Well you would say that, wouldn't you John?

Political funding has to come from somewhere, and not all of it is squeaky clean or known?

Corruption is just not the exclusive province of the union movement!?

The only way to prevent the corrupt element from exercising paid for control is to eliminate private/secret funding of election campaigns/political parties, and or, the very best democracy money can buy!

Were we to fund these things exclusively via the public purse, totally transparent cloud fundraising and the fact checking national broadcaster?

The allegation of patent politically inspired bias could never have arisen?

Now that it has, and where there's smoke there's alway fire?

Time for the commissioner to excuse himself on the grounds of perceived bias?

Moreover, there where were already perfectly good less expensive instruments available to investigate real corruption!

Just not used, given that wouldn't have created the anti union forore the political masters wanted John, and paid for with our money!?
Rhrosty.

Rhrosty. As Johns is quite unable to respond to your questions, and discredited almost universally, further intervention is a waste of time. However, at the risk of being charged of playing the man and not the ball, I would insist on asking a preliminary question when assessing his credentials as an expert on the labour movement: what has he ever done to assist workers in his various turn-coat manifestations as Hon Member for Petrie, and Assistant Minister for Industrial Relations from December 1993 and Special Minister of State and Vice-President of the Executive Council from March 1994 until the defeat of the Keating government in 1996, through to his role of anti-union propagandist for the Murdoch press?

Hi Aidan,

You suggest: "Australian experience has shown that for bargaining a single union is more effective."

And a 'single union' bargaining with a 'single company' to monopolise the industry ? Making deals to wipe out any rival companies ? Deals which leave workers worse off ? Workers who, unknown to themselves, have become union members ? In the union which has done them over ? And which has been well-paid for it by the monopoly employer ?

Union members AND pay-offs ? Sweet !

Hi Loudmouth,

I don't understand your objection here. Unions are not the customers, so they don't have the power to grant any company a monopoly. They certainly can't wipe out any rival company.

Aidan, sweet boy :)

Ah, so innocent !

Shorten's AWU negotiated with ONE company, Cleanevent, to massively reduce penalty rates, just Cleanevent. Other companies couldn't compete and went out of business, and Cleanevent made hundreds of millions out of that monopoly position over ten or twelve years.

So the company won.

The union got annual pay-offs, as well as union fees and a huge bucket of union members to wave about at conferences and selection committees.

So the union won.

The workers got lower wages. And compulsory union membership they didn't even know about. So would you say the workers won in that case ? Or was there, effectively, a transfer of hundreds of millions from the workers to the company ?

I wonder if there is a decent union in the country. Any suggestions ?

Joe

Thanks to the author for an excellent article.