Hi Joe,

You wont get disagreement from me on why aren't unions trying to encourage those workers to join unions by doing something useful for them, like going into bat for them ?
The thing we often forget about unions is a lot is done when a worker is in trouble or has an individual dispute over pay and conditions. i am still a union member and I had reason to call on the union last year after being unable to resolve a 'holiday' issue with my employer. At the same time the union picked up on an hours issue, which I was not aware off, that under the workplace agreement I was entitled to more set hours (I work part time). It was all resolved in my favor and i'm now $30/day better off, with security of hours. My partner "T" is a union deleo in her job, the other day she represented a member over his wanting to return to night shift (more money), unfortunately as he had voluntary taken day shift when returning from 2 months sickness, it wasn't winnable for him. My partner spends lots of unpaid hours on union business, sometimes I tell her to give it up, she says i think I can make a difference, particularly for those with bad English and don't understand, they would have no one to represent them, all I can say to her at 66 is "You're a better man than me Gunga Din."

http://resources1.news.com.au/images/2015/07/12/1227439/303717-4915e178-2879-11e5-825e-016da8875d2e.jpg

"It beggars belief that Bill Shorten does not see any conflict of interest between representing his union’s members and receiving undisclosed payments from their employers. That those payments benefited him personally, by helping to finance his political career, only makes his claims all the more implausible.

.....It is, in other words, acceptable to claim payments are for one ­purpose when they are really for another. Why? Because the standards that apply to unions are different from those relevant elsewhere. And in that special world, conduct can be tolerated that usually seems reprehensible.

Unfortunately, that double standard is not exceptional; rather, it is at the heart of Labor’s world view. The result is that after denouncing inquiry after inquiry as a witch hunt, Labor has persistently shut its eyes to the covens those inquiries have found, while opposing each and every attempt to bring union misconduct under control. And that was exactly as true of the Hawke and Keating governments as it is of Shorten today."

Shadow, I agree with you there about Shorten and a conflict of interest. However you tend to be somewhat bias and inconsistent, as you did not see the conflict in NSW of Liberals illegally accepting political donations from developers and then passing approvals which favored those very developers. Just to refresh your memory the conga line of Liberals parading before the ICAC, or Joe Hockey's cash for access saga.

Hi Paul,

Yes, I'm sure there are some very good people out there, going into bat for workers who, these days, would be overwhelmingly non-Anglo, mostly migrant or refugee, who desperately need good union people to protect them from rapacious employers. Like Cleanevent.

I wouldn't be surprised if Cleanevent's workers were mostly in that situation, the very people who Shorten short-changed (allegedly) to simultaneously:

* cut the wages of the most vulnerable, while

* ensuring that that one company could, by paying lousy wages, monopolise the cleaning business and drive competitors out of the market (payoff = $ 400 million, to date), while

* the union got a monthly kick-back AND, unbeknownst to those vulnerable workers, got them added to its books, giving it that much more clout at national conferences, elections for ALP leader, etc.

Both Baldrick and John Grisham would be envious at such a devilishly cunning plan.

Cheers,

Joe

Hi Joe,

I don't think it has been an accident that large powerful right wing unions like the AWU and SDA control large numbers of workers in poor paying jobs. The employers years ago saw that it was in their interest to see that the "right" sort of people ran the union. The consequence of mass industrial action by those employee would hit the employer very hard and very quickly, and such workers have a lot of power.
You can see with retail, the big employers have very much got what they wanted over the years, be it extended trading hours with reduced penalty rates, or the introduction of self serve check-outs. All the union offers as an incentive to join, is a discount voucher book and little else

Paul,

Firstly you forget that the "Hockey Saga" to which you refer saw Fairfax shell out $100ks of dollars in defamation damages and $ms in Lawyers fees. Secondly, the MPs that took donations were sacked and have left Parliament other than the Labor and greens who took sums of money from developers via the unions, and the Pedophilia problem in the greens.