Lessons from Australia: nurses in New Zealand would do well to heed the experiences of nurses in Australia as they struggle to oppose radical industrial relations changes proposed by the Howard Government.

June 30 was a cold and gloomy day for Melbourne, but the weather didn't deter 120,000 workers from marching through the streets, bringing lunchtime traffic to a standstill in protest at the Federal Government's industrial relations (IR) plans.

The rally and march were part of a week of activities across Australia which mobilised massive public opposition to Prime Minister John Howard's plans to radically change IR law. Highly visible in the crowd were hundreds of nurses from the Victorian branch of the Australian Nursing Federation (ANF)--(see photo right). Nurses I spoke to on the march agreed that Howard did not campaign on this agenda prior to his election in 2004 and he had no mandate to make the changes.

However, the chilling fact is that Howard's government took power with an increased majority Last year and, now it has control of the senate, can pass any law it wants. The Federal Government has chosen to use this power to dismantle the Australian IR system.

The changes will not only affect nurses' wages and conditions but nursing unions say it has the potential to undermine the profession itself. The Howard agenda, announced on Nay 26, is an unprecedented attack on existing workers' rights. The proposal aims to create an IR system strongly favouring individual contracts over awards and collective bargaining, and strip away or reduce minimum provisions.

Howard also plans to gut the powers of the Industrial Relations Commission (IRC) which has had responsibility for setting awards, dealing with bargaining disputes and fixing the minimum wage level. The majority of workers will be able to be sacked for no reason and won't be able to take a personal grievance. Pay and conditions for most nurses in Australia are set through a combination of awards and collective bargaining, negotiated between state branches of the union and employers. When the parties cannot reach agreement, nurses have been able to take their case to the "independent umpire"--the IRC--which has resolved industrial disputes for almost 100 years.

ANF national industrial officer Nick Blake believes the approach would lead to a drop in real wages and conditions. "Nurses are under enough pressure as it is. They can't work any harder, smarter or with fewer resources. They should be very alarmed by these proposals. Many, many nurses will be affected."

Australian nurses are very alarmed. In addition to the threat to pay and conditions, there are huge professional issues, as the changes threaten nurses' career paths. Classification structures such as skill-based career paths, which Australian nurses rely on for incremental increases throughout their careers, are potentially under threat. Where hospitals are funded according to skill mix, there could be funding implications and threats to quality of care. Hospitals could come under increasing pressure to replace more experienced nurses with cheaper, less experienced and less qualified staff. In a clear indication of the Federal Government's determination to get rid of collective bargaining, the government has already made the promotion of individual contracts a requirement for federal funding to State universities.

Voters swayed by tax cut promises

Howard kept his industrial relations agenda off the radar in the 2004 elections. On election day, voters were swayed by interest rates, the lure of tax cuts and the economy. Surveys show around 44 percent of union members voted for Howard's Liberal Government. Many now feel angry and betrayed and the majority of Australians oppose these radical changes.

The promised tax cuts have turned out to be a paltry $A6 for most workers, while high income earners received $A60 a week.

In a wave of public opposition, union members are joining community groups, churches, social justice organisations and even sports groups concerned at the impact on volunteers, to build a sustained fight under the banner "Rights at work--worth fighting for". The 1991 Employment Contracts Act (ECA), introduced by the National Government in New Zealand, made very similar changes to those planned by Howard and his government. As a result of this Act, the number of workers covered by collective bargaining was halved. Countless workers lost penalty rates and other conditions. The minimum wage barely moved throughout the 1990s.

Under the ECA, collective bargaining for nurses was increasingly fragmented, industrial strength was undermined and pay increases dropped far behind other professions which continued to bargain nationally. In the private sector, and particularly in aged care, the impact of the ECA, along with National government underfunding, was severe, and created the situation we have today where undervalued caregivers struggle on little more than the minimum age.

Repealing the ECA and replacing it with the much fairer Employment Relations Act (ERA) was one of the first things the Labour/Alliance Government did after being elected in 1999. Subsequent changes to the Act have enabled NZNO members to win back national collective bargaining and win our historical fair pay settlement.

National wants to repeal the ERA, take away the right to bargain for a national multi-employer collective agreement and restrict the ability of unions to organise areas such as aged care. Other parties like New Zealand First and United Future opposed the ERA when it was introduced and wanted to keep the ECA.

Earlier this month, a Dominion Post regular IR commentator, Peter Cullen, described the IR issue as "off the radar" in New Zealand. Industrial relations fell off the radar in Australia in 2004 and people were blinded by the promise of a tax cut. We mustn't let that happen here.

Lyndy McIntyre returned this month from three months' secondment with the Australian Council of Trade Unions working on a national unions/community campaign to oppose the Howard Government's industrial relations proposal.