CPSU launches TV ads

The Community and Public Sector Union (CPSU) has launched a groundbreaking TV advertising campaign aimed at promoting the many benefits of union membership to public sector workers.

Watch the CPSU ad on YouTube here.

CPSU National Secretary Stephen Jones said: "The CPSU has decided to launch these TV advertisements to portray a more realistic face of modern unionism. "At a time when the Howard Government and militant employers are attempting to narrowly stereotype all unionists as overweight men in braces, the ad reinforces that the typical union member these days is a semi-professional, white collar worker looking for practical advice and support at work.
"This unusual step also reflects the fact that in the current industrial climate, union representatives find it extremely difficult to get into workplaces to talk with employees about their issues and the benefits of union membership. "This is an historic initiative. It's the first time unions have marketed the benefits of membership in the mass media via a TV campaign. "It's a positive campaign that links the individual 'value' in joining a union with the collective 'values' of working together.
"The ads are based on extensive research that shows that most workers are not opposed to the idea of union, but unions really need to do a better job of communicating to potential members the benefits of membership.
"These benefits include support at the workplace level if things go wrong, assistance in bargaining wages and conditions as well discounts on travel and home loans.

Young workers burnt by Chili's individual contracts

Teenagers on AWAs at a restaurant chain are being required to fork out their own money to cover customers who skip away without paying the bill.

In addition to picking up the tab of customers who do a runner, the young workers were expected to kick in $50 of their own money at the beginning of each shift for cash floats.

Employees would only start to get paid once customers arrived, with some waiting up to 45 minutes after clocking on before the $13.44* per hour started to kick in.

Many were often only offered shifts that lasted two hours in total. "Most of the time I was given only two-hour shifts, meaning I got just $26.88 a night," former employee Alice McCarthy told the Daily Telegraph.

"I was excited to land a job at Chili's...(but) sadly, my enthusiasm and excitement over my new job was quickly dampened by the harsh realities of the conditions of my employment," she said.

"I didn't really understand the implications of the AWA at first, " Alice said. "I thought it would not really make a difference to my working conditions. I also believed that the whole fuss about the WorkChoices laws was created by politicians wanting votes. But I was wrong because the AWA I had signed really did make a difference to the job."

The ACTU described the situation as "further evidence of how vulnerable young workers have lost rights under John Howard's IR laws," as they launched a new advertisement highlighting the growing concerns of older Australians and working parents.

The ad portrays three generations of the same Australian family, with a grandfather character explaining that his generation 'fought for things like regular working hours, penalty rates and redundancy pay' while his daughter and grandson worry they are losing their rights at work.

"There are very strong concerns about the IR laws among older Australians and parents who are worried about how their children are being treated in the workplace under the new IR laws," ACTU President Sharran Burrow said.

* Following a recent decision by the Fair Pay Commission, the minimum wage will jump to $13.92, effective 1 October 2007.

• What you can do: Tell Chili's what you think by sending them an e-mail.
• ACTU advertisement: Watch the latest ACTU ads online here.
• More information: Read the Daily Telegraphs report here.

Your say on new ACTU ads

As the election draws closer, the ACTU has launched a new series of hard-hitting Your Rights At Work television commercials.
In the first ad, Annette Harris talks about her experience at Spotlight where she was offered an AWA individual contract that removed penalty rates, overtime and meal breaks - all for an extra 2 cents an hour.
In the second ad, a grandfather talks about how - under WorkChoices - his children and grandchildren have lost the workplace rights his generation had fought so hard for.

Spolight on fairness: Annette Harris ad.

Grand dad ad.

UNION TALKS TO MEMBERS... SHOCK!

If you want proof that the Your Rights at Work campaign is working, look no further than Howard Government hysteria this week around a leaked ACTU's phone polling document, writes CPSU National Secretary, Stephen Jones.

Over the last two years union members and supporters have been campaigning hard against WorkChoices.

We've conducted surveys and polls, put out emails, press releases and bulletins, held workplace and community meetings, worn tempory tattoos, baked orange cakes, organised massive rallies and even funded prime-time TV ads.

Despite this highly visible approach, the Howard Government claims the Your Rights at Work campaign is a secret, sinister and undemocratic plot by "union bosses" to "steal control of the country" and "ruin the economy."

Incredibly, the Government is arguing that union representatives shouldn't even be talking with their members about the most profound change to their workplace rights in 100 years.

So as the pre-election rhetoric heats up, it's important to remember what this campaign about... unfair workplace laws.

WorkChoices is an attack on the working conditions of millions of working Australian families. Despite the Government's theatrics, the fact remains that under WorkChoices:

• overtime and penalty rates are being cut;
• workers are being dismissed unfairly;
• collective bargaining is being undermined;
• the independent umpire is being sidelined;
• new starters are being forced onto AWAs.

Because we talk with them, we know most CPSU members oppose WorkChoices and want fairer, more balanced laws. We also know that if we want to change these unfair laws, we'll have to change the government.

This is why we'll be talking with CPSU members who live in key marginal seats. What happens in those seats will determine the outcome of the election.

The overwhelming majority of members we've contacted so far have been more than happy to have their say.

If people don't want to talk about WorkChoices - for whatever reason - we fully respect their decision not to participate.

Fair workplace rights will be a key election issue. Which means the CPSU has an obligation to find out what our members think, and argue for it passionately.

It's called democracy. It's a union thing.

What's so fair about that?

With a tough election looming, the Howard Government is trying to neutralise community concerns about its WorkChoices laws by introducing a new so-called 'fairness' test.

The changes have been rightly dismissed as cynical pre-election window-dressing.

We reckon if the Government is really serious about fairness in the workplace, there are plenty of issues to tackle... and we've put together a short list.

Compensation: Recent Government changes mean over 100,000 staff have lost workers compensation coverage for journeys to and from the office. The change does nothing to make workplaces safer and simply shifts the costs and risks from employer to employee.

Unfair dismissals: The Howard Government’s laws exclude over four million Australians from unfair dismissal protection, simply because their employer has fewer than 100 employees. Under WorkChoices employers with more than 100 staff can use the 'operational grounds' loophole to sack workers and avoid an unfair dismissal claim.

Working Hours: According to ABS figures, almost a third of Australian employees work unsocial hours - between 7pm and 7am - and most have no say about when they start or finish. About half of the 37 per cent of employees who work overtime do so for no extra pay. None of which will be a surprise to the tens of thousand of CPSU members already struggling to balance their work and home lives.

Collective bargaining: Under WorkChoices, employers hold all the cards. Even where a majority of employees vote in favour of making a collective agreement, employers can ignore your wishes and offer individual contracts, or simply refuse to negotiate. Ironically the Government are now spending big money promoting collective bargaining to small businesses as way to ensure they are not disadvantaged by larger and more powerful businesses. So collective bargaining - sticking together to get a fair deal - is a good idea for small business, but somehow not for employees.

AWAs: In a growing number of public service agencies, new employees are denied the opportunity to choose between collective agreements or AWA individual agreements. And in some workplaces AWAs continue to be used to undermine collective agreements, not to improve pay and conditions.

Have your say:Is the Government doing enough to address the issues that matter to you? Are there other issues they need to address? Post a comment

Tripped up by new compo rules

Twelve hours after new workers comp rules came into effect, an accident on the way to work sent one public service manager sprawling.

With the new laws, introduced by the Howard Government, public servants are no longer covered for accidents and injuries sustained traveling to and from work and during lunch breaks spent away from the workplace.

To read Annette's* story click here.

To read previous blog posts and comments on the new compo laws, click here, here, and here.

What do you think about the changes to compo laws? Post your comments below.

Behind the Bastard Boys

The 1998 waterfront dispute was brought vividly to life this week in the ABC's Bastard Boys telemovie. Nine years ago a stevedoring company tried to sack its 1,400 employees and the ensuing battle between Patrick Stevedores and the Maritime Union of Australia has gone down in history as one of Australia's most important industrial and political events.

To read an opinion piece by Josh Bornstein (a lawyer who played a key role in winning the dispute) click here.

What did you think of the ABC's portrayal of the dispute? Post your comments below.