Labour, unions, migrants and race

The Australian union movement's relationship with questions of race and migration has always been uneasy, with strong currents of nationalism and racism running through its dealing with question of so-called "illegal" workers. Through its affiliation with the Australian Labor Party, the union movement has participated in the development and enforcement of the ‘White Australia policy’ since its inception. More recently, the union movement has been a driving force behind the "buy Australian" campaigns, which have dovetailed into the so-called anti-globalisation movement. In particular, manufacturing unions whose members are experiencing massive job-losses due to neo-liberal policies have used nationalist rhetoric in attempts to change the Australian government’s economic policy on issues such as tariffs.

Consequently, it is perhaps not surprising that in the last year three separate incidents involving Australian trade unions and migrant labour have revealed the willingness of some unions to use race as a political football, whilst in the same breath accusing the Australian Prime Minister, John Howard, of doing the same.

The Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU) and the Victorian Trades Hall Council (VTHC) have been at the forefront of the campaign to end mandatory detention (the Australian government’s policy of locking up asylum seekers for indeterminate periods of time), lending their backing to numerous demonstrations and actions of the ‘refugee’ movement. Without wishing to enter into a discussion here of the exact political nature of this campaign, it would be fair to say that it generally focuses on appealing to the compassion of the Australian population through emphasising the 'genuine' nature of the plight of those who seek asylum on our shores. However, it appears that whilst general support for the campaign is there, both the ACTU and VTHC are unable or unwilling to stop particular affiliate unions from using the spectre of migrants undercutting Australian wages and conditions to recruit members and legitimise the relevance of unions in today's society.

The most disturbing of the three incidents mentioned above was the collaboration between the New South Wales (NSW) branch of the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) and the Department of Immigration in arresting undocumented workers on two union sites in Sydney. The NSW CFMEU Secretary Andrew Ferguson went on national radio to explain that it was outrageous the Federal Government was using the Cole Royal Commission to investigate union corruption when they should be focusing on the use of "illegal labour" by employers to undermine Australian workers’ conditions. The assistance provided by the CFMEU in the arrest of 5 Korean workers was a clearly calculated attempt to capitalise on the racist paranoia currently engulfing Australia in defence of the union. The Cole Royal Commission, an attempt by the Federal Government to de-register one of the strongest and most militant unions in the country, has been hearing testimony after testimony from employers of how the union uses 'strong-arm' tactics to win better outcomes for its members. Amid declining union membership, the public relations battle between the commission and the CFMEU has become a symbolic battle for legitimacy. But instead of choosing an issue such as occupational health and safety to beat the employers over the head with, or publicising one of the many worthy community projects the CFMEU is involved with, the NSW branch chose to use the question of undocumented labour as their soapbox.

This decision is disturbing from a number of angles. The CFMEU is one of the more progressive and militant unions - if they are willing to play the scapegoating game when under pressure, what can we expect from the more right-wing unions? Secondly, the CFMEU is aware that many of its members genuinely believe that their jobs are under threat from undocumented migrants due to the fear created by the racist rhetoric of successive governments. Instead of portraying this as an opportunity to recruit and empower what is a group of hyper-exploited workers, as they would with any other un-unionised workforce, they have for the purposes of a political stunt further entrenched the fear of 'the other' amongst their own membership. In attempting to prove that they will go to any length to protect their members’ jobs and that they are not powerless against the forces of neo-liberalism and free trade, they have regressed the cause of building solidarity amongst the global working class, the only way in which the race to the bottom can be halted.

The fact that the only reason migrants are able to undercut Australian workers' wages is because they lack legal work rights, and consequently accept any conditions they are offered, seems to have escaped the CFMEU. Their analysis accepts this oppressive law uncritically, rather than working to undo the systemic injustice implicit in denying migrants access to "citizenship" rights. The union's solution sides with the racism of the legislator: they propose to get rid of the marginalised worker, rather than overturn the condition of their marginalisation.

To their credit, the Victorian Branch of the CFMEU has strongly condemned the actions of their NSW counterparts, but within the greater factional warfare being played out within the union, this rebuke will mean very little to the NSW officials who are responsible for the arrest, and almost inevitable deportation, of the undocumented migrants.

A similar incident which involved the Federal Government allowing a ship owned by a company called CSL to replace its Australian crew with a Ukrainian one brought the challenging questions of labour under a globalised economy to the Maritime Union of Australia (MUA). Once again, the rhetoric of border protection so successfully used by the Liberal Party in its election bid last year, and faithfully parroted by the Australian Labor Party, was used to lend force to the MUA's campaign to have their members' jobs restored. The slogan "Johnny Howard - protect our borders from cheap labour" written on many a worker's placard emphasised the ability of capital to enforce labour-related borders when it is to its own advantage. And whilst some union officials tried to point out that the union had no quarrel with the Ukrainian workers aboard the ship that was docked in Melbourne, the message of nationalism and xenophobia was a sure-fire winner with both the workers and the public. Once again, one of the more progressive Australian unions, with a track record in taking action against deportations of asylum seekers, was willing to use "foreign" labour as a central plank in its media strategy in defence of its members' jobs.

The third incident highlights a central contradiction between the rights of workers, the union's duty to fight for their rights and the broader social justice campaigns that the union movement supports. In their claim for higher staffing ratios, the Australian Workers Union (AWU), which represents employees working in Australian detention centres, alleged that detainees inside detention had secret weapons with which they intended to hurt staff. The legitimacy of the allegations was never proven, but in some ways this is beside the point. The detainees are exposed to all kinds of mental and physical torture at the hands of those who guard them. They need the right to self-defence. There is a very low level of unionisation amongst the staff in detention centres and the AWU was quite clearly and publicly running a recruitment campaign through further reinforcing violent stereotypes of detainees. There is another question raised by their actions - are there groups of people who by their occupation can not and should not be a part of a union movement that sees itself as socially progressive? The reality of the situation is such that unions cannot on the one hand be campaigning for an end to detention and on the other protecting the jobs of those who work there.

These three incidents portray some of the challenges the union movement has to deal with when it comes to negotiating the space between labour and migration. It is relatively easy for progressive union leaders to speak the rhetoric of anti-racism and 'tolerance', but it is much harder for them to convince their constituents of that rhetoric. In a climate where every member counts and more and more workers are experiencing the insecurity of a casualised and de-regulated labour market, many unions have opted to sacrifice what should be a core value of the union movement, solidarity with workers worldwide, for the sake of a few cheap political points. Instead of feeding the divisive logic of neo-liberalism, the union movement should be using the experiences of its members to lay bare the true nature of capitalism, nationalism and borders.

The task of educating the working class about the complex causal relationship between capital’s unfettered freedom to scour the globe for cheaper labour and its ability to stop labour from accessing better wages by crossing borders is not easy. The global union movement, as the most organized section of the working class, must undertake this task even if it encounters racist opposition from within its own ranks and even if the currently global political climate makes this task harder than ever.

Andrea Maksimovic
No One Is Illegal
Melbourne, October 2002