The implausible deniability of Michaelia Cash

Nick G.

The heavy ROC that the Federal Government hoped to drop on the head of Opposition leader Bill Shorten has instead come crashing down on the feet of Michaelia Cash.

Cash was given the job of breaking the unions by Malcolm Turnbull.  Prior to her election as a WA Senator, she had been a solicitor for anti-union law firm Freehills. Honorary Associate Professor of Work and Organisational Studies at the University of Sydney Dr Michael O’Brien said at the time that Freehills “are well known as advisers to very big employers. I gather she’s not particularly a friend of unions but anyone who works for Freehills usually isn’t.”

One of her first acts was to take away employment from Australian workers by increasing the level of s457 visa workers in the offshore oil and gas sectors covered by unions such as the MUA.

She also drove the passage of the revived Australian Building and Construction Commission (ABCC) legislation, attacking workers in the construction industry, and the Registered Organisations Commission (ROC), attacking workers everywhere.

If her name stinks in the nostrils of the working class, it is also starting to worry noses that are usually pointed skywards. She is a walking disaster for the bourgeoisie.

In November 2016, Cash bought an investment property alongside her own house in the exclusive Perth suburb of Floreat.  At a time when the Federal Government is showing absolutely no sign of being able to make housing affordable for low- and middle-income earners, it was her fourth property purchase. But what really got her into trouble was her failure to declare the purchase on her parliamentary register of interests. Politicians are required to update their register of interests within 35 days of purchase. It was only following questions from the media that Cash registered the new property - on 21 January - or eight days later than she should have.

Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull accepted Cash's apology, explaining she was "mortified" by the error, and emphasised the delay was only a matter of days and that Cash had been away on holidays at the time.

One wonders whether the ROC will take a similarly forgiving attitude to any union caught out on a technicality.

Then she further embarrassed the government by appointing the notorious Nigel Hadgkiss to head the revamped ABCC months after it emerged he was facing allegations of breaking the Fair Work laws he was meant to enforce.

Hadgkiss had to resigned from his $420,000 job after he admitted to contravening the Fair Work Act by recklessly misrepresenting union rights to enter workplaces in 2013 when he was heading up a Fair Work office for more than two years.

Cash kept her job, but not her already tarnished credibility, refusing to comment on whether she told PM Turnbull or cabinet of the allegations against Mr Hadgkiss before he took up the role in December or whether she had received any legal advice on the matter.

Now this bumbling embarrassment expects us to believe that she had no prior knowledge of the ROC’s decision to raid the Australian Workers Union (AWU) in relation to matters that occurred 11 years ago when Opposition leader Bill Shorten was its leader.  After denying that her office had tipped off the huge media contingent that arrived at the AWU hours before 32 Federal Police (surely the numbers indicate prior knowledge of a media presence!), she had to backtrack and “accept the resignation” of one of her media advisers who had done just that.

Even if she didn’t know that the ROC raid was to take place (warning: credibility gap!), and even if she didn’t know that the media was to be advised to be there to capture the event (warning: credibility gap!), the very least that can be said is that the anti-union and anti-worker atmosphere inside her office is so toxic that at least one of its staff could feel comfortable in taking the initiative to try and embarrass the union in this way.

Cash’s already-damaged credibility is a bit like a three-strand fence on a country farm: it neither keeps the air in nor the wind out. Her assurances hold no water; the conjectures they give rise to cannot be checked.

Still, she has her defenders and she has her scapegoat. Whether one respects her or reviles her depends on one’s class position.

She tried to abuse the workers, but can only amuse the workers.

Yes, she should be sacked, but then, more importantly, so should the system she admires and works for. 

Chinese "Long March" In Australia - Opportunity to Build Ties Between Chinese and Australian Peoples

Ned K.

In May 2017, events are taking place in the South East of South Australia and western Victoria to celebrate the 160th anniversary of Chinese gold seekers trekking over 400 kilometres from the seaside town of Robe to the goldfields of western Victoria. Part of the celebration includes a community "Long March" from Robe to Melbourne, following the route taken by some 16,500 trekkers in 1857.

The "Long March" will include participants who are direct descendants of those Chinese who made the journey from southern China 160 years ago. Some of these descendants are coming from China for the walk while others are Chinese Australians.

The celebration of the 160th anniversary is an opportunity to reflect on the relationship between the Chinese and Australian people and build stronger ties between the peoples of both countries at a time of growing tensions between China as a growing power and the USA as a declining but still dominant imperialist power.

In 1857 most of the Chinese people who made the long overseas journey from southern China by boat to Robe were poor people desperate to find a way to improve the lives of their families at a time when the Chinese people were exploited by a feudal regime supported by expanding European and US colonial powers.

According to Fiona Ritchie in a paper called "From Guichen Bay to Canton: The Chinese Trek to Gold", most of the Chinese who came to Robe in 1857 did so to avoid paying the 20 pound poll tax imposed by the Victorian Government on Chinese arriving by boat in Port Phillip Bay from 1853.

Ritchie points out that most of the Chinese had to borrow money from loan sharks in China to pay for the journey by boat. Those who did not own land for security on the loan had their families in China placed in indentured labor in China to work off the loan for two years or more.

The colonial merchant capitalists from England, Holland and the US provided the poorly equipped boats for the journey. These sharks were the "people smugglers” of the 1850s - from the colonial powers. Ritchie describes the conditions on the boats in the following way:

"Often they (Chinese) were confined below decks because the crews were fearful of these unfamiliar people...many Chinese died on board or arrived dying of fevers or dysentery. The British Consul of Armoy recorded that on one ship, the lack of food and water had led to the loss of 70 Chinese lives in a few days"

On arrival in Robe the "boat people" set off across difficult terrain with unknown water supplies, averaging about 35 kilometres per day until they reached the goldfields. They often had to avoid the larger towns in Victoria such as Hamilton as the Victorian Government officials were on the prowl to get the 20 pound poll tax.

Unlike today's "boat people" the majority of Chinese (about 48,000) returned to China of their own free will. How many of those went back with enough wealth from gold finds to improve their families’ lives in China or at least pay off their loans is not known. The remaining 15,000 stayed in Australia and some of them survived long enough to have a family here and contribute as Chinese Australians for generations to come up to the present day.

The similarities between the desperate lives of the Chinese gold seekers and the Chinese workers in Australia today on 457 visas or other sham contract working arrangements are pretty obvious. Unfortunately the attitude of reactionary elements within Australia is the same 160 years later with Chinese being seen as a "threat to the Australian way of life” (so called!).

The celebrations of the 160th anniversary of the arrival of Chinese gold seekers at Robe is an opportunity to strengthen ties between the peoples of both countries. The world has changed between 1857 and 2017 as has the power relationships between Australia and China. In 1857, Australia was firmly in the British colonial empire, while Chinese people were on the verge of an earth-shattering revolution against feudalism, colonialism and imperialism. In 2017, Australia is in the clutches of the US empire but has such strong trade links with China that the Australian capitalist class has conflicting allegiances depending on their sectional economic interests. Some related to defence and military are particularly tied to the US empire while increasingly the agribusinesses are closer to China. The obvious example is the big and medium sized wine industry companies. Some of these wine companies are themselves US owned such as Accolade which adds to their conflicting interests.

The rise of the reactionary ultra conservative Trump represented interests in the USA trying to fuel the anti-China mantra to cover up the internal economic crises that just do not go away for the imperialist system known as "globalisation". However, threats of a clamp down on Chinese trade and cuts to Chinese goods and investments are likely to fall on deaf ears in China.

At the January 2017 World Economic Forum at Davos, Chinese Premier Xi Jinping announced China planned to invest $750 billion in the next five years and accept $600 billion of overseas investment in China. He also estimated that in the next five years, 700 million Chinese tourists will be making overseas visits.

The latter figure is probably the starkest difference between 1857 and 2017 regarding movement of people from China to overseas countries such as Australia. These 700 million are working Chinese or the new capitalists or state capitalists of modern day China. How this figure will compare with the number of overseas Chinese on working visa arrangements is not readily available.

The other change is the degree of Chinese investment in Australia now compared with 1857. As Chinese leaders have chosen the capitalist road, the increase in overseas investment is an inevitable trend as Lenin pointed out in 1913 in his "Critical Remarks On The National Question”: "The second (historical tendency of capitalism) is the development and growing frequency of international intercourse in every form, the breakdown of national barriers, the creation of the international unity of capital, of economic life in general, of politics, science etc."

Lenin further said that this tendency "characterises a mature capitalism moving towards its transformation into socialist society."

History does not go in straight lines. What would Lenin think of the present day "capitalist roaders" in China, entering the world stage as an economic power having turned its back on the socialist road of post 1949 China?

One thing is certain. Lenin if alive today would support the strengthening of ties and understanding between the Chinese and Australian people and the strengthening ties between Australian and Chinese workers including those Chinese, who like the 1857 "boat people", come to Australia to lift themselves out of poverty.

Neither the Chinese people nor Australian people have a desire to be caught up as cannon fodder between rival modern day "empires".

Book review on temporary migrant workers

Ned K.

Australian journalist Peter Mares has written a book called "Not Quite Australian - How Temporary Migration Is Changing the Nation". 

It is worth reading as it provides much information on the challenges that temporary migrant workers face in Australia.

Why is this important? These workers are being used by big business to drive down wages and conditions and to cause division within the working class and weaken organisation on the job.

Regarding 457 visas, Peter Mares argues that "the 457 visa shifts the balance of power in the workplace in favour of employers and renders migrant workers more vulnerable to exploitation. It does this by reducing migrants' mobility in the labour market. It is not that 457 workers are irrevocably tied to one employer for the duration of their visa - they can seek an alternative position - but 457 visas holders are far less free than Australian workers to change jobs."

What are the barriers to mobility? According to Mares, 457 visa holders must find an alternative employer willing and qualified to sponsor them for a 457 visa job. If a temporary migrant is unemployed for more than 90 days without a sponsor they must leave the country.

If a 457 visa holder switches employers, then the clock starts at zero again regarding the time they need to be continuously employed to qualify for permanent residency. Is it any wonder why migrant workers on 457 and other types of visas remain silent when they know they are being paid less than the legal amount under the "fair day's pay for a fair day’s work" wages system which is supposed to exist under "democratic" capitalism"?

Peter Mares provides many more situations that the more than 1 million temporary migrant workers face in their struggle to survive in Australia.

Employers are well aware that many (Mares says about 40%) temporary migrant workers want to stay in Australia. They need to have continuous work for at least 2 years to progress their visa status. To some employers this means at least two years of cheap labour and a way of undercutting competitors on labour costs and making greater profits. Where the temporary migrants are overseas students, the degree of exploitation is even worse because there is a restriction of 20 hours a week that they are legally allowed to work during their study terms of the year. The overseas students are not all from wealthy families and without much financial support from their families back home in their country of origin, they are forced into working above 20 hours for as low as $3 an hour in one case and usually cash in hand.

Underpinning all the types of temporary visa workers in Australia is that they have no political rights in the country worth speaking of. They speak out at great risk to their short and long term plans regarding their stay in Australia. 

It is a great challenge, perhaps the greatest challenge for progressive unionists to find the way to include these workers in the organised class struggle against the common oppressor of all workers - imperialism and its manifestation in the employer-employee relationship. These workers have great first-hand experience of what exploitation under capitalist relations of production and services is all about. Objectively they are among the most exploited within the working class as a whole and a breeding ground for leadership of the working class struggle for an independent and socialist Australia.

Cherries ripe for picking, pickers ripe for organising.

Ned K.

Cherry growers in the Adelaide Hills have had a bumpy ride over the last few years.

Cherry production yields in a particular season have varied significantly due to unexpected changes in the weather combined with the ruthless price reduction demands for cherries by the big retailers Coles and Woolworths.

However this recent season, Adelaide Hills cherry growers have become less dependent on this retail duopoly as the main market for their product. Now the cherries are picked, packed and exported by air freight within the space of a couple of days to eager customers in Asian cities, particularly China. Cherry growers are also getting a better price and hence realization of profit from these markets. New storage technologies and the increasing speed with which commodities can be moved from one country to another can change the fortunes of one section of capitalists compared to another very quickly.

This rapidity of movement is extending to labor power. Most of the cherries for export from Adelaide Hills to Asian markets are picked and packed by about 1,000 migrant workers from Afghanistan. They are on some form of Visa and return home after the cherry picking season is over. One cherry orchard owner was reported in the daily press as saying that with rising export demand to Asia he expected the number of Afghanistan migrant workers to grow to 1500.

These workers are at best being paid the casual award rate. It is unclear whether their food and accommodation is provided free of additional cost to these workers. Further investigation is needed to find this out. It is not a unique situation for Afghanistan migrant workers, thousands of whom work in dangerous conditions on construction sites in Dubai and other oil rich cities. 

In Australia for the foreseeable future, we can expect growing numbers of migrant workers on short term visas working in food production as food producing companies compete with countries like Chile for a greater share of the Asian market and try to take advantage of the rising number of 'free trade agreements'.

Most of these workers are not yet organised. Most have yet to see a union Organizer because they are the new 'invisible workforce' in Australia and vulnerable due to the temporary nature of their work in Australia. Most would not have experienced union activity in their home countries. 

However this is also a great challenge for unions in Australia. How to organize these workers is no easy task but an essential one for the benefit of the Australian and international working class.

Unions in the USA have had some success in organizing 'undocumented' farm workers who have risked their lives in crossing southern borders of the USA in search of income to feed their families back home in Central and Latin America.

Co-operation between unions and communities locally, combined with co-operation between unions internationally, can succeed in organizing the many thousands, perhaps millions of migrant workers whose labor feeds the world.

The industries in Australia where the working class was strongest have disappeared or are in decline due to changes within capitalism in its imperialist form. Unions that wish to remain relevant to workers' lives have to organize the unorganized wherever they are or whoever they are.

Marx when asked about national boundaries said he saw himself as a citizen of the world. Now it is thousands, perhaps millions of migrant workers who are actually living their lives as citizens of the world rather than of one country. By so doing they provide another practical dimension to the meaning of proletarian internationalism.

Progressive elements within the unions have a choice to take the lead here and seize on the new situation of mobility of labor as an opportunity not a threat. History of working class struggle in Australia over the last 150 years or so demonstrates that the opportunity will not be missed, no matter what obstacles are faced.

Super-exploitation of migrant workers in the hotel industry

Contributed

Super exploitation of migrant workers in Australia is nothing new in Australia. It has existed almost as long as the super exploitation of Indigenous people in Australia. All workers under capitalism are exploited in that they sell their labour power and create surplus value for the capitalist from which profit is derived. Through collective struggle since 1788, workers in Australia have won minimum standards enshrined in the capitalists’ industrial laws to prevent being thrown in to a state which Marx called “miserable wretches”. However alongside these minimum standards of engagement by the capitalists, there have been many instances of capitalists ignoring their own laws and ‘super exploiting’ workers. Migrant workers in particular are often the victims of this.

The other day I met some Nepalese migrants who worked cleaning rooms in a large multinational owned hotel. Some were overseas students, some were partners of overseas students. Their working goal in Australia is to work continuously for two years to improve their chances of a successful application for permanent residency status. They said they had checked to find out that they were being paid the minimum award rate of about $18 per hour. The problem was that they were only paid for four hours a day and the work they had to do took eight hours!  They were expected to clean and tidy 16 rooms in four hours, one room per 15 minutes! They were effectively working for $9 per hour!

On a few occasions some of them stopped working at the four hour mark and went home, rather than working in unpaid time. However the company they worked for, a large overseas owned labour hire firm, deducted a couple of hours pay from their pay packet for not cleaning all the rooms. So even though they worked four hours on these days, they were paid less than four hours for not completing all the work. They were told by the manager they had to finish the work in four hours, that was the job. The industry standard, itself too demanding, is half an hour cleaning time per room.

Modern Forms Of Slavery Still Exist Right Here In Australia

When I heard their story, I thought that this was outrageous, but nothing new in the hotel industry.

What they then told me was even more outrageous. In fact, a modern form of slavery.

They said their supervisor and some other hotel workers they knew were in Australia on what were called “sponsorships”. I asked them what did that mean?

They said the “sponsors” are business people who agree to provide work for a new migrant worker for two years, provided the new migrant pays the sponsor an amount of money equivalent to the wages being performed for the sponsor. Once the money is paid to the sponsor in advance of work performed, the sponsor then pays back the money to the worker in the form of a wage, including a gross and net pay after tax. So on the surface, it looks like a normal capitalist–wage labour relationship, but in fact the worker gets nothing, accept two years guaranteed ‘employment’ and a hoped for ‘passport’ to permanent residency.

What does such a migrant worker live on if their ‘wage’ is paid back in full to the boss or so-called ‘sponsor’?

The Nepalese people I met said that these workers have to work a second job, usually cash in hand, in order to survive.

They said they wanted to get out of their situation but knew that the odds are stacked against them. With great courage, they said they were going to contact the relevant union as a first step to improving their situation.