Ross Wilson: Unions have every right to advertise

Ross Wilson

The Herald editorial (link below) questioning Council of Trade Unions (CTU) radio advertising urging people to enrol to vote and to have careful regard to the Parliamentary voting record and election policies of political parties, suggests limits to free speech and the role of trade unions in democratic society.

The CTU gives collective voice to the 300,000 members of unions affiliated to the CTU on the basis of policies on a broad range of issues determined by a democratic process of decision-making. The CTU takes pride in the fact that we are the largest democratic organisation in New Zealand.

It is correct that the CTU is having to resort to some paid advertising, mainly because we have difficulty getting our voice heard through the usual media channels, including the Herald.

With the General Election approaching we have two priorities. Firstly to get as many of our members on to the electoral roll as possible, so they can vote in the General Election. Secondly, to provide information to union members on the policies of political parties, particularly the policies which relate to the workplace.

I can confirm that the CTU, on behalf of working people, does support the measures put in place by the Labour-led Governments of the past six years -fairer employment laws, the improved annual leave, sick leave and bereavement leave entitlements, the stronger workplace health and safety laws, the improved ACC scheme, the increased minimum wage (35 per cent over 5 years), paid parental leave, the Working for Families assistance, and increased funding for public services.

Given the strong campaigning approach that the Herald has taken against many of these measures, I suggest that your editorial could be interpreted (perhaps wrongly) as a desire not to highlight their positive benefits to workers at election time.

The National Party Industrial Relations Policy makes explicitly clear that they will axe all of the employment entitlements mentioned above if they are elected to Government. The CTU does not tell people how they should vote; but it is our duty to spell out the implications of particular policies and, for what it is worth, express our collective opinion.

Your editorial (see link below) is quite correct in saying that some union members may be attracted by a tax cut. That is their choice, but I consider it my duty as CTU President to advise them on the price that will be paid in terms of the other policies which parties like National and ACT are promoting.

The restoration of an Employment Contracts Act will make it even harder for workers to get fair wage increases. Workers would prefer wage increases to tax cuts. Our 5 per cent wage campaign delivers $41.12 gross ($27 net) on the average wage of $822.40 per week, and that campaign has been bitterly opposed by the National Party leadership.

Our concern is that tax cuts have historically meant cuts in public services; that was our experience of the National Governments of the 1990s. And it was National Governments who slashed ACC entitlements, froze the minimum wage for three years, and failed to make the necessary investment in skill and economic development. National's proposal to deny legal rights to challenge dismissal for the first three months of employment will adversely affect 200,000 workers every year.

So our fear is that any minor benefits from tax cuts will be quickly offset not only by cuts to our social wage through the cuts in public services but also directly to our salaries and wages.

Workplace productivity is clearly not going to be increased by a return to an Employment Contracts Act style with a primary focus on "reducing labour and compliance costs" and the inevitable conflict and bitterness which will accompany its re-introduction.

Investment is required in skill development and technology to ensure that productivity is improved.

There has been a dramatic shift over the past few years towards greater co-operation between business and unions on economic, skill development, and productivity initiatives. That has been the successful formula in other countries which have transformed their economies, and it will be a major setback if the 2005 general election takes us back to the industrial relations strategies of the 1990s.

The CTU understands that the Herald may have a different view. And yes, I would be concerned if business organisations were to mount expensive advertising campaigns, because of the huge resources they have.

But the CTU would not deny the right of all citizens, and their representatives, to put forward their views on the policies of political parties in election year. That is what democracy is supposed to be about.

* Ross Wilson is President of the NZ Council of Trade Unions