In this issue:
The final stretch — schools ballots to be held this week
This is the week that every school should hold a secret ballot to ratify the new Schools Agreement - with every teacher and principal class officer entitled to vote.
http://aeu-vic.labor.net.au/newsletters/28/ballots.html
Schools Agreement — So when do we get the money?
The exact date that members will see their pay rises depends on the outcome of this week's ballot and is then in the hands of the Workplace Authority, but our best guess is the money will flow in the pay period starting either August 14 or 28.
http://aeu-vic.labor.net.au/newsletters/28/money.html
TAFE morale plummets as pay and casualisation make teachers consider new careers
TAFE bosses have put new obstacles in the way of an agreement for Victoria’s hard-pressed TAFE teachers, despite a new survey that found morale so low that three-quarters have considered leaving the sector in the past year.
http://aeu-vic.labor.net.au/newsletters/28/tafe.html
Builders leader charged with refusing to attend interview
Noel Washington, Senior Vice President of the Victorian CFMEU, has been charged with refusing to cooperate with the Australian Building and Construction Commission (ABCC). He is due to appear in the Geelong Magistrates court on August 8.
http://aeu-vic.labor.net.au/newsletters/28/charged.html
Study shows public education at risk of hidden privatisation
The language of "educational reform" or "modernisation" is masking a growing trend towards privatisation of public education, according to a new study commissioned by Education International (EI).
http://aeu-vic.labor.net.au/newsletters/28/study.html
AEU calls for massive investment and better standards for Rudd’s rebuild
The AEU is calling on the Rudd Government to establish a new standard for buildings and facilities in public schools after an independent report found a $2 billion annual shortfall in capital investment.
http://aeu-vic.labor.net.au/newsletters/28/rudd.html
Enrol to Vote Week 2008 announced
Secondary schools are urged to help their students secure their right to vote, by taking part in the Australian Electoral Commission’s national Enrol to Vote Week in secondary schools from 28 July to 3 August.
http://aeu-vic.labor.net.au/newsletters/28/enrol.html
AEU members get big savings on Apple computers
The AEU has negotiated significant discounts on the cost of a new Apple computer for union members.
http://aeu-vic.labor.net.au/newsletters/28/apple.html
Community Campaign to protect bank workers
The Finance Sector Union is calling for the support of union members everywhere as its spearheads a community campaign against Westpac’s proposed $18 billion takeover of St George Bank and other competitors.
http://aeu-vic.labor.net.au/newsletters/28/bank.html
Teachers feature in new collective bargaining ad
Unions will ramp up the campaign to scrap WorkChoices and bring in new laws that protect workers’ rights with the release of two new advertisements highlighting the value of collective bargaining for Australian workers.
http://aeu-vic.labor.net.au/newsletters/28/ad.html
Zimbabwe trade unionists need your face
Tomorrow, unions around the world will stage protests in support of two Zimbabwean trade union leaders arrested for "inciting the public to rise against the government and communicating falsehoods" in their May Day speeches - and they need your help.
http://aeu-vic.labor.net.au/newsletters/28/zimbabwe.html
Giveaways — Melbourne International Film Festival / Next Gen
To celebrate the return of the popular Next Gen schools program at the Melbourne International Film Festival, AEU E-News has four double passes to give away for any film at the festival (excluding the opening and closing nights).
http://aeu-vic.labor.net.au/newsletters/28/giveaway.html
AEU e-Newsletter: http://aeu-vic.labor.net.au/newsletters/
Powered by Social Change Online
Monday, June 23, 2008
AEU agreement - school ballots to be held this week
From: AEUVB Registry [mailto:Melbourne@aeuvic.asn.au] Sent: Monday, 23 June 2008 4:42 PMSubject: AEU agreement - school ballots to be held this week
Dear Member
The AEU has been made aware of a vote NO email circulating via Edumail from a Matt Doric, Anthony or Joseph Triopodi purporting to be a statement from the Socialist Equality Party. Neither of these people are AEU members. As a result we have had requests from members to clarify the AEU’s position in relation to the ballot.
The final stretch — schools ballots to be held this week. This is the week that every school should hold a secret ballot to ratify the new Schools Agreement – with every teacher and principal class officer entitled to vote.
AEU council has backed the schools agreement; AEU delegate meetings have backed the schools agreement; now it is time for the entire teaching and principal class workforce to have their say as workplace ballots are held this week.
Secret ballots of all staff covered by the agreement will be conducted in every school and workplace. They will be conducted jointly by the school's principal and AEU Rep — if your school has not yet fixed a date, call the AEU NOW on (03) 9417 2822. All ballots must be completed by 5pm on Friday June 27.
This is a vital last vote — despite the overwhelming endorsement of the agreement by AEU members at the delegates ratification meetings earlier this month (where 89% backed the agreement), it will fall if it is not accepted by a majority of all staff covered by it. Arrangements should also be made for those members of staff who are not in school on the day of the meeting and cannot attend.
You can find out more about the ratification ballot process in this AEU agreement bulletin, http://www.aeuvic.asn.au/news/1213849947_15688.html
For more on the agreement and what it contains, go to the campaign website http://www.aeuvic.asn.au/campaigns/schools_agreement_08/ .
The key points of the agreement are:
• Top of the scale classroom teachers would now earn up to $75,500 a year — the highest pay in Australia
• The starting salary at $51,184 is also the nation's best
• Schools must now justify in writing every fixed-term contract they create — and it will be quicker and easier to be rolled over to an ongoing position
• Contract teachers are guaranteed holiday pay
• Some 16,000 teachers get a $10,000 pay rise overnight
• Immediate pay rise of 4.9% (with one-off payments for most teachers of $1000, $1,500 for most leading teachers 2 and $2000 for principals) followed by annual pay rises of 2.71% in January 2009, 2010, 2011 - higher than current forecasts for CPI
• Guaranteed pay rise at the end of the agreement
• No trade offs on holiday or pupil free days.
VOTE YES.
Yours sincerely
MARY BLUETT
Branch President
Dear Member
The AEU has been made aware of a vote NO email circulating via Edumail from a Matt Doric, Anthony or Joseph Triopodi purporting to be a statement from the Socialist Equality Party. Neither of these people are AEU members. As a result we have had requests from members to clarify the AEU’s position in relation to the ballot.
The final stretch — schools ballots to be held this week. This is the week that every school should hold a secret ballot to ratify the new Schools Agreement – with every teacher and principal class officer entitled to vote.
AEU council has backed the schools agreement; AEU delegate meetings have backed the schools agreement; now it is time for the entire teaching and principal class workforce to have their say as workplace ballots are held this week.
Secret ballots of all staff covered by the agreement will be conducted in every school and workplace. They will be conducted jointly by the school's principal and AEU Rep — if your school has not yet fixed a date, call the AEU NOW on (03) 9417 2822. All ballots must be completed by 5pm on Friday June 27.
This is a vital last vote — despite the overwhelming endorsement of the agreement by AEU members at the delegates ratification meetings earlier this month (where 89% backed the agreement), it will fall if it is not accepted by a majority of all staff covered by it. Arrangements should also be made for those members of staff who are not in school on the day of the meeting and cannot attend.
You can find out more about the ratification ballot process in this AEU agreement bulletin, http://www.aeuvic.asn.au/news/1213849947_15688.html
For more on the agreement and what it contains, go to the campaign website http://www.aeuvic.asn.au/campaigns/schools_agreement_08/ .
The key points of the agreement are:
• Top of the scale classroom teachers would now earn up to $75,500 a year — the highest pay in Australia
• The starting salary at $51,184 is also the nation's best
• Schools must now justify in writing every fixed-term contract they create — and it will be quicker and easier to be rolled over to an ongoing position
• Contract teachers are guaranteed holiday pay
• Some 16,000 teachers get a $10,000 pay rise overnight
• Immediate pay rise of 4.9% (with one-off payments for most teachers of $1000, $1,500 for most leading teachers 2 and $2000 for principals) followed by annual pay rises of 2.71% in January 2009, 2010, 2011 - higher than current forecasts for CPI
• Guaranteed pay rise at the end of the agreement
• No trade offs on holiday or pupil free days.
VOTE YES.
Yours sincerely
MARY BLUETT
Branch President
Thursday, June 19, 2008
Why Victorian teachers should vote "no" to the AEU-Labor government agreement
Click here to download this article as a leaflet.
Teachers are set to vote in schools throughout Victoria next week on whether to accept or reject the Australian Education Union (AEU) and state Labor government's proposed industrial agreement that will determine wages and conditions in the public education system for the next three years. The Socialist Equality Party calls on all teachers to take a stand and vote "no". Such a vote must mark the first stage of a coordinated industrial and political campaign in defence not only of teachers' wages and conditions but the public education system as a whole—a campaign that directly poses the need for a struggle against both the AEU and Labor.
The union is presenting the state-wide secret ballot as a foregone conclusion, a mere formality. Next week's vote is a legal requirement under federal industrial relations legislation. If it were simply up to the bureaucracy, teachers would not be able to directly vote on the agreement at all. The AEU has aggressively opposed demands for a mass meeting to be held, through which teachers could openly cast a fully informed vote after a democratic discussion and debate.
The AEU has attempted to persuade teachers that democracy has been served and the agreement already ratified through the union-convened delegates' meetings held over the past weeks. On June 13, the union announced that 1,508 delegates (89 percent) had reportedly voted in favour of the agreement versus 186 (11 percent) opposed. A total of 68 percent of allocated ballots were cast—a record high.
This purported outcome in no way reflects the depth of opposition among teachers to the deal. In 2004, for example, some 22 percent voted against ratification of the three-year agreement—despite the fact that there was very little overt opposition at the time among ordinary teachers. This time round, the depth and breadth of oppositional sentiment has been impossible to deny, expressed through emails, blogs, and social networking sites as well as in discussions within schools and between union sub-branches.
No teacher should feel obliged to vote "yes" in next week's ballot out of respect for the delegates' vote. Some teachers have raised the possibility that the AEU directly rigged the delegates' meetings ballot. While this cannot be excluded, far more likely is that such a thing proved unnecessary. From the outset, the union deliberately organised the meetings to exclude the participation of ordinary teachers and deliver the desired result. In an email to the World Socialist Web Site, one senior teacher wrote: "I had strongly requested that I wished to speak at the ratification meeting and was given a verbal OK. I did not receive notification of the [Horsham] meeting (last Thursday); it was advertised through the email system, of which it seems, I was the only one not on the DL. Suffice to say, I missed the meeting and the opportunity to present the opposing side. Others who had attended the meeting, and felt betrayed by the AEU campaign, felt there was little choice but to support the proposed agreement."
Moreover, the delegates, each supposedly representing 20 union members, were selected on an entirely ad hoc and arbitrary basis. In some schools there was no sub-branch meeting or vote to select delegates, and the established, pro-agreement union representatives simply appointed themselves. In other schools, where only a marginal majority of teachers voted in favour, every delegate was bound to vote for the agreement, effectively disenfranchising large minorities in these schools.
In another measure aimed at outright intimidation, the vote was conducted at each meeting by delegates placing their card in either the "yes" or "no" box—with their name on the card! So this was a "secret ballot"—for everyone except the union officials, who no doubt kept a record of all those who failed to toe the line.
Delegates were encouraged to simply cast their vote without staying for the meeting, or participating in the extremely limited debate permitted by the union. Interestingly, those few meetings where SEP members or supporters were able to ask questions or speak in opposition to the deal recorded a significantly higher "no" vote.
No teacher should be under any illusion—if the agreement is ratified it will mark a serious defeat for the year-long industrial campaign.
Throughout the campaign, which included two mass meetings and a series of rolling stop-work protests, teachers won broad support from wide sections of the population. Central demands included a 30 percent pay rise over three years, no more than 20 students per class, and the establishment of permanent positions for those teachers on contracts who now comprise one-fifth of the total workforce. Yet the AEU-Labor deal delivers none of these demands. Instead, first-year and senior teachers receive a nominal pay increase that barely matches the official inflation rate, while everyone else will take a significant real wage cut. Amid escalating interest rates, house prices, rental rates, costs of groceries, transport, and many other necessities, teachers living standards—already substantially lower than those of most workers with comparable qualifications—will be driven down even further.
The impact of the agreement will soon be directly felt in classrooms throughout Victoria. Class sizes will remain unmanageable, and schools will continue to be understaffed. The agreement explicitly endorses the government's right-wing "productivity"-based education "Blueprint", in which underperforming schools will be further starved of funds, forced to close or amalgamate, and it introduces new classifications of teachers such as "executive class"—a means of smuggling in a form of performance pay. Ratification of the deal will serve to formally entrench this agenda, policed by the AEU.
The AEU, the Labor Party, and the political tasks confronting teachers
A number of teachers who oppose the agreement have nevertheless said they intend to vote "yes" because they feel nothing better can be achieved given the AEU's refusal to mount a campaign against the government.
The union has stopped at nothing to cultivate this sentiment. That is why AEU Victorian President Mary Bluett publicly kissed Premier John Brumby in gratitude and hailed the agreement as the best achieved in 25 years. The state's teachers, she crowed, would now be the best paid in the country. These fraudulent claims—made more than a week before teachers were even permitted to read the agreement—were faithfully repeated by every section of the media, leading the public to believe that the teachers' central demands had been met. This outcome was no "misunderstanding", but rather a deliberate attempt by Bluett and her colleagues to present teachers with a fait accompli. The agreement cannot now be rejected, the union has repeatedly claimed, because a "no" vote would appear greedy and cost teachers the support won throughout their industrial campaign.
The AEU leadership has also threatened that the Brumby government would respond to any rejection of the agreement by invoking the former Howard government's WorkChoices legislation, as it did with the state's nurses—halting negotiations, making illegal any further industrial action, and instructing the arbitration courts to determine the outcome. This would lead, the AEU insists, to the courts imposing a significantly worse settlement. The only realistic and rational course of action, therefore, is to endorse the agreement.
The logic of the union's position is that teachers are obliged, every three years, to simply shut up and swallow whatever deal the bureaucracy cooks up with the government, regardless of what measures are actually contained within it.
Teachers must not permit themselves to be intimidated by these threats. In the first place, it is not true that teachers would lose public support if they voted "no". Such an outcome—combined with a campaign explaining the true character of the proposed deal and exposing the union-government-media barrage of misinformation—could in fact develop into a focal point for the escalating opposition among working people to the bipartisan assault on public education, social services and living conditions that has unfolded over the past two decades.
Secondly, the spectre of WorkChoices and judicial arbitration only underscores the necessity for teachers to break out of the union-driven impasse and develop an independent political struggle against the state and federal Labor governments.
Brumby's threats, delivered by the AEU bureaucracy on his behalf, highlight the right-wing, pro-business character of his administration and again point to the absence of any fundamental differences between Labor and Liberal.
For the federal Labor government of Prime Minister Kevin Rudd—whose election the AEU vigorously supported last November—the Victorian teachers' struggle is a crucial stage in its ongoing efforts to place the burden of the economic crisis squarely on the backs of the working class. Amid a growing crisis in the global economy, with the US in recession and the world's financial markets hit by a "credit crunch", Rudd has responded to corporate demands about inflation by pledging to suppress workers' wages. No less than three senior federal Labor ministers immediately responded to the announced teachers' agreement by assuring business, and the Murdoch press, that no "wages breakout" would be tolerated. Finance Minister Lindsay Tanner later admitted that the true nature of the teachers' deal was very different to the one touted by the AEU and state government in their "presentation for general public consumption".
The AEU functions as the conscious agent of the Brumby and Rudd governments, and the ruthless enforcer of their drive to achieve productivity benchmarks and "international competitiveness" by undermining public education and driving down teachers' salaries. No amount of pressure from below will alter this relationship—which is why the alternative to ratifying the agreement is not, as some have argued, forcing the union to renegotiate a better outcome. It is necessary to speak plainly—as long as teachers remain trapped within such a futile trade unionist framework they are doomed to face further defeats.
That is why a "no" vote in next week's ballot must mark the first salvo in an open rebellion against the AEU and the Labor Party. The Socialist Equality Party calls on teachers to elect rank-and-file committees of trusted teachers to advance their campaign, bypass the union's bureaucratic structures, and break down the imposed divisions between schools and union sub-branches, and between teachers in various states. That Victorian teachers remain largely uninformed about the industrial campaigns currently being waged by teachers in New South Wales, South Australia, Western Australia, and the Northern Territory for better pay and conditions stands as an indictment of the AEU's efforts to isolate them. The unification of these struggles should coincide with a turn by teachers to other sections of the working class fighting to defend their wages and conditions, including Qantas engineers, Holden car workers, and NSW power workers fighting the state Labor government's privatisation drive.
This campaign can only go forward to the extent that it is based on a new and independent political orientation. Contained within the Victorian teachers' dispute is a fundamental question: what should be the determining basis, and the daily priorities, of economic and social life? Should the enormous productive capacities and technological resources of the world economy continue to be guided by the profit motive and utilised for the benefit of a tiny minority, or should they to be harnessed to serve the social needs of the vast majority? Is public education to remain an under-resourced, second-rate system reserved for those whose parents are unable to afford private schooling, and whose central task is simply to provide students with the skills demanded by business—or should billions of dollars be spent to ensure a free, universally accessible, quality school system that gives all children the opportunity to fully develop their talents, capacities, and interests?
The latter alternative is incompatible with the dictates of big business and the "free market". It requires nothing less than the revolutionary reorganisation of society along socialist lines. There are no easy solutions or short-cuts. We encourage teachers—and all workers—to study the history and program of the Socialist Equality Party and make the decision to fight for its growth and development as the new mass party of the working class.
The WSWS invites your comments
See Also:An eyewitness account of a Victorian teachers' union ratification meeting[17 June 2008]Two letters and a reply on the teachers' dispute in Victoria, Australia[6 June 2008]Victorian teachers' union opposes mass meetings to discuss industrial agreement[3 June 2008]Australia: Demand mass meetings to reject Victorian teachers' union sell-out![20 May 2008]
Teachers are set to vote in schools throughout Victoria next week on whether to accept or reject the Australian Education Union (AEU) and state Labor government's proposed industrial agreement that will determine wages and conditions in the public education system for the next three years. The Socialist Equality Party calls on all teachers to take a stand and vote "no". Such a vote must mark the first stage of a coordinated industrial and political campaign in defence not only of teachers' wages and conditions but the public education system as a whole—a campaign that directly poses the need for a struggle against both the AEU and Labor.
The union is presenting the state-wide secret ballot as a foregone conclusion, a mere formality. Next week's vote is a legal requirement under federal industrial relations legislation. If it were simply up to the bureaucracy, teachers would not be able to directly vote on the agreement at all. The AEU has aggressively opposed demands for a mass meeting to be held, through which teachers could openly cast a fully informed vote after a democratic discussion and debate.
The AEU has attempted to persuade teachers that democracy has been served and the agreement already ratified through the union-convened delegates' meetings held over the past weeks. On June 13, the union announced that 1,508 delegates (89 percent) had reportedly voted in favour of the agreement versus 186 (11 percent) opposed. A total of 68 percent of allocated ballots were cast—a record high.
This purported outcome in no way reflects the depth of opposition among teachers to the deal. In 2004, for example, some 22 percent voted against ratification of the three-year agreement—despite the fact that there was very little overt opposition at the time among ordinary teachers. This time round, the depth and breadth of oppositional sentiment has been impossible to deny, expressed through emails, blogs, and social networking sites as well as in discussions within schools and between union sub-branches.
No teacher should feel obliged to vote "yes" in next week's ballot out of respect for the delegates' vote. Some teachers have raised the possibility that the AEU directly rigged the delegates' meetings ballot. While this cannot be excluded, far more likely is that such a thing proved unnecessary. From the outset, the union deliberately organised the meetings to exclude the participation of ordinary teachers and deliver the desired result. In an email to the World Socialist Web Site, one senior teacher wrote: "I had strongly requested that I wished to speak at the ratification meeting and was given a verbal OK. I did not receive notification of the [Horsham] meeting (last Thursday); it was advertised through the email system, of which it seems, I was the only one not on the DL. Suffice to say, I missed the meeting and the opportunity to present the opposing side. Others who had attended the meeting, and felt betrayed by the AEU campaign, felt there was little choice but to support the proposed agreement."
Moreover, the delegates, each supposedly representing 20 union members, were selected on an entirely ad hoc and arbitrary basis. In some schools there was no sub-branch meeting or vote to select delegates, and the established, pro-agreement union representatives simply appointed themselves. In other schools, where only a marginal majority of teachers voted in favour, every delegate was bound to vote for the agreement, effectively disenfranchising large minorities in these schools.
In another measure aimed at outright intimidation, the vote was conducted at each meeting by delegates placing their card in either the "yes" or "no" box—with their name on the card! So this was a "secret ballot"—for everyone except the union officials, who no doubt kept a record of all those who failed to toe the line.
Delegates were encouraged to simply cast their vote without staying for the meeting, or participating in the extremely limited debate permitted by the union. Interestingly, those few meetings where SEP members or supporters were able to ask questions or speak in opposition to the deal recorded a significantly higher "no" vote.
No teacher should be under any illusion—if the agreement is ratified it will mark a serious defeat for the year-long industrial campaign.
Throughout the campaign, which included two mass meetings and a series of rolling stop-work protests, teachers won broad support from wide sections of the population. Central demands included a 30 percent pay rise over three years, no more than 20 students per class, and the establishment of permanent positions for those teachers on contracts who now comprise one-fifth of the total workforce. Yet the AEU-Labor deal delivers none of these demands. Instead, first-year and senior teachers receive a nominal pay increase that barely matches the official inflation rate, while everyone else will take a significant real wage cut. Amid escalating interest rates, house prices, rental rates, costs of groceries, transport, and many other necessities, teachers living standards—already substantially lower than those of most workers with comparable qualifications—will be driven down even further.
The impact of the agreement will soon be directly felt in classrooms throughout Victoria. Class sizes will remain unmanageable, and schools will continue to be understaffed. The agreement explicitly endorses the government's right-wing "productivity"-based education "Blueprint", in which underperforming schools will be further starved of funds, forced to close or amalgamate, and it introduces new classifications of teachers such as "executive class"—a means of smuggling in a form of performance pay. Ratification of the deal will serve to formally entrench this agenda, policed by the AEU.
The AEU, the Labor Party, and the political tasks confronting teachers
A number of teachers who oppose the agreement have nevertheless said they intend to vote "yes" because they feel nothing better can be achieved given the AEU's refusal to mount a campaign against the government.
The union has stopped at nothing to cultivate this sentiment. That is why AEU Victorian President Mary Bluett publicly kissed Premier John Brumby in gratitude and hailed the agreement as the best achieved in 25 years. The state's teachers, she crowed, would now be the best paid in the country. These fraudulent claims—made more than a week before teachers were even permitted to read the agreement—were faithfully repeated by every section of the media, leading the public to believe that the teachers' central demands had been met. This outcome was no "misunderstanding", but rather a deliberate attempt by Bluett and her colleagues to present teachers with a fait accompli. The agreement cannot now be rejected, the union has repeatedly claimed, because a "no" vote would appear greedy and cost teachers the support won throughout their industrial campaign.
The AEU leadership has also threatened that the Brumby government would respond to any rejection of the agreement by invoking the former Howard government's WorkChoices legislation, as it did with the state's nurses—halting negotiations, making illegal any further industrial action, and instructing the arbitration courts to determine the outcome. This would lead, the AEU insists, to the courts imposing a significantly worse settlement. The only realistic and rational course of action, therefore, is to endorse the agreement.
The logic of the union's position is that teachers are obliged, every three years, to simply shut up and swallow whatever deal the bureaucracy cooks up with the government, regardless of what measures are actually contained within it.
Teachers must not permit themselves to be intimidated by these threats. In the first place, it is not true that teachers would lose public support if they voted "no". Such an outcome—combined with a campaign explaining the true character of the proposed deal and exposing the union-government-media barrage of misinformation—could in fact develop into a focal point for the escalating opposition among working people to the bipartisan assault on public education, social services and living conditions that has unfolded over the past two decades.
Secondly, the spectre of WorkChoices and judicial arbitration only underscores the necessity for teachers to break out of the union-driven impasse and develop an independent political struggle against the state and federal Labor governments.
Brumby's threats, delivered by the AEU bureaucracy on his behalf, highlight the right-wing, pro-business character of his administration and again point to the absence of any fundamental differences between Labor and Liberal.
For the federal Labor government of Prime Minister Kevin Rudd—whose election the AEU vigorously supported last November—the Victorian teachers' struggle is a crucial stage in its ongoing efforts to place the burden of the economic crisis squarely on the backs of the working class. Amid a growing crisis in the global economy, with the US in recession and the world's financial markets hit by a "credit crunch", Rudd has responded to corporate demands about inflation by pledging to suppress workers' wages. No less than three senior federal Labor ministers immediately responded to the announced teachers' agreement by assuring business, and the Murdoch press, that no "wages breakout" would be tolerated. Finance Minister Lindsay Tanner later admitted that the true nature of the teachers' deal was very different to the one touted by the AEU and state government in their "presentation for general public consumption".
The AEU functions as the conscious agent of the Brumby and Rudd governments, and the ruthless enforcer of their drive to achieve productivity benchmarks and "international competitiveness" by undermining public education and driving down teachers' salaries. No amount of pressure from below will alter this relationship—which is why the alternative to ratifying the agreement is not, as some have argued, forcing the union to renegotiate a better outcome. It is necessary to speak plainly—as long as teachers remain trapped within such a futile trade unionist framework they are doomed to face further defeats.
That is why a "no" vote in next week's ballot must mark the first salvo in an open rebellion against the AEU and the Labor Party. The Socialist Equality Party calls on teachers to elect rank-and-file committees of trusted teachers to advance their campaign, bypass the union's bureaucratic structures, and break down the imposed divisions between schools and union sub-branches, and between teachers in various states. That Victorian teachers remain largely uninformed about the industrial campaigns currently being waged by teachers in New South Wales, South Australia, Western Australia, and the Northern Territory for better pay and conditions stands as an indictment of the AEU's efforts to isolate them. The unification of these struggles should coincide with a turn by teachers to other sections of the working class fighting to defend their wages and conditions, including Qantas engineers, Holden car workers, and NSW power workers fighting the state Labor government's privatisation drive.
This campaign can only go forward to the extent that it is based on a new and independent political orientation. Contained within the Victorian teachers' dispute is a fundamental question: what should be the determining basis, and the daily priorities, of economic and social life? Should the enormous productive capacities and technological resources of the world economy continue to be guided by the profit motive and utilised for the benefit of a tiny minority, or should they to be harnessed to serve the social needs of the vast majority? Is public education to remain an under-resourced, second-rate system reserved for those whose parents are unable to afford private schooling, and whose central task is simply to provide students with the skills demanded by business—or should billions of dollars be spent to ensure a free, universally accessible, quality school system that gives all children the opportunity to fully develop their talents, capacities, and interests?
The latter alternative is incompatible with the dictates of big business and the "free market". It requires nothing less than the revolutionary reorganisation of society along socialist lines. There are no easy solutions or short-cuts. We encourage teachers—and all workers—to study the history and program of the Socialist Equality Party and make the decision to fight for its growth and development as the new mass party of the working class.
The WSWS invites your comments
See Also:An eyewitness account of a Victorian teachers' union ratification meeting[17 June 2008]Two letters and a reply on the teachers' dispute in Victoria, Australia[6 June 2008]Victorian teachers' union opposes mass meetings to discuss industrial agreement[3 June 2008]Australia: Demand mass meetings to reject Victorian teachers' union sell-out![20 May 2008]
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
To Stay Or Not To Stay (in the AEU)?
89% voted yes! Why?
1. Many teachers believed that once our industrial campaign had been halted it would be too hard to restart the campaign again.
2. Teachers also believed that the public were convinced that we had all received a huge pay increase and would see us as greedy and unreasonable.
3. Many did not think that the AEU Leadership was capable of getting a better deal. In fact the AEU Leadership themselves, all along have been saying that they can’t get a better deal!
4. We had lost our trump card by calling off the campaign just before the NAPLAN tests.
5. Brian Henderson kept telling us that the government would now end our bargaining period and force us before the Arbitration Commission where we would get less money. He also said that the government would use Workchoices against us. All the paid AEU organizers were spreading this line as well.
Many of those who voted yes did so because they felt they had no choice. The AEU Leadership took away our choice!
Where to Next?
Stay in the union. Because most members aren’t actively involved in the AEU the current Leadership can do what it does. Leaving or becoming less active only gives them more power. Without unions we wouldn’t have any of the gains: such as maximum number of classes per week, maximum number of extras per week, LSL, even equal pay.
The opposition to this deal showed many teachers the truth about it. The opposition did this without any organization. Imagine if we planned and organized ourselves how much more effective we could be!
So get more active in the AEU. Stand for AEU Council. Being on council is not an onerous task. It means going to council meetings (held at Trenerry Crescent, Abbotsford) 8 times a year on a Friday during school hours. CRT coverage is paid to the school. It's really vital to get more independent minded teachers on Council. You have ‘what it takes’ to be on Council = the interests of the members at heart.
Join with us- Teachers Alliance- to build an alternative. We are seeking to work with others to create a network of AEU members and provide alternative views to that of the current leadership.
Attend our July 26th meeting at 2pm at Dantes Cafe(150-156 Gertrude Fitzroy) to discuss these ideas.
Organise meetings in your area. We’re happy to help and come along.
Send us your ideas.
Convince others to stay and focus on the next stage.
You may say that I'm a dreamer But I'm not the only one I hope someday you'll join us And the world will live as one
1. Many teachers believed that once our industrial campaign had been halted it would be too hard to restart the campaign again.
2. Teachers also believed that the public were convinced that we had all received a huge pay increase and would see us as greedy and unreasonable.
3. Many did not think that the AEU Leadership was capable of getting a better deal. In fact the AEU Leadership themselves, all along have been saying that they can’t get a better deal!
4. We had lost our trump card by calling off the campaign just before the NAPLAN tests.
5. Brian Henderson kept telling us that the government would now end our bargaining period and force us before the Arbitration Commission where we would get less money. He also said that the government would use Workchoices against us. All the paid AEU organizers were spreading this line as well.
Many of those who voted yes did so because they felt they had no choice. The AEU Leadership took away our choice!
Where to Next?
Stay in the union. Because most members aren’t actively involved in the AEU the current Leadership can do what it does. Leaving or becoming less active only gives them more power. Without unions we wouldn’t have any of the gains: such as maximum number of classes per week, maximum number of extras per week, LSL, even equal pay.
The opposition to this deal showed many teachers the truth about it. The opposition did this without any organization. Imagine if we planned and organized ourselves how much more effective we could be!
So get more active in the AEU. Stand for AEU Council. Being on council is not an onerous task. It means going to council meetings (held at Trenerry Crescent, Abbotsford) 8 times a year on a Friday during school hours. CRT coverage is paid to the school. It's really vital to get more independent minded teachers on Council. You have ‘what it takes’ to be on Council = the interests of the members at heart.
Join with us- Teachers Alliance- to build an alternative. We are seeking to work with others to create a network of AEU members and provide alternative views to that of the current leadership.
Attend our July 26th meeting at 2pm at Dantes Cafe(150-156 Gertrude Fitzroy) to discuss these ideas.
Organise meetings in your area. We’re happy to help and come along.
Send us your ideas.
Convince others to stay and focus on the next stage.
You may say that I'm a dreamer But I'm not the only one I hope someday you'll join us And the world will live as one
Saturday, June 14, 2008
DEECT Announces procedures for all staff to vote on agreement
- DEECT memo (S197-2008)
- Proposed Victorian Government Schools Agreement 2008
- Joint statement from the Department and the Australian Education Union
- Information statement for employees
- Frequently asked questions
- Approval process – Principal Guidelines
- The Australian Education Union also has a website dedicated to the proposed workplace agreement and this can be accessed at : http://aeu-vic.labor.net.au/campaigns/
Yes to the agreement but Victorian teachers are divided.
Mary Bluett the president of AEU Vic defending a deeply divisive pay deal with gains won for those at the top and bottom of the scale by saying “you are a long time at the top”.
It is not unreasonable to suggest that some of the leadership have been too long at the top. Some time at the bottom of the class may bring them back to earth. While the majority voted at the ratification meetings to accept the deal it belies the deep divisions and discontent with the AEU Vic’s leadership and with the ALP governments both state and federal. The question we ask is, who is representing “working families”?
The AEU leadership may like to maintain the pretence of political independence from their ALP masters, but sealing the deal with a kiss reveales our leadership’s special relationship with the ALP is much to intimate. This same State Government chooses to denigrate the collective actions of concerned and responsible citizens through the corporate mass media, bankrupting them in the courts, and generally avoiding any serious public discussion and dialogue about any of our concerns. Both the union leadership and the ALP have displayed contempt for any claim that they genuinely represent “working families”.
It is clear that the conditions of daily life are getting worse rather than better. Rest assured it will be global and national economic and political events that will eventually burst the bubble our current leadership live in. From truck drivers in Spain, to teachers in Pakistan, and taxi drivers in Melbourne, to fisherman in Lakes Entrance, workers are being forced to protest against the impact of rising global oil prices on our lives. Those who suggested that arguing for the continuation of the campaign was just being “radical” betray their naiveté. We all have car tanks to fill, mortgages and rent to pay, food to be put on the table and children to cloth.
Attracted by the enthusiasm and heightened expectations of their fellow teachers unprecedented numbers of teachers joined the union in short time – 5000 plus over a period of 5 months – while some principals actively encouraged their staff to join the union and involve themselves in the campaign. Time and again the point was made that the AEU campaign was not just a wage claim but equally importantly about improving the condition of state schools and addressing the very significant workload issues we will still have to deal with.
The damage done to the growing solidarity and strengthening of the union - from graduates to principals – is the most gut wrenching aspect of prematurely ‘kissing- off ‘ our campaign. What ever the future holds for us there is one guarantee, and that is we will only get the strength we need from the collective, organised strength of the union. What ever we think of this deal it is an absolute truth that it would not have been won without the collective strength and activity of union members.
The negotiations were never in “good faith” on the government’s part. Can we forget how the minister accused teachers of stealing time from their students, and defrauding the government over curriculum days as extra holidays? The State Government’s preferred bargaining method was to use the reactionary Workchoices legislation that their federal counterparts wish to retain. The government’s belligerence further fuelled the ongoing campaign of our detractors who undermine and malign the work of thousands of teachers in the public education sector. That was obvious to all the community, and it is why we received the support we did when we were forced to undertake a prolonged campaign of industrial action.
The collective welfare and the goodwill of our union’s members have been sacrificed for political expediency, saving face for the state and federal governments, by pushing a deal through so as not to upset the national testing program. The announcement by the union that there was an overwhelming ‘Yes’ vote does not represent the sentiments of all the membership. The extreme differences between the divisions – accomplished teachers did very badly while graduates and expert teachers won significant wage catch-ups - is the reason why sub-branches and staff rooms are deeply divided on the wages issue.
The Government’s premature announcement of a done deal to the press before union members saw the terms of the agreement, let alone ratify it, was a mischievous act of political sabotage. The union leadership should have warned them off. It beggars belief that our leadership had no control over the government’s actions. The union leadership’s threatened that if we voted No we would have to go back to square one with all bets off and that would then mean remounting the campaign which would then “alienate the community” who had supported us.
Many teachers felt that they had no choice but to vote Yes to the agreement. They felt that if the union leaders were saying it was a good deal then it was unlikely that they would have the necessary fire in the belly to reignite the campaign. It is true that once an industrial campaign has been wound down that the impetus is lost. The proper process would have been to present objectively the terms of the agreement that had been negotiated to that point and then put the pros and cons to the members for discussion. Instead they assumed that there would be agreement and that their job was to ‘sell’ it to us. Treating members with such contempt can only weaken the union by encouraging counterproductive cynicism.
We need a union leadership that is not afraid of its members and instead encourages us to voice our concerns and actively participate in our sub-branches, in the union state branch, and the labour movement generally. Let us not waste the good work done to build the union to date; we all have a better world to win.
The words penned by Ben Mulvogue in 1915, who was then secretary of the Builders’ Labourers’ Union still resound today, “The union has made possible progress not only for the working people, but advancement in many other directions – morally, socially, and intellectually – and is traceable to the existence of the organisation of the workers.”
Peter Curtis
AEU Vic Branch and supporter of Teachers Alliance
It is not unreasonable to suggest that some of the leadership have been too long at the top. Some time at the bottom of the class may bring them back to earth. While the majority voted at the ratification meetings to accept the deal it belies the deep divisions and discontent with the AEU Vic’s leadership and with the ALP governments both state and federal. The question we ask is, who is representing “working families”?
The AEU leadership may like to maintain the pretence of political independence from their ALP masters, but sealing the deal with a kiss reveales our leadership’s special relationship with the ALP is much to intimate. This same State Government chooses to denigrate the collective actions of concerned and responsible citizens through the corporate mass media, bankrupting them in the courts, and generally avoiding any serious public discussion and dialogue about any of our concerns. Both the union leadership and the ALP have displayed contempt for any claim that they genuinely represent “working families”.
It is clear that the conditions of daily life are getting worse rather than better. Rest assured it will be global and national economic and political events that will eventually burst the bubble our current leadership live in. From truck drivers in Spain, to teachers in Pakistan, and taxi drivers in Melbourne, to fisherman in Lakes Entrance, workers are being forced to protest against the impact of rising global oil prices on our lives. Those who suggested that arguing for the continuation of the campaign was just being “radical” betray their naiveté. We all have car tanks to fill, mortgages and rent to pay, food to be put on the table and children to cloth.
Attracted by the enthusiasm and heightened expectations of their fellow teachers unprecedented numbers of teachers joined the union in short time – 5000 plus over a period of 5 months – while some principals actively encouraged their staff to join the union and involve themselves in the campaign. Time and again the point was made that the AEU campaign was not just a wage claim but equally importantly about improving the condition of state schools and addressing the very significant workload issues we will still have to deal with.
The damage done to the growing solidarity and strengthening of the union - from graduates to principals – is the most gut wrenching aspect of prematurely ‘kissing- off ‘ our campaign. What ever the future holds for us there is one guarantee, and that is we will only get the strength we need from the collective, organised strength of the union. What ever we think of this deal it is an absolute truth that it would not have been won without the collective strength and activity of union members.
The negotiations were never in “good faith” on the government’s part. Can we forget how the minister accused teachers of stealing time from their students, and defrauding the government over curriculum days as extra holidays? The State Government’s preferred bargaining method was to use the reactionary Workchoices legislation that their federal counterparts wish to retain. The government’s belligerence further fuelled the ongoing campaign of our detractors who undermine and malign the work of thousands of teachers in the public education sector. That was obvious to all the community, and it is why we received the support we did when we were forced to undertake a prolonged campaign of industrial action.
The collective welfare and the goodwill of our union’s members have been sacrificed for political expediency, saving face for the state and federal governments, by pushing a deal through so as not to upset the national testing program. The announcement by the union that there was an overwhelming ‘Yes’ vote does not represent the sentiments of all the membership. The extreme differences between the divisions – accomplished teachers did very badly while graduates and expert teachers won significant wage catch-ups - is the reason why sub-branches and staff rooms are deeply divided on the wages issue.
The Government’s premature announcement of a done deal to the press before union members saw the terms of the agreement, let alone ratify it, was a mischievous act of political sabotage. The union leadership should have warned them off. It beggars belief that our leadership had no control over the government’s actions. The union leadership’s threatened that if we voted No we would have to go back to square one with all bets off and that would then mean remounting the campaign which would then “alienate the community” who had supported us.
Many teachers felt that they had no choice but to vote Yes to the agreement. They felt that if the union leaders were saying it was a good deal then it was unlikely that they would have the necessary fire in the belly to reignite the campaign. It is true that once an industrial campaign has been wound down that the impetus is lost. The proper process would have been to present objectively the terms of the agreement that had been negotiated to that point and then put the pros and cons to the members for discussion. Instead they assumed that there would be agreement and that their job was to ‘sell’ it to us. Treating members with such contempt can only weaken the union by encouraging counterproductive cynicism.
We need a union leadership that is not afraid of its members and instead encourages us to voice our concerns and actively participate in our sub-branches, in the union state branch, and the labour movement generally. Let us not waste the good work done to build the union to date; we all have a better world to win.
The words penned by Ben Mulvogue in 1915, who was then secretary of the Builders’ Labourers’ Union still resound today, “The union has made possible progress not only for the working people, but advancement in many other directions – morally, socially, and intellectually – and is traceable to the existence of the organisation of the workers.”
Peter Curtis
AEU Vic Branch and supporter of Teachers Alliance
Thursday, June 12, 2008
Deal is Done !
Hi Colleagues,
This morning Mary Bluett announced that the AEU would be formally accepting the deal struck between the AEU and the Brumby government. As far as we know a majority of AEU members voted yes at all of the ratification meetings.
While Teachers Alliance along with many other individual AEU members campaigned strongly against this deal we accept that the majority has determined to accept it.
We applaud the strong and inspiring committment shown by the majority of AEU members during our industrial campaign. As the AEU officials have said on several occassions it was this committment of the members to campaign hard and to continue industrial action which got the government to begin to negotiate more seriously after months of stalling.
So it seems such a pity that we have been forced to accept second best. We were planning our strongest and most powerful industrial action; to stop work during the NAPLAN tests (and there were talks in the other States of a national stopwork against the NAPLAN tests if Victoria went ahead) when the plug was pulled on our campaign and our officials announced that they had negotiated the "deal we have been fighting for"!!!!!!
We also had enormous support from the public. We remember pedestrians clapping us as we marched through the city streets. There were many letters in the daily papers arguing for us. Additionally there was no real pressure from the government on us to give in. We could have taken the campaign further to get a much better deal and a fairer deal for all teachers.
The information we have received from many teachers who voted yes is that they are not very happy with this offer at all. However they feel that once the "plug" had been pulled from the campaign it would have been too hard to restart it and that we had lost the support of the public because both Brumby and our union leaders had described the deal as wonderful. Consequently we would have been seen as greedy. Additionally many teachers said that they just don't trust this leadership to do better.
Of course there are teachers, who are happy about the deal because they personally will benefit.
However it is important to understand that the process of voting is also quite misleading. In many AEU sub-branches the vote was split but they still tied their delegates to vote according to the majority. In other sub-branches they tried to reflect the split vote and determined that some of their delegates should vote yes and others no. Still other sub-branches did not tie their delegates at all, which is actually the way the process is supposed to work. Why?
We have ratification meetings where discussion and debate takes place. This is designed to give delegates the opportunity to hear different viewpoints, especially from other sub-branches. Delegates should be able to decide which way to vote after having heard this discussion and debate. Obviously they are expected to take into account the way their sub-branch voted and the opinions expressed in their sub-branch meetings and then be prepared to report back and explain which way they finally cast their vote.
If sub-branches tie their delegates there really is no need for a discussion or debate at the ratification meetings. In fact there is no need for a meeting. We could all just send in the results of the votes from sub-branches. However the AEU has a tradition of making this form (as opposed to a mass meeting vote) of ratification more democratic than a referendum process.
Mary Merkenich
AEU Councillor
Teachers Alliance
view our web site at www.teachers-alliance.org
This morning Mary Bluett announced that the AEU would be formally accepting the deal struck between the AEU and the Brumby government. As far as we know a majority of AEU members voted yes at all of the ratification meetings.
While Teachers Alliance along with many other individual AEU members campaigned strongly against this deal we accept that the majority has determined to accept it.
We applaud the strong and inspiring committment shown by the majority of AEU members during our industrial campaign. As the AEU officials have said on several occassions it was this committment of the members to campaign hard and to continue industrial action which got the government to begin to negotiate more seriously after months of stalling.
So it seems such a pity that we have been forced to accept second best. We were planning our strongest and most powerful industrial action; to stop work during the NAPLAN tests (and there were talks in the other States of a national stopwork against the NAPLAN tests if Victoria went ahead) when the plug was pulled on our campaign and our officials announced that they had negotiated the "deal we have been fighting for"!!!!!!
We also had enormous support from the public. We remember pedestrians clapping us as we marched through the city streets. There were many letters in the daily papers arguing for us. Additionally there was no real pressure from the government on us to give in. We could have taken the campaign further to get a much better deal and a fairer deal for all teachers.
The information we have received from many teachers who voted yes is that they are not very happy with this offer at all. However they feel that once the "plug" had been pulled from the campaign it would have been too hard to restart it and that we had lost the support of the public because both Brumby and our union leaders had described the deal as wonderful. Consequently we would have been seen as greedy. Additionally many teachers said that they just don't trust this leadership to do better.
Of course there are teachers, who are happy about the deal because they personally will benefit.
However it is important to understand that the process of voting is also quite misleading. In many AEU sub-branches the vote was split but they still tied their delegates to vote according to the majority. In other sub-branches they tried to reflect the split vote and determined that some of their delegates should vote yes and others no. Still other sub-branches did not tie their delegates at all, which is actually the way the process is supposed to work. Why?
We have ratification meetings where discussion and debate takes place. This is designed to give delegates the opportunity to hear different viewpoints, especially from other sub-branches. Delegates should be able to decide which way to vote after having heard this discussion and debate. Obviously they are expected to take into account the way their sub-branch voted and the opinions expressed in their sub-branch meetings and then be prepared to report back and explain which way they finally cast their vote.
If sub-branches tie their delegates there really is no need for a discussion or debate at the ratification meetings. In fact there is no need for a meeting. We could all just send in the results of the votes from sub-branches. However the AEU has a tradition of making this form (as opposed to a mass meeting vote) of ratification more democratic than a referendum process.
Mary Merkenich
AEU Councillor
Teachers Alliance
view our web site at www.teachers-alliance.org
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)