I feel compelled to add my 2cents worth here - I can write for a year and give many stories / facts, this is just a slight glimpse to give insight to the topic in question --
Having worked at Holden in maintenance for 21yrs, I was also a union rep for 10yrs, and part of the bargaining committee for the negotiations of Holden's last 3 EBAs prior to its current one. My roles were plenty and varied.
Its easy to point blame and distort the facts, the fact is though prior to the 'Yank Corporate Invasion', our business module was good and relations between union & company were also stable & diplomatic. This offered both sides a security that today is hard to find.
Yes, we fought for better pay & conditions, and were perhaps at the forefront of industry, but then again Holden also gained from the exercise.
Conditions / pay were not handed on a platter, rather so they were earned. The workforce became highly flexible and Holden could 'at a whim' rearrange its business module for unforseen circumstances with the support of its employees. This included but not limited to :downdays, forced RDOs & A/L, changing of shift patterns, supplementary labour hire etc.
It also meant the up-skilling of its workforce, paid training, post trade certificates etc, but there was now a flexible team to work on any equipment.
It also came after the 'cleanout / restructuring period' where for example sections of 10 people were stripped back to 3. Obviously you don't have to be very clever to understand the 3 blokes remaining are gonna be working like *****.
Productivity was increased, workers put in all they had (and yes there was dead wood, but 99% of it was already flushed out) and it was a successful partnership between company success & employee rewards.
It was fair to say pretty much all the workforce at Fishermans Bend was value added.
There was room for understanding, compromise, tolerance & negotiations.
Enter the Yanks, they basically walked in with arrogance, an attitude of never good enough and a total disregard and contempt for the unions or the employees who believed in them.
The HFV6 plant was originally proposed to be a 'Greenfield Site' non union labour with 457 workers etc, but yes we intervened. We did so for us, for our children and to uphold the very values our forefathers fought for and won.
To have 'given them' these conditions as one example alone is both Un-Australian and unethical on the future generation of employees who would have depended on it.
Im all for supporting ALL manufacturing as its the very backbone of a nations prosperity and ability to create, on the other hand however do we continually be held to ransom by a ruthless mob and constantly be criticised for upholding and maintaining our conditions -
We are in the new phase (although its reality) where the worker is continually threatened with the argument of accept less or lose your jobs to the Asian competitors etc.
We don't eat a bowl of rice a week, we don't live at work - we eat steak, drink beer and on average drive 200kms per week between work alone.
The average mtg is approx. 400K and utilities are up 17% in one yr.
What good would it be for anyone to have a manufacturing presence, but its workers are living below the economy scale???
There are 2 sides of the union debate !
Oh and believe me - GMs fate was sealed long before any labour deal
