Ed Davis

You have not been recognized as a subscriber to Labor History online. About 647 words from this article are provided below; about 6729 words remain.

If you are a individual subscriber to Labour History, you may:: • login here if you have already registered for online access.; • Or if you're already logged in register your subscription.
• Set up your online account for the first time.
If you are not a subscriber to Labour History, you can:: • subscribe here.
• Purchase this article in PDF form for $10.00.
• Purchase a research pass to gain two hour access to the entire History Cooperative web site. You will have full access to current issues of Labour History (82 - present).
Instititutions can:: • Subscribe to this journal and receive print and electronic issues.
• Activate your existing subscription so that we recognize your IP number ranges.

Ed Davis | The ACTU Congress of 2006 and its Aftermath | Labour History, 96 | The History Cooperative

RESEARCH REPORT

The ACTU Congress of 2006 and its Aftermath

The 2006 Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU) Congress was opened by President Sharan Burrow at 10.00am 24 October. It closed the next day after an extended morning's business at 1.15pm. It was the briefest Congress for at least 30 years; its focus was the sole and singular challenge of overturning the industrial relations policies of the federal government led by then Prime Minister John Howard. The previous Congress, in 2003, had lasted for four days and considered some 30 items of business.¹ The Congress was held at the Crown Promenade Hotel on Melbourne's Southbank, with the business conducted in a large room with theatre style seating for approximately 650 delegates and media. Notable by their absence was the usual significant cohort of international union leaders. None attended the 2006 Congress; their greetings and good wishes were instead relayed in a short video shown to delegates. This was the third Congress for the leadership team of Sharan Burrow and Secretary Greg Combet.	1
ACTU Assistant Secretary Richard Marles reported on the first day of Congress that there were 543 delegates from 62 organisations with 1,625 votes.² The organisations comprised 46 unions and 16 state and local labour councils. Approximately 60 per cent of the votes were in the hands of the largest nine unions: Australian Education Union (AEU), 134; Australian Manufacturing Workers Union (AMWU), 112; Australian Services Union (ASU), 80; Australian Workers Union (AWU), 102; Communications Electrical and Plumbing Union (CEPU), 82; Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU), 84; Community and Public Sector Union (CPSU), 92; Liquor, Hospitality and Miscellaneous Union (LHMU), 100; and Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees Union (SDA), 174.³ There was no occasion on which votes were counted reflecting the practice of recent Congresses. Consensus had again been forged pre Congress and prevailed.	2
The three years following the 2003 Congress had been hard going for the ACTU and its affiliates. Australian Bureau of Statistics data showed that absolute union membership had barely increased between 2003 (1.87 million members) and 2005 (1.91 million members).⁴ Overall density had fallen from 23 per cent to 22.4 per cent. Density had enjoyed a small rise for public sector employees, from 46.9 per cent in 2003 to 47.2 per cent in 2005. Private sector union density fell over this period from 17.6 per cent to 16.8 per cent. Falling density had been identified as a critical issue for unions since the mid and late 1980s.⁵ More recently the former head of the ACTU's Organising Centre, Michael Crosby, had taken up the challenge with missionary zeal. In his book, Power at Work: Rebuilding the Australian Union Movement, he presented a graph demonstrating the decline in union density from above 45 per cent in 1986 to under 25 per cent in 2004. In what became known as 'the scary graph' he extrapolated the trend to show zero membership by 2012.⁶ Unions were well aware of the scale of the threats to their existence; with some notable exceptions, few had succeeded in turning the tide.⁷	3
The 2003 Congress had highlighted the damage to workers, members and unions associated with the policies of the Howard government. The next election was seen as a vital opportunity to mobilise opinion in favour of a change of government.⁸ The outcome was calamitous for the industrial and political wings of the labour movement with John Howard's Coalition winning a resounding victory in October 2004. Not only had the government achieved a strong majority in the House of Representatives, it had also secured an unanticipated majority in the Senate. This was a luxury no federal government had enjoyed since 1981.⁹ Prime Minister Howard indicated he would be pressing ahead with the industrial relations reform agenda previously blocked in the Senate.	. . .

There are about 6729 more words in this article. Please log in (or, if you are not yet an authorized user, please go to the User Setup page) to gain full access rights. Or if you're already logged in register your subscription.