The head of Australia’s construction union is working hand-in-glove with the Labor government-appointed administrator to implement a restructuring operation, amid vocal criticism from current and former state branch officials in the union. The plan’s opponents claim it is a move to weaken the branches and consolidate financial and organisational control at the national level, giving the administrator more power over the day-to-day running of the union.
The concrete details of what Construction, Forestry and Maritime Employees Union (CFMEU) National Secretary Zach Smith and Administrator Mark Irving are seeking to carry out have not yet been explained to workers or made public.
Purported excerpts from the Irving-Smith Strategic Plan, circulated by Your Union Your Choice (YUYC), a group associated with ousted CFMEU Queensland Secretary Michael Ravbar, contain several strong indications of what is intended.
The document states that “national ‘capitation’ arrangements,” that is, how much of members’ dues and other union income collected by the state branches is sent to the national office, “will change.” Training for union delegates, shop stewards and organisers would be centralised, while the direction of media, communications and campaigns would also be controlled by the national office.
YUYC claims that this plan would result in “a multi-million dollar increase to capitations … and a tripling of the expenses of the National Office.”
Making clear that other sections of the union’s operations will be brought under the control of the national office—and therefore, more directly, of Irving—the leaked document refers to “further changes being rolled out over time.”
YUYC also published a letter signed by CFMEU officials Mick Buchan, Western Australian secretary, and Michael Hiscox, acting (in place of Smith) Australian Capital Territory secretary, who state they are “deeply concerned by the proposed restructure.”
Buchan and Hiscox note that the proposal would “deprive rank and file members of having a voice in the way that their union is run.” But the pair’s real concerns are their “exclusion from key decision-making forums” and the diminution of the financial resources and power under their control as branch leaders.
Significantly, while arguing that the restructure should “wait until we are out of Administration and members can be fully informed and fully participate in a democratic decision-making process,” Buchan and Hiscox do not rule out lending their support to the restructure, merely stating they will not do so until they “have had a chance to properly consult with delegates and members.” They do not actually call for a membership-wide vote, let alone a mobilisation of workers against the restructure, despite acknowledging that it will be imposed in entirely anti-democratic fashion by Smith and the administrator.
Smith has hit back at the “bulls..t going around about a restructure,” complaining that his opponents are “hanging on to the past” and “continuing the problems that led our union into administration.” Other than claiming that “no branch is losing any power out of this,” Smith does not actually dispute any of the claims, except to state emphatically that the restructure “is my plan as your national secretary. It’s not the administrator’s plan.”
Smith’s insistence that the plan is his, and that every criticism of it is a “personal attack,” is a transparent attempt to bolster the credibility of the restructure proposal and suppress workers’ opposition. In reality, it only serves to confirm how tightly integrated Smith is into the administration and the Labor government.
The most striking feature of the restructure plan is that it has nothing to do with the ostensible purpose of the administration. The federal Labor government imposed the dictatorial measure last August, under the pretext of stamping out corruption and links to organised crime and bikie gangs. The basis for this was laid by a scurrilous media campaign comprising unproved allegations and the claims of factional enemies of the union leadership.
As the World Socialist Web Site explained, the aim was never to cleanse the CFMEU of “rogue elements,” but to strip a historically militant section of workers of the capacity to oppose attacks on their wages and conditions, amid a downturn in the building industry and the broader economy.
The proposed restructure provides further confirmation of this analysis. Its purpose is to ensure that union officials at every level, from the branch leadership down to site delegates, are committed to carrying out the dictates of the administrator—that is, of the ruling elite.
The heated online exchanges between Smith and other union officials make clear that none of these bureaucrats, ousted or remaining, will lead a fight for workers’ interests. Their sole preoccupation, as always, is their own positions and privileges. The internecine squabbling is a product of disagreements over how best to preserve, or, in the case of the sacked officials, restore, their lucrative roles.
The officials on both sides have suppressed any opposition from workers to the administration, the Labor government that imposed it, or the Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU) which lent its full-throated support to the unprecedented attack on workers’ democratic rights.
Following the imposition of administration, mass protests, involving tens of thousands of workers in the CFMEU and other building industry unions, were held around the country. There was broad support for industry-wide strikes against the anti-democratic attack. But the union leadership, with the backing of the ousted officials, ensured that no such action went ahead, and that even the protests were quickly halted.
Smith, in particular, played a major role in shutting down this opposition. Quickly installed as branch secretary in Victoria, where the largest rallies took place, Smith told workers at the second and final protest in Melbourne, “we will come out of this period, and we’ll be stronger than ever,” in other words, that there was no need to fight the administration.
Ravbar, along with other ousted officials, has also been instrumental in hosing down workers’ opposition, promoting illusions that the administration could instead be overturned through a High Court case. This was used as the excuse to shut down protests in Sydney and elsewhere late last year, with organisers claiming that workers needed to wait for a legal outcome, then said to be coming in February or March.
Now, while Ravbar, Hiscox, Buchan and others are attacking Smith and the restructure plan, there is still no call for workers to mobilise against the administration and the Labor government.
The role of the pseudo-left is also highly significant. A Socialist Alliance-led group, previously known as “Rank & File: Hands off the CFMEU,” but now calling itself “Defend the Unions—Defend the CFMEU,” which last year put itself forward as an opponent of the administration, is conspicuously silent about the restructure. Since Smith was installed as secretary of the Victorian branch, the group has entirely subordinated itself to his leadership and the position that workers and the union must proceed with “business as usual” under the administration.
That underscores the reality that the pseudo-left is an adjunct of the union bureaucracy, in which its leading members are increasingly integrated. No less than Smith and co., they are hostile to any independent mobilisation of the working class against the apparatus, which they defend.
But as the entire course of administration has demonstrated, such a mobilisation is the only means for construction workers to fight the takeover of the CFMEU and the attacks on their wages and conditions. Rank-and-file committees, democratically led by workers themselves, politically and organisationally independent from the unions and Labor, as well as the ousted officials, must be established on building sites and in workplaces across the country.
Labor’s attack on the CFMEU is the most acute expression in Australia of a global offensive by the ruling class against workers, unfolding amid a deepening crisis of capitalism. This highlights the need for a unified political struggle by the working class to oppose the domination of all aspects of life by corporate profit interests.
Above all, what is required is the fight for a workers’ government to implement socialist policies. The major developers, banks, and other corporate giants must be placed under the democratic ownership and control of the working class, so that society’s resources can be directed toward meeting the social needs of the majority, rather than further enriching the financial elite.