INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, Vol. 16, No. 2, May 1977

EDWARD DAVIS”

Decision M a k i n g in the Australian AMWU

THIS PAPER DEALS with two recent significant developments relating to the decision-making process of Australia’s largest union, the Australian Metal Workers Uni0n.l First, since the union’s branch structure has failed to attract significant participation, increasing reliance is being placed upon the shop stewards as a link between officials and rank-and-file workers. Secondly, the union’s paid staff is assuming increasing power. Both developments have important implications for the degree of democracy within the union.

Introduction Formed in 1972 by the amalgamation of the Amalgamated

Engineering Union (AEU),2 the Boilermakers and Blacksmiths Society, and the Sheet Metal Workers’ Union, the AMWU’s current membership is around 163,000, with a predominance of skilled tradesmen. The AMWU has in- herited the important role of bargaining over the award wage of the fitter

‘Teaching Fellow, Department of Economics, Monash University, Australia. ‘My observations about the union’s behavior are based upon personal attendance at meetings, docu-

mentary evidence such as minutes, reports, and the union’s publications, and interviews with officials. I attended all Victorian State Council and Victorian Administrative Committee meetings in the past year, as well as the Victorian State Conference and the National Conference. I also attended branch and shop steward meetings and conducted a survey using questionnaires and “tapes” in four metal work- ing shops. This has generated insight into the degree to which the decisions of the official bodies reflect rank-and-file opinion. I have been fortunate to have the opportunity to observe the workings of a union from the inside. The AMWU’s acceptance of an outsider is related to their confidence that they are democratic and that they have nothing to lose from such an investigation. Both members and officials have been extemely cooperative.

*The AEU was unique among Australian unions for its connection to the British AEU, which retained authority over the Australian branch until 1968. See Tom Sheridan, Mindful Militants (London: Cambridge University Press, 1975), Chap. 2.

126

Decision Making in the Australian AMWU / 127

and t ~ r n e r . ~ The strength which it has employed to pursue improved wages and conditions, combined with its ‘‘leftist’’ political perspective, has given the union a reputation for rnilitan~y.~ The AMWU has also attracted atten- tion through its concern for artistic activities.5

The AMWU’s formal decision-making process is outlined in its rulebook. Each member is assigned to the branch which is located nearest to his home; therefore, monthly branch meetings are residential rather than work based. Branches play the important role of voting on resolutions of the union’s superior policy-making organs. An aggregate majority is required before resolutions become policy.

The next tier is provided by the state structure, which includes an annual State Conference, a State Council which acts as the executive arm of the State Conference, and a State Administrative Committee which meets for two hours weekly and supervises day-to-day events. At the apex of the process is the biennial National Conference, which is composed of rank- and-file delegates (who constitute a majority) and State and National officials. A diverse array of issues is discussed in accordance with the AMWU’s broad interpretation of its responsibilities.e Between Conferences, national affairs are supervised by the National Council, comprising state and national representatives. In general, the National Council coordinates national affairs, while the states operate with some autonomy.

Changes in the Decision-Making Structure The old Amalgamated Engineering Union had an extensive,

area-based branch network, which played a central role in the decision- making process. The branches dispatched delegates to the union’s councils and conferences, proposed resolutions, and were required to ratify the poli- cies formulated by these bodies. The AMWU has, to a significant degree, retained this branch structure and set of responsibilities. Although these

“he award wage is the legal minimum for an occupation stipulated by the Commonwealth Concilia- tion and Arbitration Commission. The “fitter and turner” is a skilled asembler of machinery and lathe operator. His award rate has acted as the yardstick around which the entire national wage and salary structure has been adjusted. The AMWU, like many unions, is also involved in collective bargaining for over-award rates.

’The AMWU’s militancy is best understood in terms of (a) readiness to take industrial action over a range of issues, (b) the canvassing of aggressive tactics by the Labour Movement, (c) the affiliation of a number of officials to Communist Parties. (The National Council comprises 15 Australian Labour Party members, 5 Communist Parties’ members, and 1 nonaligned.)

5For example, the AMWU has constructed the auditorium at the National Office to double as a theatre and has sponsored an Australian tour of the “radical” folk singers, Ewan MacColl and Peggy Seeger.

%ice AMWU pamphlet, The A.M. W. U. Works for AIE Metal Workers, p. 3. “Everything which affects the well-being of metal workers and their families is the legitimate concern of the A.M.W.U.”

128 / EDWARDDAVIS

branches are fulfilling their nominal function, they are failing to attract members to their meetings.

Decisions of the Victorian State Conference were referred to and passed by the State’s 28 branches, but only 173 people in aggregate were recorded as voting at these meetings. An average of six votes per branch meeting, when the “electorate” may number several thousand members, illustrates the extent of low attendance. In part, this phenomenon can be explained by the members’ diminished need to attend branch meetings. In the nineteen twenties and thirties, branches were the main collecting agency for the union; they disbursed benefits and served as union advisory centers.’ Today dues are frequently paid through the mail, benefits are handed out less frequently (and when required, an organizer visits the particular shop), and advice can be gained over the telephone. In addition, as the tendency to commute to work has developed, it is increasingly common for union members to belong to branches some distance from their workplace. This has further reduced the incentive to attend branch meetings, since branch members are unlikely to have the bond of a common workplace and ex- perience’. This limited attendance has undermined the legitimacy of branch endorsement of state and national policy. It has encouraged the allegation that the union’s democratic process is more form than substance, and has prompted a search for other means of involving the membership.8

An alternative structure does already exist, based upon the shop stewards. Their function has developed in ad hoc fashion. The Rules give little space to defining the duties of the shop steward, beyond setting out his workshop powers and responsibilities. The desired role of the shop steward becomes clearer from the AEU Shop Steward’s Charter, which the AMWU inherited. The shop steward is viewed by the union as the key agent to the mobiliza- tion of the membership. The custom already existed of convening stewards’ meetings to assist in campaign^."^ In 1976, the State Council began to call regular “area” meetings which were held during working hours, with the union compensating the stewards for lost wages.I0 These meetings have

’Benefits refer to payments from union funds to dues-paying members who are unemployed, sick, or on strike. These benefits were of some significance during the depression.

‘One factor inhibiting structural change is that the branches and their delegates will be required to vote to diminish their own importance.

g“Campaign” is the term used by the union to describe the pursuit of specific objectives, such as a membership drive or national wage increase.

‘“The delineation of the areas has been on a rule-of-thumb basis reflecting travel considerations and membership concentration. The current area shop steward meetings differ from earlier varieties which were often held after working hours and were financed by members in the workshops delegating stewards to union meetings. The recent round generated a national cost of approximately $12,000. It is likely that the union will opt for quarterly rather than weekly regional sessions.

Decision Making in the Australian AMWU / 129

improved communications between the officials and the rank and file and have been more effective rallying agents than the branches.”

In Victoria, 450 of a possible 2,000 stewards attended these new-style area meetings.12 All meetings endorsed the proposal to develop a regionally based shop stewards’ organization, and it appears likely that Regional Councils of Shop Stewards will be set up in order to coordinate these meet- ings. The regional meetings fulfilled the function of bringing stewards to- gether to consider policy concerning union structure and economic and political matters. Since the stewards were representing the views of their workshops, the policies endorsed were taken as reflecting the views of the rank and file, thereby legitimating the union’s subsequent action. Shop stewards were encouraged to hold job meetings before attending the area session. These meetings were generally very well attended, which was in part related to the captive nature of the audience, since meetings were often held during lunch breaks. It would appear that stewards’ meetings will increase in importance and may well supplant the branch structure in time.

Union attention to the role of shop stewards is corroborated by results from questionnaires in four shops.13 As Table 1 illustrates, attitudes toward the union’s involvement in nonindustrial matters (“agree/disagree that the union should only be concerned with higher pay and better conditions”) were related to the degree to which the shop steward, rather than the media, was sought as “the most informative source about union policy.” The contrast between Shops A and D indicates, ceteris parihus, that the greater the role of the steward, the more support will eventuate for the union’s policies. The stewards’ program could therefore be of considerable assistance in mobilizing rank-and-file support for the union’s actions.

Staff Expansion The union’s relatively large size has bestowed the finances

required for increasing division of labor in union administration. The records, finance, research, education, and “workers compensation” respon-

“The union has described the rationale for these meetings as “to defend the union, to defend living- standards.”

‘*The number of stewards fluctuates. There are approximately 2,000 stewards in Victoria, represent- ing 53,000 members. There is no rule stipulating a ratio of stewards to rank-and-file members. The num- ber of stewards in any workshop will be influenced by the “union consciousness” of the shop. There may be a steward to every ten members (and contested elections), or there may be a hundred members and no steward.

I3The shops are broadly similar in the following respects: they are metal shops in adjoining suburbs in Melbourne; they have a similar skilled-unskilled component, a similar ethnic composition, and are all “union” shops, although differing in the degree to which dues are paid-up by the members.

130 / EDWARDDAVIS

TABLE 1

DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONSES OF AMWU MEMBERS (PER CENT)

Shops ____ A B C D Average

The union should only be concerned with higher pay and better conditions

Agree 54 38 47 28 42 Disagree 42 55 50 64 53 No reply 4 7 3 8 5

Total 100 100 100 100 100 What are the most informative sources about union policy?

The shop steward 19 26 27 72 36 The newsletter 31 38 22 21 28 TV and radio 27 26 22 5 20

10 The daily papers 19 7 3 - No reply 4 2 6 2 6

Total 100 100 100 100 100 N 26 42 32 39 139

Note: All differences significant at .05 level.

sibilities are currently being undertaken by the union’s staff, who are termed its “officers.”’4 In addition, all states are renting computer time until the AMWU’s own computer (at a cost of half a million dollars) is installed in the national office.

There has been some debate within the union over the officers’ expanding domain. On one side, it has been argued that this expanded specialist role has generated a bureaucratic image for the union, that it further removes decision making from rank-and-file control, and that “expert” decisions may be undemocratic. The opposing view is that specialists can relieve officials of much administrative detail, thereby freeing these officials to spend more time with their members. Finally, it is claimed that computers have speeded up communications and made more information available.

The union’s policy of recruiting staff officers from the ranks of the union has prevented significant tension from arising between this group and the officers. The staff officers have been known elements, and they have served terms as shop stewards or branch officials. Their opinions have often tended to coincide with those of the 0fficia1s.l~

“The AMWU distinguishes between its officials who are elected by a ballot of the rank and file every three years to organizing positions, its officers who are usually union members appointed for an unspeci- fied term by National or State Council to a specialist position in the union, such as data processor or education officer, and the staff, e.g., clerks or stenographers.

“It is difficult to gauge the influence of officers outside their specialist sphere. They can attend and speak at policy-making bodies, but they cannot vote.

Decision Making in the Australian AMWU / 131

Democracy in the AMWU Two current phenomena which affect the degree of democracy

within the union are the development of the union’s education program and recent enacted legislation concerning union elections.

(1) Besides taking part in the newly established national and state pro- grams, the AMWU is one of the few unions in Australia to run its own educa- tion program. As a concomitant of its desire to increase involvement of the rank and file, classes have been developed around a range of economic, political, and organizational matters. The main focus of the union’s educa- tional energy has been on shop stewards, who make up the class core. Also, all novitiate stewards are invited to a one-day introductory course.

(2) The Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Act provides for secret ballots in all registered unions, and Court-controlled ballots can be undertaken if a sufficient number of a union’s membership petition the Commission. New laws recently introduced establish greater responsibility for the “industrial registrar,” who assumes responsibility for the dispatch of postal ballots to all members.l8 The rationale behind these laws appears to be the Liberal Government’s faith that if more union members voted in ballots, more moderate officials would be elected. The AMWU, renowned for its militant leadership, is probably the union where the Liberal Govern- ment would most like to see fresh, and more moderate, blood in leading positions. The fact that union officials have often been elected without opposition and with only a small minority of the membership voting has encouraged allegations of unrepresentative leadership. l7 It will therefore be of interest to see whether the new laws increase the numbers voting and whether this has any effect upon election outcomes.

In conclusion, the AMWU’s recent history reflects its pioneering position among Australian unions. The Australian Council of Trade Unions, to which 131 of Australia’s 300 unions are affiliated, has encouraged both amalga- mations and industrial unionism as a recipe for diminishing organizational duplication, overcoming jurisdictional problems, and generating greater bargaining strength.l8 AMWU progress is significant in these fields. A parallel can be drawn with the British Trade Union Congress’ similar policy

‘%ee Act. No. 64 of 1976. The “industrial registrar” is an agency established under the Conciliation and Arbitration Act which is given the task of registering trade unions, employers’ associations, control- ling their rules, and coordinating their procedures.

”The AMWU has not yet experienced a ballot under the new legislation, which stipulates that unions must employ postal balloting as the method of election (and the registrar offers to undertake the process). This replaces the AMWU’s electoral form whereby a member could vote either at his branch or on a postal ballot.

‘%ee William P. Evans, “The Australian Council of Trade Unions,” in Peter W. D. Matthews and Bill Ford, eds., Australian Trade Unions (Melbourne: Sun Books, 1968), pp. 103-143.

132 / EDWARD DAVIS

of promoting amalgamation between affiliated unions. It is of interest to note that, although extremely large, the Amalgamated Union of Engineering Workers (the AMWU’s British counterpart) also has a considerable reputa- tion for union democracy, which suggests the correlation of union size and democracy to which the AMWU makes ~ 1 a i m . l ~

Conclusions The current attention of the AMWU to its decision-making

process illustrates its concern to appear democratic. The branches, although fulfilling the nominal function of grass-roots participation, have failed to involve more than a small minority of the membership. The development of area shop steward meetings is likely to embrace a broader section and pro- vide more effective communication. In addition, the expansion of the union’s officers has generated a more efficient discharge of administrative responsi- bilities and has freed officials from clerical duties. The new electoral legis- lation will test the degree to which rank-and-file members believe they are being adequately served by the union’s leaders. Shop stewards will play an important and probably decisive role in gathering support for the officials. The new electoral legislation, therefore, appears unlikely to challenge the present direction of AMWU policy.

I8Ken Coates and Tony Topham, The New Unionism (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1972) refer on page 190 to Britain’s Amalgamated Union of Engineering Workers as a “hyperdemocratic” organization.