Page 1334 - Week 05 - Wednesday, 12 May 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Berry: No, no.
MRS CARNELL: He did say that. He also made a comment about my industry, and I assumed that he meant retail generally. But, even if he was talking about just the pharmacy industry, that is an industry that employs a very large number of women and young people. He made the comment that women and young people would find themselves out on their ears, would not have jobs at all - - -
Mr De Domenico: And children, too.
MRS CARNELL: Yes, and children, if it were not for compulsory unionism. Let me get back to my industry, which Mr Berry picked on a little bit. There is a union that represents our employees, the SDA. The Pharmacy Guild, my union, approached that union two years ago because we believed that the award for our employees needed to be increased. It had been increased in New South Wales. Because it is inappropriate for my union to initiate a claim that would produce an increase for another union - not something that is done in the industrial court, as Mr Berry would be acutely aware - we approached the SDA to file a log of claims, for which we gave them all the details. We said, "This is what we want. We want our employees to get an increase". What happened? Nothing. We approached them again, and what happened? Nothing. We went to Sydney to have a meeting with them. This time some of them turned up for the meeting, but not terribly many. We organised from that meeting another meeting in Canberra, and what happened? They did not turn up. Time went on.
Mr Berry: Why didn't you just give them the money? Because you did not want some to give them the money and some not to give them the money.
MRS CARNELL: I will tell you about that. Time went on and New South Wales employees got another increase. This was causing us quite a lot of problems in the ACT. Certainly everybody was paying above the award, but I do not think that is an exceedingly appropriate way to go. We again approached the union and said, "Now we really have a problem here. Now we have the really nasty hassle that there have been two increases in New South Wales and in other States and still nothing here. Could you please file a log of claims? We have not had our ECP increases. We have not had anything. Please file". Still there was nothing, and we are still in a position in the ACT where in my industry - the one Mr Berry picked on - there has not been an increase since 1990. This is a union that supposedly looks after its membership! Certainly over-award payments are in place.
I started this speech by saying that I believe that this legislation will help members. Here is a union that does not have to care too much about whether it looks after a fairly small number of members. They have to join anyway, in many circumstances, so the union does not bother. If the union had to earn their membership, if they could not rely on people having to have their union membership fees deducted from their wages or having to come up with the money when the union delegate turned up, I believe that the workers in my industry would now be in a substantially better position than they are. If Mr Berry would like to check these details, he is more than welcome.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .