Union intervention stands in way of higher wages

In his speech last week to the National Press Club, ACTU Secretary Dave Oliver addressed the issue of what he called "insecure work" in Australia.

His and the ACTU's goal for Australian workers of a reasonable work-life balance is naturally commendable, but the notion that single-employer job security is the optimal arrangement for all workers is not a given.

It also smacks of moral panic to suggest that, "people [are] bidding each other's wages and conditions down in a race to the bottom in the hope of finding any work at all."

The German IBM example he cites to support this alleged doomsday epidemic of neo-liberal outsourcing merely demonstrates one global conglomerate's solution to improving its operational efficiency.

And it is simply wrong to suggest that, "because all contracts will be global, national labour laws will not apply." At very least, German legislation and that of a worker's home country would be applicable to some degree.

The degree to which employment laws cover various work arrangements, including providing services across international borders are, of course, a matter for national legislatures and negotiation among nation-states.

Further, the ACTU chief is scared that IBM Germany's foreign-based workers, "will be chosen from applicants who register on an electronic personnel platform derived from the auction site eBay."

Whether this indicates a fear of eBay or the internet generally may only be speculated upon, but one would think that innovative web-based platforms would be an ideal response to connecting employers with jobseekers.

There appears to be an underlying assumption to Mr Oliver's words that just because a company in a significant first-world economy is offshoring work that it will inevitably be done by cheap, substandard, third-world labour.

For a start, the fact that IBM in Germany is looking offshore for skilled labour presents a lucrative opportunity for appropriately-qualified Australian workers to provide their services to a leading IT company.

Secondly, the boom of remotely-provided global IT services from areas like the Philippines and the Indian subcontinent shows that developing countries are equipped to deliver high-quality services, including to Australian firms.

It is pertinent to point out that the ability for an Australian telecommunications provider, for example, to offshore its call centre operations could enable it to spend additional funds on building infrastructure back home.

Likewise, if a small Australian promotional goods company is able to manufacture its low-cost products in China, then that could enable it to hire additional staff in Australia for business development, graphic design and marketing functions.

A firm's cost-saving of a having its operations that need not be Australian-based being provided from overseas could actually facilitate the creation of more highly-skilled domestic work. Offshoring has the potential to create better Australian jobs.

It is this kind of national economic development that trade unions and the ACTU should be driving towards; the creation of Australian-based jobs, and the ongoing improvement of Australian workers' skills.

The focus of many labour organisations appears to be entrenched in the 1970s, with a focus on single-employer job security, rather than supporting their members to become more employable through improving their skills and knowledge.

There are exceptions to this rule. For instance, the Association of Professional Engineers, Scientists and Managers Australia (APESMA) is a workers' representative body that fosters its members' continued upskilling.

APESMA combines public advocacy and organising with comprehensive member services, which should be a model to which all modern labour organisations aspire. It may well be only union to encourage its members to obtain an MBA.

This kind of approach moves away from a worker relying on a single employer to provide, if not necessarily a job for life, at least one on which a worker is forced to depend for their personal financial stability.

The focus needs to move away from "job security" to broader financial security for individuals and families. The best way to achieve this is through continued upskilling and increased domestic economic activity.

If offshoring some roles is one way for Australian firms to increase their expenditure on necessarily domestic functions, thereby creating Australian jobs, it seems odd for the workers' peak representative body to stand in the way.

Of course it is important for Australian workers to be protected at work through workplace safety laws and wages that enable a good living standard, be they teachers, nurses, childcare workers or any other profession or trade.

But it is time to empower our workforce to determine its own occupational and financial security, through concentrating on improving workers' employability by enhancing their skills and creating opportunities to put them into practice.