MUA

In this edition

• p 4 Logging On
• p 6 Crying Shame
• p 10 Dire Need
• p 14 New Horizons
• p 16 Ship reform on course
• p 54 MUA elections

Dear [firstname,fallback=Sir/Madam]

LOGGING ON
BY NATIONAL SECRETARY PADDY CRUMLIN

ABOVE GROUND
Paddy Crumlin with Andy Honeysett, (President, NSW South Western District, CFMEU mining and energy division), mine workers’ delegate Jeff Madden and Dave Noonan (National Secretary, CFMEU Construction and General Division) emerge from the Centennial underground mine in Lithgow after talking to miners below. With tragic irony the solidarity visit fell on the same day as the Pike River mine disaster in New Zealand in November which and the loss of 29 miners. Photo by Wayne McAndrew, Vice President, CFMEU Mining & Energy Division.

CHALLENGING TIMES
2011 presents opportunities as well as problems for MUA members and the union must continue to work hard to secure and build on our industrial, political and economic rights.
The shipping reform agenda will be either realised or postponed this year. Certain political self-interest groups continue to peddle the distortion that the national interest can be served without a viable and sustainable merchant navy. This line is given constant ventilation by the Murdoch press, particularly The Australian. Their arguments have been one sided and the reporting disgracefully partisan.
It is an argument in favour of markets and their need to be free of direction or responsibility. The mantra is that an efficient and properly regulated domestic shipping sector, integrated with road and rail into a complete transport service, amounts to protectionism.
That argument is never reinforced by a proper analysis of the Gillard Government’s shipping policy which provides for sustainable, fair and efficient services benefitting Australia’s long term interests – as against those of the international shipping
industry who lobby hard to preserve their low labour standards and ability to operate outside of Australian law. Their proposterous notion that our economic future should rely on those exemptions and still build consistent, safe and financially reliable shipping services, skills and infrastructure in a domestic economy driven by the need to integrate trade between Australian ports.
The broad shipping industry here including shippers, Australian ship owners and unions are in support of the Gillard initiative – a fact that fails to get reported. After a full year of union bashing and their unapologetic promotion of their ‘market-based’ and conservative political values, the Murdoch editors continue to aggressively represent an advocacy in denial of a balance and constructive journalistic code. The MUA remains one of their top industrial targets, which we accept as a great tribute from one the main promoters of the Tea Party in the US and a long line of other flawed and elitist political movements reaching right back to Thatcher in the UK. We are supposed to accept that free market bankers and financial institutions – and media and entertainment megalomaniacs – remain the solution for the future of a world brought to its economic knees by those same arguments and organisations.
The politics behind the delivery of the legislation supporting the shipping policy look difficult. The minority government will place great weight on the independents in the lower house to act with responsibility and maturity in delivering this key plank of national economic development.
The Senate looks less problematic with already strong support from the Greens for a sustainable shipping industry as outlined by the minister for transport Anthony Albanese. A further round of industry consultations is taking place with a view to drafting legislation in the second half of this year. All industry stakeholders are involved including maritime unions. In an industry seriously damaged by the negligence and ignorance of Howard government policies over a long time, it will be important for all to hold fast against the bushwackers and carpetbaggers out there peddling the doggerel of their opposition.

STEVEDORE FAILURE GALORE
Patrick Bulk and General’s refusal to meet their responsibilities to their long-term workforce and the wider response by other stevedores in this year of bargaining rounds will be one of the big challenges. The bulk and general industry has casualisation running at nearly 60 per cent, with many workers employed under those temporary conditions for years. Ringing up cap in hand every time you need work and then being kept on an employer’s string is a process designed for another stevedoring era called the bull system. Employers use the procedure not only to minimise their obligations to their workers but also to stand over them with a threat of no further work if they don’t hold their heads right.
The suitcase stevedores setting up with a casual workforce, a roll of dunny paper and an overdraft are part of the problem as well. It is no coincidence that the majority of stevedoring workers killed and badly injured come from this section of the industry. Paying lip service to training without proper competency-based structures is a key characteristic of this employment short cut.
The terminal enterprises fare little better in this area. Training has been reduced to a force feed approach with minimal infrastructure
or professional training institutions. It can be an afterthought sandwiched into slow shifts or second-rate machinery. There is not one stevedoring machinery simulator in the country whether for cranes, straddles, gantries or forks. It is a shabby and second-rate commitment to OH&S and workforce development, an impediment to productivity and an unacceptable risk to workers and their families. And it will sorted out this year one way or another.

PROUD TO BE UNION
The response by the union and its members to the devastating floods in Queensland was immediate and wonderfully generous. Many of our friends in the Dockers and other sections of the ITF have generously responded as well.
In a country where we are used to to the mewling, carping and puerile politics of division and self interest the national response comes as a breath of fresh air – and as an absolute necessity to the beleaguered and distraught families and individuals so devastatingly affected.
The ability to reach out to those in need has been one of the first tenets of the Australian character and the union looks forward to those values regaining their proper status in a country brought low in recent years by politicians and others wedded to the formula of division and dysfunction to realise their political and economic power. Our union and our movement generally have shown again that not only did we never depart from the principle of a fair go for all; we remain as committed as ever.
The tragedy and the long process required to rebuild will help focus all of us on the type of political and community leadership that is essential to the quality of all our lives.

AFTER THE DELUGE
When the floods hit Queensland, donations and well wishes flooded into the MUA national office from around the country and abroad. The union quickly set up a special fundraising account with the credit union, with other funds going directly to the Qld premiers fundraising account.
As of today donations already totalled more than $200,000. MUA National office and branches donated $35,000; DP World and Patrick committees at Port Botany pledged $15,000 each from their rolling funds andmembers were contributing an initial levy of $100 per person. Sydney branch had called on all members to contribute a $100 levy while DP World Fremantle site committee to match it. Mackay/Hay point tug members had also raised $4,000. Internationally the appeal was being publicised on the ITF, RMT, MUNZ and ILWU websites with all contributing, Other ACTU affiliates have raised more than $400,00.
Donations are being directed through the MUA Relief Fund and other Relief Funds as determined by the members concerned.

“My daughter gets pretty upset every time she knows I’m going to work,” said John “She’s
nine. She cries. She hears me on the phone. It’s going all the time even when I’m not at work. She
overhears what’s going on – how many people are getting hurt or killed.” John (not his real name) a safety delegate, is off work. He walks with a limp. A chain dropped on his foot. “I can’t get my boot on,” he said.
But he’s more worried about his mates. And he’s not the only Australian waterside worker whose family no longer want their father, mother, husband or brother to go to work. After three deaths and countless injuries in the past year families are feeling the strain.
The union is working to bring in safety regulations on the wharves in an effort to enforce safety. It’s all happening. But it’s going to take time. People have to agree on the details. Get it through Government and deal with employer opposition to a regulatory approach to waterfront safety. We need to get training under way, so new workers aren’t just brought in off
the streets as casuals and sent down the ship’s hold to dodge 20 tonne slabs of steel swinging precariously overhead from rusting ship cranes, stumbling around awkward stow. And the employers are still pushing hard to put productivity before anything else.
One of the central battles is over the hatchman. Australian waterfront employers are moving systematically to remove the use of hatchmen in operations, particularly in the general stevedoring area where it is most important. All the companies seem to be heading the same path on this issue. Currently members at Patrick general stevedoring are taking protected action around a number of safety related issues among other bargaining matters. The message is the same. Safety must come first. Topman, they call him in Freo. The bosses don’t want him. Or her. Or they only want him or her around sometimes, not all the time. The workers say they believe it is unsafe to work without him. And in four ports this year – Fremantle, Bunbury, Darwin and Townsville – they’ve walked off the job due to those safety concerns.

interpretation
In Fremantle it went to Fair Work Australia. The union won. It all centres around the interpretation of Marine Order 32 – a. The driver has an unrestricted view of the load at all times during the loading or unloading; or b. A hatchman is employed for each crane or set of derricks that is clearly visible to the driver(s). The workers say it’s no good going on the visibility at start of shift. You can never count on a clear view down the hold for long – the sun changes as it moves over the ship, the load can obstruct the view during a lift, the crane can be over the wharf when something on deck tumbles into the hold from above where crew are at work. A major incident happened in Fremantle last year. “We started work at 9am,” said John “We only did the three or four lifts when we got called off the ship. I was the leading hand down below. We’d put a hatchman there because we always have a hatchman. I’ve been working here 10-odd years and we always have a hatchman. “It’s about safety. That’s the way we were trained.”

assessment
“We got pulled off the job to do a JSA (job safety assessment),” he said. “(the shift manager) said he’d go and type it up. When he came back he didn’t come back with what we’d wrote. He came back with another thing. When we wouldn’t sign, we got threatened with the sack.”
After several hours backwards and forwards management came back with the JSA the men had done.
But they wanted the risk rating on the side changed and the workers said they wanted to add to the report.
“They gave us 10 minutes to sign or ‘you’ll be subject to disciplinary action and you may be sacked’, “ workers said. “The guys said go and get stuffed – it’s not our JSA and we’re not signing it,” said Adrian Evans, Deputy Branch Secretary. “So the dispute ended up around the JSA. Our members were stood down for refusing to sign a JSA that didn’t address the risks.” Workers were stood down, off pay. We called Worksafe and
were told an inspector was on his way but management stopped Worksafe and went to Fair Work claiming it was an industrial issue. “The day shift sat in the shed,” said Adrian. “They knocked off at seven when the night shift turned up.”
“Management said there’s an ongoing dispute. You guys are all stood down until the commission hears this tomorrow. “We had the commission hearing (with Fair Work) that afternoon,” said Adrian. “It went to a conference hearing and the delegates were involved.”
The Commissioner took an unusual step in deciding to come
down to the wharves to have a look at what the issue was about. He even went up the crane. “The master of the vessel wanted a hatchman in place. He said it was standard practice on his vessel. That’s how the ship worked in every other port in the world,” said Adrian. The Commissioner conciliated and we reached agreement that there would be a hatchman in place for the duration of the vessel’s stay.
The workers won. But the dispute flared up again only weeks later. The labour stopped the job. It’s the same old argument every time a ship comes in. But the workers are standing firm.
“Hearing about the three fatalities is a factor for sure,” said POAGS workers. “We have never had a death in Fremantle and by the statistics we are way overdue. We’ve had a few injuries, no fatalities and we want to keep it that way. The hatchman is an extra set of eyes. We want to make sure we walk out the gate the same way we came in.” How important is it to have a hatchman?
“I’d say about 12 times in 10 years there’s been a situation where a life was at risk,” said John. “And that’s just on my shift. That’s 2-3 near death experiences every 6-8 months.” The workforce argues there’s always something happening – cargo falling, stuff toppling over, crew knocking dunnage into the hatch – plenty of things.
“The dunnage can be brand new pine and when there’s heavy stuff on it during the voyage the sap comes out and the wood sticks to the bottom of the cargo,” said the POAGs workers. “As we get out of the way the hatchman can see there’s a bit of wood under there and so he gets on the radio and tells the boys on shore to be careful – it’s got a passenger. We call it a passenger.” “There’s been several instances where the crew may get up in another crane and you might be doing a heavy lift and they move the crane,” they said. “It will make the ship rock. You might be next to the hold wall and you can’t see but the hatchman will see and he’ll stop the crew. And he’ll stop the lift. You can’t see from down the hold up to the next crane. The crew could be in the pontoons on the other level and you can’t see they’re up there either. But the hatchman can see. And he can tell them to stop.
“Everything that can possibly go wrong possibly does,” he said. “You’ve only got to have another vessel going past while we are doing a direct lift and it moves the ship around. That moves the load and you’ve got people running everywhere to get out of the way. You need that extra pair of eyes, especially when we’ve got inexperienced guys working with us. It’s getting to the stage you don’t even want to be down in the hatch. Because you feel like you might not be going home.”
Assistant National Secretary Warren Smith is emphatic on the matter. “The hatchman is about saving lives. It is a fundamentally important position and must be protected against employers who see it as a quick and easy way to reduce costs. It’s the workers who potentially pay; with their lives. The union will continue to fight for the hatchman.”

LiFesaVer
Workers at POAGS, Fremantle listed a dozen instances where the hatchman has possibly saved a life in recent months. “We had a 10-tonne crane beam fall down inside the hatch a few weeks back,” said a POAGs worker. “There was one section inside another and they are usually lashed together and they weren’t lashed together. It was midnight and no one noticed.” He was the foreman on shore that night. “I saw it happen,” he said. “I seen it because it was up nearly to the top of the hatch and it just touched the side. It’s just tipped up a little bit, but as it’s tipped up its shot out. The main piece shot towards the crane driver and the bit inside shot out and went straight down the bottom of the hatch.
“I thought someone was dead. I heard the hatchman yell out on the radio HEADS UP!!!.” “We were about 15 metres back away from it,” one worker down below said.
“I ran and got behind another piece of machinery that was down there. It was very loud when it hit. Then it slid. And we didn’t know which way it would go but it slid away from us luckily.
“The load was on rollers and as it hit the bottom of the hold it went at a hundred miles an hour, skidding about 20-30 metres. We had 3-4 crew plus four of our blokes down there at the time,” they said.
“They had all been standing there and the crew were standing there, but it was the last lift and they’d all moved over to the left,” they said. Did the ship roll? “When you’re thinking of your life you don’t think of whether it’s shaking the boat,” they said. “You absolutely shit yourself. It landed exactly where we’d been standing.
“It’s a wake-up call. We had a couple of new blokes. And that night they learnt the cargo doesn’t just come in and out all the time. Things do happen. “When he came out of the hatch I said, ‘You’re a bit white, mate’ and he said, ‘Phew, I see what you mean when you say always to get out of the way and that.’” “The crane driver is devastated,” they said. “He’s taken his name of the crane list. And he’s still in shock two weeks later.”
Then there was the bulldozer part that toppled over, four months earlier. Four men were working in a cargo space down the hatch and the crane was out over the shore. The hatchman was on deck.
“They were unlashing the cargo. The hatchman was looking over and saw it was going to topple. He yelled out to the guy unlashing down below. He jumped out of the way. The hatchman saved his life. It would have killed him,” said one worker.
“You tire on the midnight shift and you don’t see everything and that’s what the topman is for,” he said. “He’s a second pair of eyes.” “We’ve had other things fall, we’ve had steel plates fall, we’ve had things fall on shore.”
The hatchman once saw that a lift was actually catching a lanyon – the safety line across the hatch the men’s harnesses connect to. “If the crane pulls that up into the air, well the guys with the harnesses are going with it,” said a delegate.
“Luckily enough the top man saw what was happening and stopped the crane. “The crane driver can’t always see,” he said. “Anything can happen. Another crane could be working or the ship rolls, you’ve got wind conditions, you’ve got light conditions, you’ve got all sorts of things. Cranes break down. We drive cranes that aren’t up to scratch and the company want to take the topman away?
“We had the crew knock a piece of steel and it fell down the bottom into the hatch,” he said. “The hatchman had told them to stop working above us. He told us to get out of the way. But the crew said we’re nearly finished. Then they knocked this piece of steel and it fell. If the hatchman wasn’t there and our guys were working underneath it they would have been gone.” “The company doesn’t believe in it. They think the hatchman stands there and does nothing,” said John. “But he saves lives. He makes it easy for everybody. People feel safer. People who work the job know the importance of a hatchman. People who don’t probably don’t see. “Ours is a very dangerous job,” he said. “We’ve had deaths in the industry these past years. And if having a hatchman saves one life what’s it worth? What’s a life worth? “We going to fight this to the end,” he said. “We’re not giving up. We’re not going to be told how to do our job safely by people who don’t know the job. Let us do our job and let us do our job safely.”

“The situation on the Australian waterfront is in dire need of change” - so begins the 20-page report
Qualification and Automation International Study: Toward Best Practice in Occupational Health and Safety on the Waterfront.
The report represents the findings of a delegation of a dozen MUA officials and waterside workers who visited four ports over two weeks from September 18-October 2, to find and study world’s best practice for stevedoring safety and training.
The delegation also studied automated technology now beginning to make a mark on the Australian waterfront.
“All four ports – Antwerp, Rotterdam, Vancouver and Los Angeles – displayed far superior training and safety for wharf labour,” said Warren Smith, assistant national secretary and delegation leader.
“Safety is eally a priority issue overseas and it is seen as being linked to training and qualifications. Employers view this approach as enhancing productivity and creating a safer workplace.” “In all cases training was far in advance of our own
requirements, inducting processes for new waterside workers were of better quality with a greater emphasis on safety.” (see also Council report p 24)
In Europe training was first priority. In northern America regulation was the best in the world.
That’s why the recommendations arising from the MUA report are for Australia to model our training on European ports and our regulations on the US.
“The European cultural tradition of social partnership created a higher degree of inclusion for unions and the workers. Unions are allowed a better and more sensible outcome on training and qualifications applicable to dockers. Often his is related tofar superior IR environments where union action around safety has not been curtailed by anti union workplace laws,” Warren Smith said.
Belgium had by far the best training; the USA the best regulation.
“A combination of both of these would provide absolute best practice for work safety on the Australian waterfront,” he said.
The report recommended: • a national training school on both the East and West coasts of
Australia with government funding for capital equipment and a tripartite board made up of union, employer and government representatives
• uniform induction process initiated through joint talks with all industry stakeholders
• government and employer investment in high quality simulator programs for straddle, ship’s crane, mobile slew and job crane, gantry and RTG cranes
• Transport and Logistics Industry Skills Council to develop industry safety plans and training
• METL to become a RTO for training. In regulation the report recommends the MUA continue its
work on the Safe Work Australia Temporary Advisory Group towards implementation of national stevedoring regulation.
An ongoing body of regulators and industry stakeholders should then be set up to review industry changes and ongoing development of regulations.
The report recommends regulation should govern training and certification requirements for waterside workers.
The delegation included: Warren Smith - Assistant National Secretary Kevin Bracken - Victorian State Secretary Tony Austin - Assistant Queensland Branch Secretary Noel Nielssen - West Australian Organiser Rick Blake - DPW Brisbane Site Committee member Mick McClennan - DPW Brisbane Site Committee member Brett Nicholls Patrick Terminal Brisbane Site Committee member Kevin Fennesy - DPW Melbourne Site Committee member Hugh Doherty - Patrick Melbourne Gavin Bostick - Patrick Sydney Site Committee member Michael Marketo - DPW Sydney Site Committee member Robert Sax - Patrick West Australia.

RTM Weipa points way to future
When the RTM Weipa became the proud flag bearer of Australian ship reform, it was MUA seafarer Andrew Gray who led the first Australian crew up a gangway of a new ship in more than decade.
It’s a good feeling,” he said. “Teekay told me to pick the crew I wanted to take with me. They let me choose. I brought five of the crew from the Endeavour River – all good blokes. We all wanted to stick together. If we can get the ship working and prove it’s viable, we know there will be more Australian crewed ships to come.”
The Maritime Union brokered a framework agreement with Rio Tinto Marine this year that will see a minimum 70-80 per cent of Rio’s coastal cargoes carried on vessels with Australian crew.
The agreement was partly completed due to the government coming good on shipping reform. It was also dependent on the union delivering on labour reform.
“It’s a small crew and hard work,” said Andrew. “But that’s what we’re here for. On our last ship we had an extra IR and one or two trainees. Now we’re down to an MUA crew of eight, four engineers, the skipper and three mates. We replace a crew of 26 Filipinos.”
Andrew has been a seafarer 29 years. And that’s what’s changed the most. Crew numbers. Down from 42 when he first started going away to sea to the 16 on the RTM Weipa today.
And it’s not only seafarers’ numbers that are down.
“We’ve lost a lot of ships over the years, so the ones you’ve got you to try to look after,” he said. His last ship, the Endeavour, was decommissioned this year.
RusT buckeTs
“There’s nothing more important than keeping Australian ships on the coast,” said Andrew. “It’s good for the economy and the environment. Foreign ships aren’t safe. They don’t pay taxes. They work under a whole different set of rules. Heaps of them are rust buckets. You watch them come into port with no garbage to dump. It’s obvious they’ve already thrown it all over the side.”
Andrew has been on the Gladstone run for 13 years. The ship loads bauxite in Weipa to feed the Comalco alumina plant down south. It’s a four to five day voyage up to Thursday Island where they take on a pilot to navigate the ship around Cape York then down hugging the coast inside the Great Barrier Reef.
“Usually it’s pretty flat,” says Andrew. “If we hit a cyclone we head out to sea and ride it out. It can get a bit rough. But it’s nothing like going across the Bight down south.”
Australian crew are more safety conscious and more professional, Andrew says.
“I love going away to sea. It’s my home. I take big pride in it. Having a clean tidy ship is a safe ship,” he says, noting missing ladders, hoses and slings on the new ship. “You treat it like you treat your own house and yard. We stick to the rules – no dumping rubbish or washing down at sea. We’re going through the Great Barrier Reef. But we’d do the same anywhere.”
Federal transport minister Anthony Albanese recently released a discussion paper seeking input on legislative and education changes needed to boost the Australian shipping industry. (see opposite)
In January the government is committed to setting up three refence groups to work on separate areas of reform and report back by May next year.
“We’re a test case; virgin sailors,” IR Brian Carpenter told the local Geraldton Weekly. “We hope we are just the start of many more Australian crews.”
The crew wrote there thanks to Paddy Crumlin and Ian Bray, MUA for all their work.

Minister outlines New yeaR strategy for Australian shipping.
The Gillard government is moving to reclaim our coastal waters. It is closing the doors to foreign ships carrying domestic cargoes between Australian ports, without accountability or any other impediment, with exceptions only under emergencies and only once the vessels come under Australian laws – no longer a law to themselves.
In a move that made headlines in December the Minister for Transport Anthony Albanese announced the government would consider the abolition of Continuing Voyage Permits. Immediately the Murdoch Press ran a single-handed opposition to the policy on their front pages.
Single voyage permits would be limited to emergencies, when lives or the community are at risk, such as fuel urgently needed to power a hospital.
Under the proposed new rules the only other foreign ships plying the coast will operate under temporary licences on nominated trades for specified periods. Crew will come under the Fair Work provisions.
A full licence to trade on the Australian coast would now only be available to ships crewed with Australian seafarers, owned or operated by Australians.
The new temporary licences replacing CVPs would be restricted to nominated trades for a specified period based on a requirement to introduce Australian crews and not undermine the existing Australian vessels.
These would apply to foreign vessels operating under Australian laws and Australian ships plying under a proposed Australian international register. On the coast it has been already determined that the crew would be covered by the provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009 on Australian wages and conditions of employment, workforce standards, crew competencies, environmental and safety laws. The union contends the same shall apply internationally.
In other words foreign ships would now be governed by the same laws that apply to Australian vessels, thus ending the decade long double standards exploited by the Howard government and freight forwarders at the cost of Australian industry, security, the economy and environment.
The proposed restrictions on foreign shipping, including Australian internationally registered vessels, in our domestic trade come hand in hand with the long touted incentives for investment in Australian shipping – tonnage tax, accelerated depreciation, royalties withholding tax.
Ship owners taking advantage of the fiscal incentives such as tonnage tax would be required to train an agreed number of officers and ratings annually.
With this in mind the government is to set up the Maritime Workforce Development Forum to improve maritime skills and training outcomes and develop mechanisms for workforce planning and sharing of resources in the delivery of training.
“It’s about being able to secure reinvestment in our industry again,” said MUA National Secretary Paddy Crumlin. “We can now rebuild our coastal fleet. There’s probably the capacity to have many more Australian crewed ships on the Australian coast and to revitalise the Australian maritime industry in the process. But to do that you need investment and certainty.
“We should be able to walk up the gangway in our own country, carrying cargoes between our own cities as part of the domestic transport network and do it with the full support of the Australian government and legislation,” he said.
As well Australian seafarers working on international trades would be eligible for tax exemptions. These would kick in when working over 120 days overseas with those working over 180 days on a qualifying ship being tax exempt. This will help open up new opportunities for employment while securing existing ratios such as the North West Shelf LNG trade.
coMpacT
The announced shipping reform package, however, is conditional on a compact between industry and unions to deliver productivity and efficiency reforms, along the lines of the Rio framework agreement.
Ship-based cost reduction targets are to include a review of minimum crewing levels by shipowners, the maritime unions and the Australian Maritime Safety Authority.
Reforms would not come at the expense of job safety or the environment.
A second proviso is the introduction of riding gangs on board vessels involved in the coastal trade to undertake additional maintenance. They would be employed on terms and conditions of employment established under the Fair Work Act.
“We have to do our bit, if we are going to rebuild our coastal industry, if we’re going to attract investment back into the country to replace those 30-40 ships and add another ships gone under the Howard Government shipping doctrine of help yourself to our country and it’s jobs,” said Paddy Crumlin.
“We have to come to terms with having an international register to replace the flag of convenience ships carrying most of our international cargo,” he said.
“However the international register can’t be used to substitute Australian vessels in the domestic trade. We’ve told the regional Pacific unions and our members from Vanuatu to Fiji and PNG that we would be developing opportunities for them to have quality of work within our region and have the protection of the MUA,” he said floating the vision of the union becoming more international in character.
“We have the capacity to provide employment into the future, to attract investment back into our country, to build the union not only to deliver security of employment, not only to deliver wages and conditions for ourselves and our families, but also to deliver a political and industrial capacity to defend our right to work in our own country against the Howard type attacks in the future.”
The national secretary also put on record the union’s gratitude to the MUA crew who had done the hard yards in the blue water industry to keep it going until the reforms came through.
“These 30 ageing ships have been only been kept in the trade by the professionalism of Australian seafarers to maintain these cranky creaking old ships as the union worked this industry and political process through to some sort of solution.
“If they go does anybody seriously think they are not going to go after the offshore,” he said. “Over time they would gradually try to remove Australian crews from every area of offshore operation as is the case in many countries around the world.
“Of course there would be a fight, we will fight every time an Australian ship goes. We fought over the Stolt, we fought over the CSL ships, we fought over the Rio ships. But there’s one thing in fighting and another thing in winning if you haven’t got the legislative framework and the investment framework to assist.
“The offshore industry isn’t protected by cabotage,” he warned. “There’s no cabotage protecting any of our seafarers working in the FPSOs, rig tenders and dredges – and there are numerous examples of attempts to introduce foreign labour into these areas.”
“It is our hardcore membership working in the relatively more low paid domestic blue water shipping industry who have been the bulwark of the defence of the industry,” the national secretary said.
“Those seafarers are staying with the older vessels under enormous economic challenges, rebuild the Australian industry, rebuild cabotage, rebuild it from the ground up, give us the support that we need to go on the campaign offensive in building the political and the industrial agenda. They are the real heroes and they are the future of the industry. That’s the real story. All Australian seafarers in all other aspects of the industry need to actively support them to get behind this campaign.”
The Minister announced he would establish three reference groups to advise on key elements of the reforms:
• arrangements to replace Part VI of the Navigation Act • tax changes • maritime workforce development arrangements.
The reference groups, which will include representation of the MUA and other maritime unions will start work in January and will be asked to complete their work by the end of May.
A full Regulatory Impact Statement will be developed as part of the documents on which the government will base its decision.
Mr Albanese made the announcement at the union’s Sydney Branch Conference at the Cypriot Club in Stanmore on December 1.
For more details of the government’s ship reform package go to: http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/maritime/shipping_reform

The following information is provided to members to assist in the preparation for the conduct of the 2011 -2015 Election. It includes an explanation of the various steps to be taken by members, the National Council, existing officials and the National Returning Officers. The information provided hereunder also contains a timeline summary to assist members. Nominations for the 2011 MUA Election open on Monday 7 March 2011 and close at 5pm on Wednesday 6 April 2011. The election will then be by a postal ballot of all financial members commencing on Thursday 28 April 2011 and closing at 5pm on Tuesday14 June 2011, in those positions where more than one candidate has validly nominated. In accordance with the rules National Council has determined that the election shall be for the positions as listed: NATIONAL OFFICE: National Secretary, 1 position; Deputy National Secretary, 1; Assistant National Secretaries, 2. QUEENSLAND BRANCH: Branch Secretary, 1;
Deputy Branch Secretary, 1; Assistant Branch Secretary, 1. NORTHERN NSW: Branch Secretary, 1;
Deputy Branch Secretary (honorary), 1; SYDNEY BRANCH: Branch Secretary, 1; Deputy Branch Secretary, 1;
Assistant Branch Secretaries, 2. SOUTHERN NSW: Branch Secretary, 1, Deputy Branch Secretary (honorary) 1. VICTORIA:
Branch Secretary, 1; Deputy Branch Secretary, 1; Assistant Branch Secretaries, 2. TASMANIA: Branch Secretary, 1; Deputy Branch Secretary (honorary) 1. SOUTH AUSTRALIA; Branch Secretary 1; Deputy Branch Secretary (honorary) 1. WEST AUSTRALIA: Branch Secretary, 1; Deputy Branch Secretary, 1; Assistant Branch Secretary 1. NORTHERN TERRITORY: Branch Secretary (honorary) 1. Existing officers must notify the National Secretary if they are not standing for office or are standing for another position before Monday 7 February 2011, as per Rule 45 (i), which prohibits an officer of the union from nominating for a different office in the union unless he has given at least 28 days written notice before the opening of nominations.
Members will then be notified of this information by Branch newsletters and the Union website.
A preliminary Roll of Voters and a final Roll of Voters shall be prepared by the National Secretary and provided to the National Returning Officer in accordance with Rule 46.
The Final Roll of Voters in hard copy form may be provided to candidates who make such a request and who provide written confirmation to comply with the Privacy Act 1988. The provision of this material will require the payment of the nominal cost for printing and postage.
Nomination papers will be available in Branch offices or can be downloaded from the MUA Elections page on the MUA website. Nominations are to be in writing, signed by the nominee and two financial members and forwarded by mail or delivered to:
National Returning Officer Maritime Union of Australia PO Box 20493, World Square Sydney, NSW 2002
Where the nomination papers are forwarded by mail, the nominee shall retain verification of the date and means of postage.
A candidate may enclose a 100-word statement and a head and shoulder photograph with their nomination.
The union will publish candidates’ statements and photos in the Maritime Workers’ Journal to be mailed out to financial members and distributed to branches. Candidates who fail to provide their statement and photo before close of nominations will miss out on publication in the Journal and on the website.
Statements shall require the approval of the National Returning Officer and shall meet requirements of the law. Scandalous or defamatory matter will not be published. Words in excess of the 100-word limit will be deleted from the end of the statement in conformity with Rule 45(k).
Only financial members who have been a member for at least one year at the close of nominations are eligible to nominate as required by Rule 45 (g).
No member shall be eligible to nominate for more than one office as prescribed in Rule 45 (h). If a member nominates for more than one such office, both nominations shall be void.
In the event of two or more candidates being nominated for any office, the National Returning Officer [as prescribed in Rule 47 (b)(i)] shall, seven days following the closure of nominations, arrange for
the printing of ballot papers. These ballot papers shall contain the names of the candidates in alphabetical order.
The National Returning Officer will then cause each ballot paper to be initialled before dispatching papers to voters on Thursday 28 April 2011, this is the day the ballot opens.
Members must check with their Branch to ensure their current mailing address is correct on the union’s records.
The method of validly casting a vote is provided for in Sub-Rules 47(c) to (f) inclusive. The ballot material provided will contain voting instructions from the National Returning Officer. Absentee Voting is provided for where a member will not be present at the postal address provided in the Roll of Voters during the ballot period. In these circumstances a member may apply in writing to the National Returning Officer to personally collect the ballot materials or to have them sent to an address nominated by the member. Such applications must be made before 5pm on Tuesday 7 June 2011.
Each candidate shall have the right to appoint not more than two scrutineers being financial members of the Union who shall be entitled to be present at all stages of the ballot. The appointment of scrutineers shall be by notice in writing signed by the candidate to the National Returning Officer. The rights and duties of scrutineers shall be to represent the interest of their appointing candidate. They shall be entitled to be present at all stages of the ballot while
the Returning Officer carries out the procedures under the Rules and to direct the Returning Officer to any irregularity concerning the carrying out of any step in the ballot. They shall do all things necessary so that the secrecy of the ballot shall be observed. They shall not obstruct the Returning Officer in the performance of the Returning Officer’s duties nor interfere with the conduct of the ballot. The National Returning Officer shall notify each candidate by post of the place and date of the Ballot Count at least 7 days prior to the count. The ballot closes at 5pm on Tuesday 14 June 2011 and only ballot papers received by the National Returning Officer by that time shall be counted, provided that a ballot paper contained in a prepaid envelope which is received by the National Returning Officer by 5pm on Monday 20 June 2011 bearing a post mark dated not later than 14 June 2011 shall be counted. On Wednesday 15 June 2011 the National Returning Officer and the Deputy National Returning Officer shall attend
at a place nominated by and under the control of the National Returning Officer in order to count the ballot. The counting of the Ballot will be undertaken in conformity with MUA Sub- rules 47 (g) to (i) inclusive and be under the control of the National Returning Officer. Upon completion of the count, the National Returning Officer shall announce the result of the election in writing to the National Secretary and each Branch Secretary pursuant to Sub-Rule 47 (j). Any protests will be dealt with in conformity with Sub-Rule 47 (l).