Email this page

It is part of an on-going struggle by the wharfies to defend their pay and conditions and to keep their jobs. New Zealand's biggest forest products corporation, Carter Holt Harvey [CHH], has been flying in scab labour from the North Island in an effort to break the Wharfies Union and lower the cost of loading export logs. There's been picketing each time a ship comes to load at one of five small ports around the South Island. The pickets started off small, but recently more people have been coming along, the latest being half a dozen union reps from Australia (at Nelson). This dispute is as much about small town jobs as it is about pay and conditions, and the wharfies have had a lot of support from small business people who stand to lose when log-loading contracts go to "outsiders[per thou]. In Nelson, a conservative town, the mayor has been sympathetic to the wharfies. That's unprecedented. These are real working class pickets, with a lot of feeling. The cops have been very vigorous against the picketers. One of the lessons of the picketline for me is that despite a new centre-left government, and better industrial law, the police are behaving just as they did under the repressive governments of the last 15 years. There seems to be unlimited cash for flying scores of cops around the country. At the Nelson picket there were about 150 on the union side. Perhaps a third of these were wharfies, some local, some from other South Island ports. Then there were other local unionists, some seamen, the Aussies, six or eight from the Green Party (including two MPs) and a range of individuals like myself (Engineers Union member). About half an hour before the scabs were expected, the national president of the Watersiders Union, Les Wells, called everyone to a meeting away from the gates and the cops. He said he wanted a [base "]peaceful[per thou] picket. Everyone was to line up in two columns and march either side of the scab bus and its police escort. A woman shouted out, why don[base ']t we sit on the ground? Les said the police [OE]flying wedge[base '] at the front of the bus would trample over anyone sitting, but people could sit if they liked. Then he immediately changed his mind to say no one was allowed to sit. [base "]We[base ']ve come a long way in this dispute, we don[base ']t want anyone buggering it up for us. If anyone is planning to do that, they can go home,[per thou] is pretty much what he said. I yelled out that at least we should try and stop the bus. [base "]How many pickets have you been on?[per thou] shouted back Les. I said I[base ']d been on plenty and asked why wouldn[base ']t we at least have a go. A bloke nearby said what[base ']s the use of having a picket unless you enforce it? Les said it was impossible to stop the scabs. At the end of his speech a group of wharfies applauded him, so he clearly had some support. One of the Nelson wharfies told me the local union had, in fact, agreed to keep the picket non-confrontational. But not all the wharfies stood aside. When the scab bus drove up with 30 or 40 police around it and the wedge in front, wharfies were among the many picketers who stood in the middle of the road. At one stage they tripped up a few of the front cops and a woman cop got thrown to the ground beside me. I got bundled off to the side, and although I didn[base ']t see it, the media reported that a couple of picketers were batoned [hit with riot sticks]. Everyone followed the bus as it came up to the wharf gates where another 20 or 30 police were lined up. Everyone was getting worked up by this time, a lot of anger against the cops, and there was a shoving match between the picketers and the cops, which no one seemed to be winning. I was one row back from the front and was surprised to see Les squeeze between the cops and the front row, ordering the picketers to pull back. No one took much notice for a while. I shouted at Les: [OE]Why are you doing the cops job?[base '] But gradually our side pulled back. The cops were able to shut the wharf gates, which took the pressure off them. Soon the cranes were moving as the scabs went to work. There wasn[base ']t a lot to do after that, but one thing I[base ']ve noticed at pickets is that people like to stand around and talk, wind down, meet people and generally keep a presence on the picket. Les started going around telling everyone it was time to go home [^] it was about 8pm - and come back tomorrow at 6am. He was walking quite a marathon around the place, trying to convince people to go. Again, most people took their time, but did leave. Next morning there were less on the picket, about 100, and Les said no one was to stand in the way of the bus. (He even warned that standing in the road [^] as we[base ']d been doing all along [^] was probably illegal.) I didn[base ']t hear anyone challenge Les this time. With fewer numbers, and the news that CHH had now agreed to mediation, it was maybe the best tactic, but the thing that annoyed me was the decisions seemed to be being made by Les and a small group around him [^] then everyone was ordered what to do. The main thing I learned from this picket was that a lot of the wharfies took no notice of their national leader. In fact they defied him and took on the police in a very courageous way. I guess they knew where Les and his group were coming from, and had decided in advance to make the cops and scabs work for their money. It was more difficult for people like myself who came to support the wharfies. I didn[base ']t want to get off side with the local union, but at the same time I recoiled against Les[base ']s approach. The thing that really rankled with me is this. Why have a leader if all he is doing is making the cops[base '] life easy. I asked a couple of wharfies about this, and they said Les had to talk this way or risk arrest for incitement. But this argument doesn[base ']t wash, because Les could simply have keep his mouth shut. In the days of anti-Vietnam War and anti-aparthied marches (which involved tens of thousands in NZ), we made a point of not identifying our leaders, not talking to the police, and certainly not doing what they told us. In the environment movement, some of the groups have no leaders anyway, so no one has any authority to give orders to anyone else. And environmentalists have proved they can be just as staunch as workers on their blockades (Seattle, Melbourne). I[base ']ve used Les[base ']s name, because its already in the media, and he is portrayed as the man who wanted a [base "]peaceful[per thou] picket and [base "]ordered them not to sit on the road[per thou] (Dominion 24/1.01). But at the same time it would be very wrong to suggest the way Les acted at the picket is unusual. In fact the opposite is the case. At workers[base '] pickets I[base ']ve been to over the last 12 years there is almost always a very conservative union leader in charge, telling people to tone things down. Could this be the key to why workers have been so unsuccessful in their strikes and campaigns in recent years, while movements like greens, minorites, and women have made the breakthroughs? In a recent article in Asia Labour Update [ALU], Chris Bailey of Labournet suggested that workers need a higher level of discipline and [base "]some kind of command structure[per thou] that can enforce the will of the majority over the minority on such occasions as pickets. I questioned this in a letter to ALU, saying it[base ']s always better to have conscious and committed people at a picket [^] anyone whose heart isn[base ']t in it won[base ']t be much use anyway. An old miner on the West Coast told me about a union leader called Ernie Locke. Ernie used to say to the young workers: [OE]you be your own leaders, the only ones who need leaders are the ones that want to be led[base ']. There is a lot of wisdom in this advice, and it is very important for pickets. First, heaps of people may turn up to support a picket, maybe 5 or 10 times the number of the workers whose immediate dispute it is. So it becomes much bigger than them - it demands a new level of democracy. Where meetings can be held, everyone needs to take part in decisions. Second, pickets are very dynamic and unpredictable things. They quickly develop a life of their own. All sorts of opportunities arise. No one should be bound by tactical decisions made earlier, or opportunities could be missed. A good example of this was the picket at a CHH paper mill in Auckland a number of years ago. For a couple of weeks the scabs had been getting through the picket with just insults shouted at them, and minimum police. The workers decided to call for support on a particular day and they got a hundred people. The police beefed up their presence and it looked like they[base ']d still be able to herd the scab bus through. Then something happened, which as far as I know, was totally unplanned. A truck pulled out of a nearby factory and came up to the gate from the opposite direction. The driver wasn[base ']t sure what to do when he saw the cops and scab bus, so he stopped in his tracks, just inside the gate. What a gift to us! The scab bus had nowhere to go, and while most picketers were bashing away at the sides, someone let down the front tyres. The police had no option but to get the bus to reverse. It limped off up the road with the workers in pursuit. It was a victory on the day, won by the flexible tactics of the picketers. I want to stress again that I[base ']m not trying to get at Les Wells. What I want to do is highlight a big problem in the union movement, something that is really holding it back. One of the strengths of the environmental movement is that it has often done away with leaders in the sense of one person having power over others [^] and perhaps more important, the mentality among the rank and file that any particular person should order them around. (This mentality is still strong among workers.) At the Nelson picket, Les[base ']s tactic of letting the scabs through unopposed would have quickly led to defeat. Not only would the union members have become disillusioned, but supporters like me would go away, never to return. The sad fact is, we have bureaucracy in the union movement and a very conservative bureacracy at that. I bet it was not like that in the early days of industrial unionism [^] I[base ']ve read accounts of a very activist, dynamic and democratic movement. If this bureacracy remains, I really can[base ']t see the unions achieving much. However, the very positive thing about the Nelson picket, is that many of the wharfies disobeyed their national secretary[base ']s orders and formed the activist core that others could come around. That[base ']s gotta be good news! Pete Lusk Notes: NZ has been opened to the global economy more than most nations. This is illustrated by the fact that CHH is owned by US transnational International Paper, while Southern Cross Stevedores which employs the union wharfies is also owned in the US. The scab stevedoring firm (Mainland) is locally-owned as far as I know. The Watersiders Union, CHH, and Mainland (scabs) have now agreed to enter negotiations [^] at the government[base ']s suggestion. For CHH and the union to sit down has a positive side, because CHH had earlier refused to negotiate. But to enter talks with scabs sounds dangerous. Mainland director Greg Dickson is in the media saying he[base ']s looking forward to sitting down with the other parties and welcomes the [base "]reduction in the level of violence and intimidation at the picket line[per thou]. CHH ceo Chris Liddell said the dispute had got to the stage where it was damaging the company[base ']s reputation with international investors. The dispute was [base "]publicity we do not need[per thou]. [the same would apply to the government which has been trying to prove itself worker-friendly]. Les Wells told anyone who didn[base ']t want to obey orders to bugger off. Sometimes on pickets you get people who do stupid things, taking actions that put them out on a limb. Generally they are no problem, because the cops soon arrest them, which gets them out of the way. If they[base ']re not arrested, it[base ']s a fair bet they[base ']re provocateurs. I've been asked by a pro-union news outlet to "tone down" my criticism of wharfies union official Les Wells in my report on the Nelson picket. Below is my reply: To tone down my criticism of Les Wells wouldn[base ']t be right. I stand by my report on the Nelson picket. I thought about whether to use Les' name, and decided to do so because he was named on nationwide TV - everyone could see the role he played. He was also written up in newspapers like the Dominion and Nelson Mail. But the main thing is, leaders have to be accountable for their actions. We need more people to be up-front and outspoken in the labor movement and be prepared to name names. Otherwise everything is fudged over, issues are swept under the carpet, and debate is stifled. You say my report has 'good human interest elements'. That's because I'm describing what real people actually did on the day. I had a union official email me, with a similar criticism to yours. The gist of his argument was that the members elect union leaders and they have a responsibility to protect the union's resources. He said it's easy for self-proclaimed radicals to demand militant action when they don't have to feed the workers' families. Unfortunately he missed my main message. Here is my reply to him: >I can agree with a lot of what you say about knowing when to save your >strength to fight another day. But there are other important issues, like, >do workers need leaders like Les (just using him as an example) or can the >unions learn from groups like the environmentalists who don't have any >leaders with that sort of authority, yet still manage to achieve their >goals? >Also, when hundreds turn up to a picketline, far outnumbering the local >unionists, should they be allowed any input to decisions on the >picket, or is it the dispute of the local union? >Should union leaders make agreements with the cops before the picket (this >was done in Nelson) and then discipline the picketers to fulfil the >agreement? >These are questions implicit in my report. >My motive in writing this is to try and understand why such conservatism >reigns in the unions - why other NGOs make breakthroughs in all sorts of >areas while unions remain in a rut. >I was 6 years in Auckland, going to heaps of pickets as a >reporter for the Peoples Voice, and yes, you are right, that paper used to slam >union leaders when they were often simply carrying out the wishes of the >majority of their members. So I was very conscious of this when I wrote my report. Les Wells is now a national figure. He was on TV again the other night, at the picket at Bluff, saying the picketers are getting so >angry it[base ']s hard to control them. Well, why not loosen the reins? Do >they really need controlling? These are adults (mostly wharfies and >their families) who are very conscious of why they are there. >They should be free to act as they see fit. Getting back to Nelson, wouldn't it have been better for Les to have welcomed the supporters, explain the situation (marginal numbers for a head-to-head, cops very aggressive, etc) then leave everyone to it. Dominion report on the picket meeting between WWU officials and police (27.1.01): "...[the] apparently spontaneous action is all-but-rehearsed in meetings between senior police and WWU officials before each shift change..." "Inspector Wilson strides through the gate to talk tactics with Mr Hanson and two fellow officials. 'As long as you let the three of us stand in the middle of the road till you formally tell us to move to let the truck through, we'll move when you say, and our pickets will stand outside the police lines and not block the road,' the unionists offer. 'A deal,' the police reply. In return there'll be no flying wedge." Radio[base ']s Morning Report broadcast the same union-cop conversation live. (24.1.01) A friend emailed that he heard it at work. The RNZ reporter had been moving around among the picketers in what he'd thought would be a blow-by-blow report of workers trying to stop the scabs. She hurried to where she could see the officials talking to the police. The conversation was broadcast live, with the cops saying the picketers had blocked the road when it was supposed to be a peaceful picket. The officials appeared to be preparing to assist the police to clear the road, saying "no problem". In the background a picketer is calling out to the union officials something about not just having to fight the bosses, but fighting the officials as well. My friend commented: 'what an opportunity to have the workers determined, courageous and honorable action broadcast live throughout the nation. What an opportunity lost'. Below is a report from the Otago Daily Times on the later picket (20/2/01) at Nelson. ...last night's action passed without incident, Waterfront Workers Union Nelson president Brian Callaghan said. "We had a meeting with police first and said we wanted to keep it peaceful. The police kept it down. They didn't do any of that flying wedge stuff, which kept everyone calm. "But we made our point that we are not happy with these guys coming in, taking permanent jobs away from us." To me this statement is terrible.CHH and the govt want nothing more than a reduction in confrontation. The scabs get thru, and less and less cops need to be flown around the country. Supporters get demoralised and go home - in my case I won't go back to Nelson on the above basis. Yet the Nelson wharfies are still calling for support. Support to stand peacefully and calmly on the footpath and boo? They can do that perfectly well on their own. I'm not blaming Brian Callaghan, because I guess he represents the majority of Nelson wharfies and the national leadership. Pete Lusk 22.2.01

Email this page

back to top