Login / Join
Australian Immigration Daily News
Breaking Australian immigration news brought to you by Migration Alliance and associated bloggers.
- Font size: Larger Smaller
- Hits: 9483
- 18 Comments
Trade Union outreach page on DIBP website - take it down
The following email has been sent to the Hon Senator and Assistant Minister for Immigration and Border Protection, Michaelia Cash MP, this morning. Thanks to John Findley, a Senior member of Migration Alliance for preparing this piece. A copy of this can also found on Newsboot.
TAKE DOWN THIS PAGE.
The employment relationship is between employer and employee. But unions seek to interpose themselves into that relationship and the previous Labor government, always beholden to trade union bullies, and numbers men, took extraordinary measures to entrench union powers.
The Fair Work Act allows and encourages an employee to not become a member of an industrial association (euphemistic term for trade union). Fairwork Australia provides a proper resource for employees seeking to check if their terms of employment are appropriate. See http://www.fairwork.gov.au/pages/default.aspx
Why on earth does the DIBP dedicate a web page to promote membership of a trade union? See the page. http://www.immi.gov.au/employers/outreach/uoo.htm
There are many in Australia who do not support the privileged position that the former Labor Government created for trade unions. There are many in Australia, at the coal face as it were, who see trade unions as bullies, thugs and promoting the self interest of union officials above the interests of those who they purportedly serve and above the national interest in a dynamic, fee economy.
It seems the DIBP supports trade unions in a privileged manner. DIBP pays for its officers to be present in union offices. Well, if the government is seriously looking to cut waste, here is one place to do that. Just cut out the position of Union Outreach Officer.
Take down the web page that seems to be a recruitment page for privileged trade unions.
John Findley MARN0316938
EXTRACT FROM THE OFFENSIVE DIBP PAGE:
Union Outreach Officers
Union Outreach Officers are out-posted to the national offices of major trade unions to help them to better understand the department's products, policies and processes.
Union Outreach Officer role
Union Outreach Officers support better understanding of the department's products, policies and processes among union organisers, delegates and members. The outreach role facilitates productive and informed communication between the department and the unions. It provides a mechanism not only to inform temporary workers from outside Australia, of their rights and the obligations of their employer sponsors but also to inform government about gaps in programs, unintended policy outcomes and emerging areas of concern.
Location of Union Outreach Officers
Union Outreach Officers are currently working with the following organisations.
|
Union |
See |
|
Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU) |
|
|
Construction Forestry Mining Energy Union (CFMEU) |
|
|
Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation (ANMF) |
|
|
Australian Manufacturing Workers Union (AMWU) |
|
|
Australasian Meat Industry Employees Union (AMIEU) |
Comments
-
Monday, 09 December 2013Dear John,
Is this as bad as it looks?
Are these DIBP employees working at Union Offices?
So the poor old taxpayer is footing the bill for a DIBP officer working at a Union Office? -
Monday, 09 December 2013
Dear Nicholas,
I don't think this is about being a Labor voter, I think it is about the use of public funds to support an anti migrant, anti 457 union agenda?
As to you resigning and campaigning against MA that is a matter for you.
By the way I am too old, too bald, too fat and too tired to even consider pursing a political career.
However, I would love to see an MA backed Senator who used to be an RMA, with your Union background..why dont you run for a seat in the Senate, I for one would back you. -
Monday, 09 December 2013
Nicholas
That's really interesting. Christopher is definitely not planning to run for a seat in Parliament. The suggstion made me laugh. Then I started imagining him in the House of Reps and thought your suggestion wasn't such a bad idea. At least he would be good on his feet and he does have the gift of the gab.....and he is a lawyer ....and he can speak for days on end. Not a bad idea, John, but I can't see him wanting to do that myself. As for the safe Liberal seats where are they? Aren't they already populated by our national leaders?
Migration Alliance members have the right to the freedom of speech. If you would like to blog about unions being so important then why not blog it on here? You are welcome to state your point of view and your views have been published for that reason. I very much doubt that 'half the population of MA' will be alienated because someone's views have been published.
Anyway, it is better to stand for something than to stand for nothing. Good on you for standing up for what you believe in. It is good to have robust debate.
Liana -
Monday, 09 December 2013
Liana, I think that should have read Nick not John.
-
Monday, 09 December 2013
I believe that less than 20% of employees belong to a union, so they represent hardly anyone. That said, the disgraceful issue where Shorten was made leader when about 80% of unions members voted against him was just that, disgraceful. The Department of Immigration have no right to include this Union blog. Immigration and Union membership are two completely different things, no relationship.
Nick, you want an apology, for what? And if you don't get it, you will resign, wouldn't that be a great loss! AND you will work against the MA!! Scary Spice, I don't know how I will sleep well for the fear of it! -
Monday, 09 December 2013
Dear John,
does DIBP publish [anywhere] the number of these Union Outreach Officers? Considering an affiliation with 5 unions it would be reasonable to assume at least that many meaning a cost of upwards of $500, 000.
With regard to various members openly supporting the now Government prior to the election, it should be obvious that most members were clearly outraged at the very poor performance of each of 3 people who undertook the role of Minister for Immigration, none of whom had a grasp of the fundamentals of legislation, PAM3 policy and the mechanations of their ministry. A clear example was the Honorable Chris Evans claiming that there was no legislation that allowed refunds for application fees. This is plainly and simply incorrect and in the specific context simply required an alteration of policy interpretation as to when an application is deemed to be unnecessary. Still, it sounds good you claim your hands are tied.
I attended a DIAC skilled migration information conference at Sydney Masonic Lodge during Evan's tenure and was surprised the hear the comtempt directed towards him from the then Assistant Manager of Adelaise SSP. He never once referred to him as The Minister, but only Evans.
I doubt there is the same level of dissatisfaction for the current minister· Beatriz Leoncini likes this comment. -
Monday, 09 December 2013
Christopher would make a lousy politician. Too up front; too blantantly honest; forgets people's names [he still calls me Rick instead of Rob] The Christpher Livingston I know would never suffer the compromises in principles required to make it. And he is bald! All the pre-requsites for a great lawyer [tongue firmly in cheek!]
-
Monday, 09 December 2013
Migrants deserve to have every resource at their disposal to ensure that their rights at work are not contravened.
Access to information regarding unions and their legal operation in Australia as well as other resources such as links to Fairiwork Australia and the scope of its activities is perfectly appropriate.
Few migration agents concern themselves with the ongoing employment welfare of their clients, beyond the scope what they "need to know" to carry out their duties in lodging visa applications.
Given that many skilled workers come from countries where union activity is illegal or supressed, publishing details on the DIBP website of union links, makes it clear to migrants, that this is not the case in Australia...at least not yet. -
Monday, 09 December 2013
As someone who works in a community legal center where temporary migrant workers come to see me all the time because they have been exploited by their employers and owe huge debts to migration agents, I find your attack on unions puzzling. Often it is their only avenue to any kind of redress and I often refer them to their union who manage to help them.
Why are you so concerned John about migrant workers having access to unions? Is it because you are worried about what would happen if migrant workers were aware of their rights? Is it because then your money making model of sourcing vulnerable workers would explode?
The fact that 20% of workers belong to a union still makes 2 million people who do, which beats any other organisation or movement in the country - so I reckon that's clearly not "hardly anyone" is it?
And how about the fact that you omit to mention that Employer associations also have Outreach Officers embedded in their organisations? Where's the outrage about that?
As for unions being anti-migrant, that is blatantly untrue. Who is out there helping them get back unpaid wages? It's not the migration agents like yourselves is it? You take your money and run.
There have been so many scandals in the media recently about migration agents exploiting their clients, how about you clean up your own show before you get stuck into unions. And I'm not saying unions are perfect or don't have issues. But your entire business model is based on having people hand over large wads of cash they don't have so they can try to make it here, which makes your opinions self-interested and completely redundant in any proper discussion about migration. -
Monday, 09 December 2013
Links ... sure. Staff from DIBP on salaries called outreach officers? No way! How about they send some outreach officers over our way? I could use some free help with free government money.
-
Monday, 09 December 2013
Seems like Nikola is part of the problem. First she refers vulnerable people to unregistered agents in unions who pretend they are able to help but can't because they aren't trained to help. Second, Nikola doesn't seem to understand the difference between a Registered Migration Agent and an Unregistered One. Nikola sends unwitting people to unregistered agents. Sure they might get some money back but their status in Auatralia will be screwed up by people who don't have a clue.
Hey Nikola do you send your mates to a witch doctor instead of a brain surgeon if they have a brain tumor? Do you get your next door neighbour to desex your pet because they like to be helpful and tell you they like animals? Or do you take your pet to a vet?
Send your clients to unions and you are doing them a disservice. And do yourself a favour and start to read the media properly. Get acquainted with the concept of 'registered migration agent' as opposed to migration agents.
And if you truly have a problem with registered agents then complain to the office of mara. It's their job to keep the industry clean,
Finally Registered agents can't take clients money and run because all the money goes into clients accounts /trust accounts. I guess you don't know that given you know very little about everything else.
Your poor clients. The scandal is you thinking you are 'helping' them.· Beatriz Leoncini likes this comment. -
Monday, 09 December 2013
Nikola, wake up, slow down, try to understand what the concerns are as I don't think you really do. George, good points made. Unions are anti-migrant, just listen to their rantings re skilled workers on 457 visas. They want less skilled migrants so they have more power and more big salaries. They believe that their salaries and extras should not be made public. They have always been that way, always will be.
· Beatriz Leoncini likes this comment. -
Tuesday, 10 December 2013
Let me understand this ( my apologies for the loooong rant, and leaving personal attacks aside) - are we arguing the political merit, or otherwise, of having DIBP staff outreaching to Trade Unions OR should the argument be that such a resource by the Department must be appropriately and ethically linked to other more relevant bodies when it comes to worker’s rights, particularly overseas workers rights from ALL kinds of visa backgrounds?
I have no issue with ‘temporary migrants’ (this is whom we are talking about, right?) having access to resources like unions amongst them – but unions are not normally the upholders of temporary migrant’s rights – some like the CFMEU and the AMWU would have them disappear off the face of the earth when ‘overseas temps’ become a threat (real or otherwise) to a generalised and misplaced sense of Australian job security as if temp migrant workers were the ONLY reason why Australians can’t find work…
The DIBP website refers to a NETWORK of outreach officers; the unions being just one of them: (http://www.immi.gov.au/employers/outreach/index.htm) BUT when it comes to DIBP organising information on its webpage by ‘interest groups’ if you like, the ‘union outreach officers’ link is specifically found under the ‘For employees’ tab (is this a subliminal message of ‘encouragement’ of all temporary workers to join the union here?) with the other two links (‘Industry’ and ‘Regional’ outreach networks) under the ‘Doing business in Australia’ (for employers) tab. Does this not seem to support the perennial argument that employers and workers are at the opposite side of the spectrum? is this an oversight?
When one goes to the ‘union outreach officers’ link, it’s very clear what the ultimate DIBP role is – to help the unions better understand the department’s policies, products and processes. Nothing wrong with that in a general government context but a bit disingenuous in the context of how unions feel about overseas temp workers and how politicised the issue is and will always be. is that the Department's role in the scheme of things or FWA/FWO?
Having gone through the weblinks, it concerns me, because one would think that DIBP's role is about controlling people's entry to Australia rather than explaining policies, products and processes to the unions specifically...– outreach to do what? to have a body with rabid opposition to an overseas workforce inform ‘government about gaps in programs, unintended policy outcomes and emerging areas of concern’? I thought that was the role of the ACTU - can't the ACTU reign in and educate their members with the assistance of DIBP as part of its consultation process? I can understand a regional and industry outreach because of the direct impact these have on the migration program but unions? how ethical is it to entertain a body which blames overseas temporary workers for the employment ills of the country and blames employers of exploiting workers? i dunno...
is DIBP not aware that it is lending itself to be complicit with whichever way the Unions felt about temporary overseas workers by the mere implication of having such a link (to ‘working with unions’) or that it can be seen by current and potential temporary workers (and employers) as an endorsement of the union movement. I don’t personally have any problems with the existence of Unions but we all know they don't look kindly on temporary workers so, WHAT is the message here? Is DIBP an apologist for the unions and has appointed itself to make things right?
Further, the focus is ALWAYS on 457 and skilled workers (I know why but I want to raise the merit of other visa holders who have work rights) whatever happened to casual working holiday makers and students who also tend to have long term relationships with employers through their years of work/ holiday and study onshore - is this not a tad disingenuous on behalf of DIBP to only link the temporary work visa holders to the ‘union’ argument? Maybe ‘students’ and ‘working holiday makers’ don’t take jobs away from Australians, according to the union (no rabid rant about this in any of the current union’s webpage, may I add…)
457 visa holders and any other temporary workforce would be better served by clear and unequivocal links to Fair Work Australia and the FW Ombudsman, including community legal services rather than the unions’ link right below the Department’s link and well before FWA and FWO. The FWA and FWO have the power to intervene in all kinds of work related matters whereas unions only look after its membership (not having a stab at them, just stating the obvious).
The question here is: does the MA Membership think this is a good thing or a bad thing? If either way, why? If we reach such consensus (rather than flicking an email to Ms Cash straight away), how do we proceed, if at all?
ANY link posted on a government department’s website IS an endorsement of that particular organisation by that website (refer to the perception of having Singapore Oil on the MIA website…) It was the Union Movement which revived the 457 bogeyman with Messrs Brendan and Michael O’Connor back in mid 2013 and earlier. If we don’t debate this perceived conflict of interest for some of us, then we are being complicit in promoting this bogeyman concept and anything else it’s promoting, by not raising these issues clearly and logically, whatever their outcome is.
DIBP, as a responsible commonwealth government institution, must provide more weight to organisations with the legal responsibility (and common values) to assist badly done overseas temps first and foremost, not just angle it as DIBP working with unions directly, found under ‘For Employees’ in the ‘Work in Australia’ tab. Unions support their members and are often brought into resolving a dispute but only AFTER one becomes a member so their focus on upholding ALL worker’s, with a very general exemption to the ACTU, is not actually the case.
Is there a clear and unequivocal outreach network and/or direct link on the DIBP website indicating that it works with the FWA or the FW ombudsman? Short answer is ‘Nope’ – long answer is: refer to ‘Your rights and obligations’ tab, which is an additional click in that hyperlink directing the reader to a pdf document translated in only 5 languages AND even on this document, the union link is ABOVE Fair Work Australia’s link– what does THAT say, if anything, about where DIBP thinks things are at? How about if we start there?
Happy to be corrected constructively but let's focus on what is important - is this an important issue for the profession? how do we best raise it?
BTW, ‘Liana Allan for President’ has a nice ring to it and she has my vote –if and when we EVER become a republic… -
Tuesday, 10 December 2013
I posted a comment to the effect that the Liberal Party is the main racial manipluator in this debate and that it misleading to state that unions are anti-migrant when they are not. They have other concerns related to restricting the supply of labour, but these are not motivated by race and they are not anti-immigrant. Anti-guest worker, perhaps, and anti-non free labour yes, but not anti-immigration, and to say and imply this is inflammatory.
Moderators, post my comment please, editing my comments on Peter Reith if you wish.
And as for Chris, who seems to be the brown shirt enforcer of the blog, feel free to mock me my friend. The MA needs friends and if you want to mock everyone who comes on to the blog, someone, and not saying it will be me, will put your eye out. -
Tuesday, 10 December 2013
Nicholas,
You are entitled to your views.
As to brown shirts enforcer and eye pulling relax !
This is what I said;
"Dear Nicholas,
I don't think this is about being a Labor voter, I think it is about the use of public funds to support an anti migrant, anti 457 union agenda?
As to you resigning and campaigning against MA that is a matter for you.
By the way I am too old, too bald, too fat and too tired to even consider pursing a political career.
However, I would love to see an MA backed Senator who used to be an RMA, with your Union background..why don't you run for a seat in the Senate, I for one would back you."
Nicholas as to the mocking bit if you are referring to my post "liar liar pants on fire" that is my attempt to shut down that serial pest Michael Walker.
i respect your views but do not agree with them, the brown shirt reference is a little unfortunate as is the eye thing but let me assume you strong feelings on this topic.
Nicholas, there is nothing "personal " in this, our views diverge that is all. -
Tuesday, 10 December 2013
Hi Christopher, I know you were friendly on the blog, and it is just ideas anyway. I wasn't referring to Michael Walker either.
My honest view is that the MA should consider not ragging on the union issue and should draw back from its identification with the Liberal Party. Those affiliations alienate people and I can't see that it advances our professional issues as migration agents. The disrespect for migration agents is bipartisan, and while we may be small business owners, there is no need to confuse our professional issues with the issues of our business clients. The fact is labour market testing, however annoying it may be for sponsoring businesses, makes more work for us and therefore higher professional fees.
I am not saying the MA should come out and endorse it but t we should remain neutral on the broader politics. Or alternatively should the general position be that if a policy change will make more money for us (that is, be bad and over complex policy) we support it?
This is one of my concerns here, and the other is the spurious conflation of the union position on the 457 program with 'anti-immigrant' politics. That is a red herring as the union movement is not anti-migrant in a racist sense but in a traditional 'defend the jobs' sense. And that is fair enough!
It is the Libs who kick the racist can with their politics on asylum seekers. -
Wednesday, 11 December 2013
No problems Nicholas.
Can we agree on this ..I don't think the tax payer should be funding the outplacement of DIBP Officers to the Unions. If they are going to offer this service why not have it centralised at DIBP so that all migrant workers can get access?
Further, I think DIBP needs to avoid the risk of giving "immigration assistance".
Also how about MA sets up a workers assistance unit to give professional and independent "immigration assistance" to migrant workers. You could coordinate it?
Are you interested?
Immigration blog
This goes too far. I have voted for the ALP and been a trade union delegate before becoming a Migration Agent and I find this blog offensive.
In fact, I find the behaviour of the MA in the lead up to the election in which you openly cheered the Liberals and abused the ALP, not only offensive but stupid and amateurish. If you want to alienate roughly half the population including roughly half the membership of the MA, then carry on like you have.
Oh no, I just realised, the MA is front to promote Christopher Levingston’s bid for pre-selection for a safe Liberal seat in Parliament.
What a nightmare.
Unless this blog is retracted with an apology, I will quit my membership and start working against the MA.