Why labour must face change

THIS YEAR marks exactly 50 years since Labour Day became a holiday.

Yet while June 19 has remained a fixture on our annual calendar, what that date represents has changed profoundly over the past five decades. And the change has, in recent years, dramatically accelerated.

The labour movement played a key role in the shaping of our society. Historic developments in the 1930s, 40s, 50s, 60s and 70s cannot be understood without recourse to an appreciation of the mobilisation of workers and trade unionism; without a grappling with the legacies of figures such as Tubal Uriah “Buzz” Butler, Adrian Cola Rienzi, Arthur Andrew Cipriani, Audrey Jeffers and more.

But as much as this movement had a vital impact on the advancement of a range of causes, it has arguably failed to transcend divisions within society – race, gender, class structure and party politics – and has never emerged as a cohesive political or ideological force.

The evidence of this is the cyclical nature of trade union influence which has been waning in more recent decades. Some – like Opposition Senator Wade Mark – even feel the movement is at a low point.

For sure, the revival and then collapse of tripartism, the closure of key state entities, the impact of globalisation and the deepening of state power have upended old modes of mobilisation.

All of this was accelerated by the pandemic which not only made mobilisation more difficult but also profoundly changed the nature of work.

The failure of labour to move beyond a focus on the minimum wage and, instead, attain a living wage for workers is one of the biggest impediments to its relevance.

But equally challenging is the simple fact of change.

As noted by President Christine Kangaloo in her Labour Day address, the workplace is now defined by work-from-home and hybrid work arrangements; virtual meetings; and the advent of artificial intelligence.

Meanwhile, legislation like the Industrial Relations Act have long started to show the signs of being outmoded and ill-suited to contemporary realities. Perennial questions are asked about systems and procedures relating to the Industrial Court and about the designation of essential services, for better or worse.

It is also safe to say there have been gaps in the many advancements secured by labour over the years. For instance, discussion of anti-discrimination measures has often failed to reflect the growing understanding of the need to protect workers based on things like sexual orientation and to address the slow pace of progress when it comes to the policing of workplace sexual harassment.

If labour is meant to be one of the shields against the excesses of the state, fifty years later it is worth asking how, given a changing world, labour can recalibrate itself to remain relevant.