Why am I siding with the Auckland wharfies in their dispute with Ports of Auckland? Well, as a left-winger, I naturally would of course. I remember well the old socialist slogan "an injury to one is an injury to all!"

The Ports of Auckland are preparing the way for privatisation by seeking to contract out jobs currently held by union members to stevedoring companies. The impact of this move on wharfies and their families would be disastrous. Essentially, wharfies would become contractors whose hours of work would be dictated solely by their employer. They would have no guarantee of either steady work hours or pay. If this proposal is pushed through, they would live month-to-month, week-to-week not knowing whether they have any work at all. And if you're trying to feed your family or pay off a mortgage, that's tough.

Also it must be remembered that the ports sector has gone through more than its fair share of restructurings. I remember the first set of port reforms were initiated by the Fourth Labour Government in 1989. These were designed to improve productivity and efficiency on the wharves. In 1991, came the Employment Contracts Act which further undermined the pay and conditions of all workers, including wharfies.

Now the Ports of Auckland are threatening to unleash another round of wharfie-bashing which will spread to other ports around the country. Aided and abetted by a National Government which has pledged to further restrict collective bargaining rights, the Auckland dispute is but a harbinger of what is to come for not only port workers but all workers.

That's why the Maritime Union of New Zealand is spearheading a campaign to get Ports of Auckland management to withdraw their current offer and instead agree to guarantee the jobs and livelihoods of workers. Any improvements to productivity and port practises should be settled around the negotiating table, of course, but should not be extracted through attacking wages and conditions.

One more note: I find the Labour Party's position on this dispute to be confusing. They are seeking to play both sides by transport spokesperson Phil Twyford saying this morning, on the one hand, that he agreed that at least two ports should be closed to create greater efficiencies while on the other hand he came out this afternoon stating that contracting out work was tantamount to privatisation. Already, a number of commentators have made comparisons to Walter Nash's infamous statement on the 1951 waterfront lock out dispute "that we are neither for the workers and nor are we against them." This kind of fence sitting will get Labour nowhere, just as it did in 1951 when they lost that year's election for failing to back the locked out watersiders. I can only foresee that National and their employer allies will make hay over this issue in the weeks to come. It's not a good start to Labour's second term in opposition.

But political support won't help resolve the dispute on its own. Only people standing in solidarity with the wharfies and their families can do that! 

(NB: The Maritime Union of New Zealand is hosting a public meeting on the ports dispute at 7.30pm tonight, Thursday, January 19 at the Auckland Trades Hall.)