According to some Coalition politicians, and some anonymous union leaders quoted in the media, the "turning point" in the federal election campaign was provided by ACTU secretary Bill Kelty's threat of a "wages break-out" that would follow the election of a Coalition government.
Is that supposed to be a joke? Australians were all set to return the Keating government, despite 13 years of having their living standards cut, until Kelty's arrogant bluster got their backs up?
As every poll before and throughout the campaign indicated, the voters had had it up to their eye teeth with Labor. The Liberals could have put up Jack the Ripper as alternative PM, and they would still have romped in as long as Jack (unlike Hewson) followed Howard's strategy of saying nothing meaningful about his policies.
Kelty did, however, have some influence on the election result: 13 years of it, in fact. The ACTU's willing collaboration with Labor in the Accord, which is transferring $26 billion per year from workers to bosses, contributed mightily to the Liberal victory. Even more of a Kelty "achievement" is the wasting away of our unions — the loss of literally hundreds of thousands of actual and potential union members, who could see no good reason to pay dues to organisations run by the likes of Kelty and his mates.
It would be impossible in Australian history to find a comparable record of union misleadership: of such a prolonged period of worker and union losses through a period of relative prosperity, starting from such a base of relative strength. Kelty is not the only one responsible, of course, but this is unmistakably his record.
And now, as though to follow tragedy with farce, we have a new, "militant" Bill Kelty. He growls at Peter Reith. He writes letters to Japanese coal buyers. He even resigns his $20,000 a year fringe benefit as board member of the Reserve Bank.
He looks scared about his job. He should.
If the ranks of the unions had any control of ACTU officialdom, Kelty would have been enrolling in a JobStart program years ago. Now, even the occasional official in a TLC or ACTU "branch" can be heard muttering that it's time for Kelty to retire, if only to give them or one of their mates a go. Kelty is trying to save his job with a bit of left fakery.
The big business media and government politicians — displaying a shocking lack of gratitude — are attacking Kelty over his new-found "militancy", and especially over the coal letter. There is a natural instinct to rally to the defence of someone under attack from such sources. It's an honourable instinct. More often than not, it is even a good guide to action. But it should not be such a guide here.
Defending Kelty is not a way to defend unions or working people. The employers, media and government should have no say in who leads the union movement or what its policies are. But Kelty is as responsible as anyone for giving them such a say; indeed, all his recent posturing is only intended to produce a new version of the union-destroying Accord, with the Liberals instead of with Labor. As Michael Easson, former secretary of the NSW Labour Council, wrote in the Australian, "... there's a sober message [from Kelty]. The Australian Government ought to want some kind of understanding with the ACTU on inflation and wage targets."
Keltyism, Accord-ism, corporatism: by whatever name, it's a poison in the unions. Getting rid of Kelty and other "leaders" of his ilk is a prerequisite to reviving the union movement, to rebuilding the ranks' confidence that the union will back them all the way in the coming fights against the Howard government's attacks.