The historic shift from wage to profit share

October 13, 2020
Issue 
Image: Zebedeee Parkes

Treasurer Josh Frydenberg claimed the Coalition government鈥檚 private-sector led economic recovery plans will get the economy back on track. It has forecast that the economy to be back to the where things were at the middle of last year, before COVID-19 hit. The Scott Morrison government is feeling confident, in large part, because of the underlying gross domestic product trend: the profit share is up to a historic high and the labour share is down. Since 1975, more than $4 trillion has been shifted from wages to profits. Paul Oboohov explains how it got to this.

* * *

p10_trade_union_membership_wages_and_profit_shares_of_gdp_1975_to_2019_graph.jpg

Profit and labour shares of GDP vs union density. Chart by Paul Oboohov based on Australian Bureau of Statistics data.

Australia鈥檚 economy fell 9.6% in the first half of聽the year, having had low growth聽and low profits growth and contribution to gross domestic product (GDP) growth, as well as stagnation in wages growth over the past year.

After the economy fell by 2.6% in the March quarter, with continued profit and wages stagnation, the 鈥渘on-essential鈥 industries shutdowns as part of governments鈥 response to the聽COVID-19聽pandemic,聽led to real unemployment of 2.3 million聽by April.聽This comprised聽those聽officially unemployed, plus those on reduced hours of work 鈥 equivalent to 20% of the labour market, according to Centre for Future Work鈥檚 Senior Economist Alison Pennington.聽

Pennington also characterised the low levels of business investment last year and this year as a 鈥渃apital strike鈥, and not just about the economic effects of the pandemic.

This meant that the wages share of GDP slumped by 3.1% in the March quarter, pushing it down to 49.4% share of GDP, below a 50% share for the first time since 1959.

The federal government鈥檚 JobKeeper payment, paid to employers (and on-paid to their workers at their discretion) led to a sugar hit聽for聽the profit share of GDP, from 29% in the March quarter, to 31.1% in the June quarter 鈥 a historic high.

How did聽Australia聽get to such a low share of wages in GDP?

The answer is that it is has been a long process of decline since the 1970s, involving capitulating to the demands of business by the聽Labor Party聽and the union movement鈥檚 deference to it in matters of economic strategy and聽its聽voluntary聽withholding聽on聽wage rises. This has allowed a massive $4.3 trillion transfer聽(in 2018 dollars)聽to profits between聽1975 and 2019.

Industrial strength

Australian workers鈥 wages share of GDP was only 49.8% in the September quarter of 1959, and began the 1960s at 50.9% in the March quarter聽of that year. Following 20 years of Coalition government聽rule, Gough Whitlam鈥檚聽Labor government was elected in December 1972. It was favourable to wage rises for workers, given their low share of GDP, and set about giving large wage rises in the Australian Public Service聽(APS), as an example to private employers.

This was the time of some powerful industry-wide unions, such as the Amalgamated Metal Workers鈥 Union (AMWU), which聽organised聽industrial campaigns across employers in single or even mega groups of industries, concentrating workers鈥 bargaining power.

This was aided by an industrial聽award system and state based arbitration of industrial disputes, whereby wage and conditions gains in one industry could be 鈥渇lowed on鈥 through similar occupations claiming the same gains in other industries and unions. Such was the 鈥渨arp and weft鈥 fabric of industrial relations at the time, assisted by half the workforce being unionised聽in聽1975.

Unions used their industrial strength to demand governments and employers give workers a better share of income in the economy. Up until late 1975,聽the post-war economic boom conditions also meant shortages of labour, that added to the bargaining strength of unions.

This resulted in major industrial gains for workers, with wages鈥 share of GDP rising from 56.3% in the March and June quarters of 1973 to a historical high point of 62.8% by the March quarter of 1975.

Despite Whitlam being sacked by the governor-general in November 1975, and losing the subsequent federal election, workers were able to maintain a wages share of GDP at, or above, 60% from the September quarter 1975 to the June quarter of 1978.

By contrast, the profits share of GDP fell from 21.1% in the March quarter 1973, to a historic low of 16.3% in the March quarter of 1975.

Business leaders and the incoming Malcolm Fraser聽Coalition聽government of December 1975 were determined not聽to聽have a wage breakout again, and聽a聽diminishment of the profit share of GDP.聽The聽latter has risen ever since, rising to 19.6% share by the March quarter of 1983聽with聽the wages share falling to 56.9% in the June quarter 1980.

However, the unions鈥 industrial strength聽led to聽another wages outbreak, into the 60% and above share of GDP, between the March quarter 1982 and the March quarter of 1983:聽it聽peaked聽at 61.9% in the September quarter of 1982.

Prices and Incomes Accord

When the Bob Hawke Labor government was elected in March 1983, unionisation of the workforce was 37.7%. He implemented聽a series of Prices and Incomes聽Accord agreements聽with the union movement, whereby unions voluntarily lowered their wage rise demands in return for the Labor government raising聽the funding of Medicare and its health coverage, funding聽childcare for workers鈥 families, and raising聽the聽unemployment benefit聽payment.

However, over the life of the Accord, Hawke and his treasurer Paul Keating introduced economic rationalist, business-friendly and right-wing policies.聽They聽privatised聽many large federal government聽entities, such as the Commonwealth Bank, Commonwealth Serum Laboratories and Qantas, as well as fundamentally transforming the economy by deregulating it.聽In addition,聽they聽subjected聽the Accord to annual negotiations.

By the end of the decade, the Business Council of Australia, a body that emerged from the biggest corporations benefitting from business amalgamations under deregulation, was demanding the introduction of bargaining by 鈥渙ne union per workplace鈥, which became a demand for bargaining by single employer businesses, or 鈥渆nterprise聽bargaining鈥.

This became policy of the Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU) under then secretary Bill Kelty, and unions were obliged to implement it, weakening their industrial bargaining.

Kelty responded to the new giant corporate juggernauts by amalgamating disparate unions into his model of 鈥10聽big unions鈥.聽It聽created聽the largest union bureaucracies in Australian history, further distancing their leaderships鈥 from control by their rank and file members.

This had a chilling effect on the militancy of union members, and the labour share of GDP fell to a low of 53.3% by September 1988.聽By the end of the Labor federal government under then prime minister Keating in March 1996, the wages share of GDP was not much better at 55%. Unionisation had fallen to 31.1% of the workforce.

The much more right-wing Coalition government of John Howard quickly set about attacking workers鈥 industrial rights and wages, in an industrial landscape where workers were already shackled by enterprise bargaining.

It passed the聽Workplace Relations Act 1996, weakening the powers of the Australian Industrial Relations Commission to adjudicate in industrial disputes.聽It聽introduced Australian Workplace Agreements to induce workers to sign individual contracts directly with their employer, bypassing unions and collective bargaining agreements.

By 1998, a profit share of 24% of the national income meant that Australian corporations were not bothered by the Asian Financial Crisis.

In the same year, Patrick Stevedoring, a wharf container operator, sought to sack its unionised workforce, and replace聽it聽with sub-contracted companies employing casuals, on individual contracts. This聽caused聽industrial action by wharf labourers, members of the Maritime Union of Australia (MUA) and, in April 1988, Patrick locked out the workers, and a major industrial standoff ensued at No 5 Webb Dock, Melbourne Port. The Howard government backed Patrick.

Litigation by the union, pursued by Patrick to the High Court,聽led Patrick to lose due to聽its聽sole aim of restructuring being to dismiss the unionised workers.聽The MUA prevailed, insofar as being able to negotiate with the employer.

However, the terms of the resulting agreement almost halved the employed workforce, through voluntary redundancies. Some casualisation and contracting introduced smaller crews, longer work hours, employer control of rostering and bonuses for faster work. By this stage, the labour share of national GDP was 54.9% and unionisation of the workforce was 28.1%.

WorkChoices

After the Howard government obtained control of the Senate in 2005, it amended the聽Workplace Relations Act 1996聽with the聽Workplace Relations Amendment Act 2005, which became known as 鈥淲orkChoices鈥.

It did away with the concept of 鈥渦nfair dismissal鈥 for companies under a certain size, and the notion of the 鈥渘o disadvantage test鈥 for workers due to law changes or industrial agreements that disadvantaged them.聽It also did away with聽workers needing to submit certified agreements directly to a 鈥淲orkplace Authority鈥, bypassing the Australian Industrial Relations Commission.

It also changed the ability of a workforce to go on strike legally, and the ability of individual workers to bargain for themselves without collective (union) representation. Employers could put their own suggested industrial documents to workforces for a vote, and unions had to run 鈥渧ote no鈥 campaigns to even get to the stage of putting forward and bargaining for their own industrial demands. Union organisers were barred from workplaces and union meetings had to be held off employer premises.

The federal government ran a form of industrial police in the construction industry, the Australian Building and Construction Commission (ABCC), to persecute militant union delegates, and even workplace health and safety representatives.

This triggered the ACTU鈥檚聽Your Rights at Work聽campaign which involved聽the union movement and allies聽beyond it.聽Major rallies were聽organised聽in cities, union TV and radio advertisements were aired,聽and聽some state governments opposed the changes.

WorkChoices became a major issue in the federal election of November 2007,聽and led to聽the election of a Labor government under Prime Minister Kevin Rudd. Howard not only lost the election,聽he聽also lost his seat in Sydney to a former woman news presenter of the ABC.

In early 2008, the new industrial relations minister Julia Gillard, a former union lawyer, told the ACT unions that the new government had 鈥減ut the final nail in the coffin of WorkChoices鈥. She received a standing ovation.

Labor鈥檚 bob each way

While the new Labor government gave聽workers back their individual rights,聽it聽also brought聽across to聽its聽Fair Work Act聽almost all the anti-union restrictions of the聽Workplace Relations Act.聽Labor also聽retained the ABCC until 2010.聽It also聽phased out Australian Workplace Agreements over聽five聽years.

Some unions labelled this version of industrial legislation as WorkChoices 鈥淟ite鈥 鈥 a bet each way between capital and labour.

This has been the bedrock of industrial relations law since, with some oppressive additional institutions by the succeeding Coalition government.

The abrasive experience of the Howard government鈥檚 industrial regimes over 11 years had left the labour share of GDP at 54.1% in the December quarter of 2007 (interestingly, it had held up over this time, perhaps due to unions genuinely fighting for their members) but unionisation of the workforce fell to just 18.9%.

After聽six years of the Rudd鈥揋illard鈥揜udd Labor federal governments, the Tony Abbott Coalition government was elected at the September 2013 election.

The labour share of GDP in the September quarter of 2013 was 53.2%, and the unionisation of the workforce was 17.1%.

The Abbott government attempted to smear the union movement by running the witch hunt聽Royal Commission into Trade Union Governance and Corruption,聽singling out聽the Australian Workers Union; Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union; Electrical Trades Union; Health Services Union; and the Transport Workers Union. The result was that, after reporting some illegalities, only one conviction occurred and five other union officials had their charges dropped, or were found not guilty.

In 2016, the Malcolm Turnbull Coalition government, having used the Senate鈥檚 refusal to pass bills聽to聽establish the聽Registered Organisations and Australian Building and Construction Commission bill, as double dissolution triggers,聽meant that the聽new Senate passed both bills聽that聽November.

The bill resurrected the ABCC to tackle 鈥渋llegal鈥 behaviour on construction sites and 鈥渋mprove productivity鈥, as it had under the WorkChoices regime.聽The Registered Organisations bill was designed to create a commission to oversee union and employer bodies, and bring standards for union officials into line with company directors under聽corporation鈥檚聽law.

Muzzling union organising

In 2019,聽the Scott Morrison government attempted to pass a bill聽to聽tighten聽the聽rules聽governing what聽unions and their officials聽could do:聽the聽Ensuring Integrity Bill聽would allow automatic disqualifications of 鈥渞egistered organisations鈥 (unions) and grant the Federal Court the power to prevent officials from holding office and broaden the court's power to order remedial action with respect to union disputes and governance.

Unions, Labor and the Greens opposed the bill,聽arguing it聽was 鈥渃ontrary to international law and Australia鈥檚 commitments鈥 and 鈥渉ostile to the interests of working people鈥.

Industry groups and the Business Council of Australia argued the bill would 鈥渞aise standards of conduct in the system鈥 and would enforce penalties against 鈥渞ecalcitrant organisations鈥. It passed the House of Representatives, but failed to pass the Senate in November 2019, after the third reading was deadlocked at 34鈥34 votes.

The votes of right-wing crossbench Senators Jacqui Lambie and Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party were crucial to the outcome, with the government having brought the聽bill聽to a vote聽believing聽Hanson鈥檚聽One Nation would support聽it. The government refused to rule out the possibility of attempting to pass the legislation in the future if it could get support in the Senate.

Insecure work

Across the 2000s and the past decade, a factor in the lowering of workers鈥 share of GDP has been the creeping increase in insecure work, including casualisation, contracting out, the so-called 鈥済ig economy鈥 of short term, episodic work, and the increasing prevalence of part time work.

The Australian Bureau of Statistics鈥 and Australian National University聽study of聽the 2016 census showed that聽a third of the workforce (half for women workers) were working less than full-time hours (35 hours a week)聽and聽that this part-time work proportion of the workforce had been steadily increasing since the 1970s.

Now, in late 2020,聽the聽labour share of GDP聽is聽at 49.4% as at June 鈥 a historic low聽鈥斅爏lightly lower than that of 1959.聽As at 2018, the聽unionisation rate聽is just聽13.7%.

A large proportion of workers are now staring down the聽barrel聽of unemployment for years, older workers聽are聽unlikely to work again and young workers may not work for years 鈥 becoming聽鈥渟carred鈥澛爁or聽employers who聽want聽fresher talent.

The industrial relations environment has steadily moved to be increasingly hostile towards workers鈥 industrial rights and聽good聽economic outcomes.聽At the same time, unions apparently represent聽only聽about a tenth of the workforce.

A balance sheet needs to be drawn as to whether workers have been well served 鈥 or not 鈥 by their institutional representative bodies in the industrial world and聽their聽supposed political representatives聽in Labor.

In the 1980s,聽Labor聽partly capitulated to the industrial demands of the then growing corporate world and, in giving rein to economic rationalism, has facilitated it.

Corporations聽have聽burst beyond聽Australia鈥檚聽boundaries to become multinational corporates on the world stage, identifying their interests with that of international capital.聽Globally, they聽demand聽workers鈥櫬爁ull capitulation to whatever value is put on them individually, without reference to any collective demands.

In the late 2000s,聽Labor聽gave individual workers back their rights, but kept the聽Workplace Relations Act聽and WorkChoices restrictions聽in place;聽this聽severely hampered聽workers鈥 ability to collectively organise.

Since then, the Coalition has added more oppressive institutions to bully and harass workers and their unions.

But there are new unions that give hope: the Retail and Fast Food Workers鈥 Union; the Hospitality Union (an offshoot of the United Workers鈥 Union); and the Australian Unemployed Workers鈥 Union. The Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union, and the Maritime Workers鈥 Union remain militant, and that is what now matters.聽And, according to The Centre for Future Work, the ACTU claims there has been聽a resurgence in union membership 鈥斅爏omething to be聽welcomed.

While unions may seek to influence聽Labor聽in matters of industrial policy and legislation, it shouldn鈥檛 be confined to that聽party.聽Unions聽must聽take counsel聽from their members聽and seek聽to build broader聽solidarity聽for workers鈥櫬爄ndustrial聽rights and聽the myriad other social and ecological issues聽if we are going to increase workers鈥 share above 50% of GDP again.

[Paul Oboohov is a long-time unionist and a member of the聽Socialist Alliance.]

You need 91自拍论坛, and we need you!

91自拍论坛 is funded by contributions from readers and supporters. Help us reach our funding target.

Make a One-off Donation or choose from one of our Monthly Donation options.

Become a supporter to get the digital edition for $5 per month or the print edition for $10 per month. One-time payment options are available.

You can also call 1800 634 206 to make a donation or to become a supporter. Thank you.