By Peter Perkins SYDNEY — The Carr government has begun to restructure the State Rail Authority in line with the neo-liberal economic recommendations advocated by Hilmer. Last April the state premiers endorsed the National Competition Policy. In August Carr announced that the NSW rail industry would be restructured along the lines of other government "enterprises" that provide infrastructure such as gas, power and water services. All of the public transport unions, including the PTU, Australian Services Union and NSW Labour Council, have offered their support for the National Competition Policy despite reservations. The old State Rail has been split into four new entities: 1. New State Rail will be the passenger services provider, containing the services Countrylink and CityRail. 2. Rail Services Authority will be a fully commercial business and will look after track maintenance business and rolling stock overhaul and repair. 3. Freight Rail Corporation will probably be the first section to be privatised since it has been first to be corporatised and would be the most advantageous to private industry. 4. Rail Access Corporation will negotiate use of track by other private operators. It will set the standards for new operators, including timetables, fees and methods of safe work. Ownership of the tracks and related infrastructure will be taken out of the SRA and put into a "specialised business".
Fares to rise
There is a simultaneous recommendation that fares be increased on longer metropolitan journeys (i.e. Sydney's outer western suburbs, Blue Mountains, Gosford-Newcastle and Wollongong) by more than 50% and in some cases that they double. This would disadvantage poorer workers, those who can least afford to live closer to the CBD. More commuters will be forced into their cars at a time when governments have an obligation to provide us all with cleaner air and environmental quality. Private motorway groups, under contractual arrangements, will be compensated if the government affects the patronage of their roads by setting up any "competing" public transport services. A new six-member board has been set up to expedite the delivery of the state's biggest "business", the State Rail Authority, to the financial wolves. None on the board have any experience or qualifications in the transport arena. All are Labor Party loyalists whose credentials are limited to the outdated theories of economic rationalism. Sydney barrister Michael Sexton, according to transport minister Brian Langton's office, found his way onto the board by being " a regular CityRail commuter". According to the
Telegraph Mirror newspaper, he once stood unsuccessfully for Labor Party preselection. Others include Labour Council industrial officer Gail Gregory; "competition policy expert" Rodney Simms, a former economic adviser to Bob Hawke; Paul Espie, listed as "continuing member"; John O'Brien, an accountant; and John Menadue, previous private secretary to Gough Whitlam and News Limited ex-general manager. The sell-off, however, has hit a few submerged snags which have slowed the whole process. Auditor General Tony Harris has said his office has received more than 80 submissions alleging corruption, mismanagement, fraud and what was termed "ineffectiveness". Harris' office has revealed that two employees received $500,000 compensation pay-outs. The SRA is at present in a state of paralysis. One of the biggest scandals, that of the multimillion dollar Tangara train tendering, should hit the mainstream media any day now. Also, recently there was the revelation that a senior manager of the SRA awarded himself a contract cleaning trains for the sum of $4 million per year. Then there are those who have sold their expertise to the new owners only to sell their wares as private consultants back to the SRA at inflated prices. It is easy to draw parallels with the same process as it occurred in the Soviet bureaucracy, albeit here on a modest scale. Privatisation is little more than a cover for theft of public property in the name of "responsible economic management".
Union response
A fact sheet released by the national office of the Public Transport Union points out that public transport contracting is targeted to "increase seven times over". In a submission the PTU gave to the Industry Commission through the ACTU, it pointed out that "contracting out means a worse Australian economy and society". Specific concerns were that 81,400 full-time public sector jobs would be eliminated, reducing the wages of workers carrying on the contracted functions by 25-50%. It adds that when services are privatised, the quality of service to the public declines. Instead of being more "efficient", it: transfers wealth to the rich at the expense of the workers; lacks accountability to the government and the people; leaves consumers to fend for themselves; doesn't save us or the government money as predicted; reduces union membership; reduces wages and working conditions, including superannuation contributions of the affected employees; ultimately lessens ecological sustainability by denial of unprofitable public services and cost cutting. The Industry Commission agrees that there are problems, but says that they can be fixed by drawing up "better" contracts. Simultaneously it calls for avoiding "so much detailed specification as to inhibit the contractor in producing the required output". And it insists "that public sector wages and conditions should not transfer to the contractor". The PTU National Executive on November 30 decided that a national political and industrial campaign against contracting out would follow from the release of the Industry Commission Final Report on Competitive Tendering and Contracting. So far, however, words have replaced action. The unions in question have devoted their energies and money to the election of state and federal ALP. They pretend to be fighting against privatisation, but they support the very party and policies that diminish the conditions and wages of their members. Perhaps the biggest attack will come through the recently announced enterprise bargaining agreements. The latest round, EBA no. 3, sets the scene for workplace changes that will be needed for privatisation to occur. The agreement provides two 3% wage increases between now and July 1 basically for agreeing to the new structure. "The new Business Entities must be established to allow them to successfully withstand contestability of services and to compete effectively from the commencement of their operations." So goes the PTU publicity blurb in a language more suited to a Harvard Business School graduate than a member of the union. Cooperation between unions, management and workers is emphasised, along with the absence of any industrial disputation. The "consultative machinery" will agree on such issues as recruitment, staff transfers, appeal rights, entitlements, redeployment and retraining, and many of the rights which gave workers job security in the past. The aim is to create a "flexible" work force which will "complement the competitive business needs of the new organisations". No talk of providing low cost transport for the general public here; the process is geared to profit only. Workers are cynical in the extreme. They don't see the union looking after their interests; they are losing interest in the fight. Right-wing PTU president Harold Dwyer was elected president with just 27.92% of members voting nationally. A strategy of union democratisation must begin in the workplace. There must be open and continuing discussions, including those that deal with the role of the ALP. We, the workers of the PTU, don't even get to ratify the EBAs.