McCarten lashes CTU
May 4th, 2008 at 8:59 am by David FarrarMatt McCarten has lashed the CTU for not supporting the junior doctors on strike – all but calling them scabs:
There is a sacred principle among trade unionists: when a group of workers is on strike you support them to the hilt. To side with the boss is the most serious of all crimes.
Working-class history is full of epic struggles that led to better wages and conditions. Crossing a picket line banished the offender to lifetime alienation as a “scab” with whom no working person of good character would associate. …
So last week I was gobsmacked to see the head of the trade union movement publicly attack the junior doctors’ two-day strike and their union leadership. It’s not as if CTU president Helen Kelly doesn’t know any better – her parents were staunch unionists.
This is harsh stuff from the head of UNITE Union about the head of the CTU, especially as UNITE is affiliated to the CTU. This may be the opening shot in replacing the Government friendly leadership with more aggressive leadership.
Kelly says she hopes the strike “doesn’t give unions a bad name” and the doctors’ union is not a “modern union”. This is because it focuses too much on getting better wages and conditions for its members and lacks professional advisers, “such as policy analysts, economists, lawyers and advocates”. Its crimes include not attending talk-fests with Ministry of Health and DHB officials and other unions to “work towards a better health system”.
She seems to think a modern union levies its members to employ “professional advisers” so they can have meetings with the ever-expanding health bureaucracy. Maybe the doctors are smarter than she thinks. I’m told that if all the DHB bureaucrats had to go into hospital there wouldn’t be enough beds available. I’m sure you need a talk-fest to see what the real problem is.
McCarten is right that there are more administrators than hospital beds.
The doctors’ union says it costs the taxpayer $100 million for locums. They say the $300-$500 an hour paid to locums during the strike, for the jobs that pay them $23 an hour, is more than their entire wage demand.
So instead of attacking the union, the president of the CTU should be demanding that Cunliffe stop lining up with the hospital bosses and make sure the doctors get a decent salary.
Otherwise, the doctors’ accusation that the CTU president seems more interested in looking after her mates in the Government than workers does seem to have a ring of truth to it.
Hasn’t a CTU official just been made a Labour candidate? Really what McCarten seems to be saying is that the CTU should put the interests of “labour” ahead of “Labour”.
Related posts:
- McCarten for Mana
- CTU asks UNITE to explain unpaid PAYE tax
- McCarten on Little
- McCarten on KiwiSaver law
May 4th, 2008 at 9:41 am
Never thought I’d say this, but Matt McCarten has a (very sharp and well-expressed) point. Like it or not, the junior doctors are taking perfectly legal industrial action — which one might have thought the Labour Party and CTU were awfully big on. From a purely pragmatic point of view, does anyone think already fraught contract negotiations are being helped by Minister ‘Silent T’ and his macho posturing, or what stinks of union officials and their power games?
Vote:May 4th, 2008 at 9:58 am
Deborah Powell and her union will get the credit but a dramatic increase in medical pay is inexorable. The gap between NZ pay rates and those available outside for people with internationally recognised qualifications has become too great. If they do not get dramatic increases they will not be here.
Vote:A medical pay dispute is our canary in the mine, in the sense that it is the one area where ordinary people are forced to care that we are dropping out of the first world competition for skill.
Our medical system has been sheltered for a couple of decades by the influx of South Africans who had limited alternatives, but that supply is no longer enough.
I hope the junior doctors hold out for long enough to ensure that the consequent huge hole in the health budget is evident before the election. Otherwise it will simply become another of the nasty realities National will have to “uncover’ after the election.
May 4th, 2008 at 10:30 am
“Really what McCarten seems to be saying is that the CTU should put the interests of “labour” ahead of “Labour”.”
Yep, to the extent that the interests of “labour” and “Labour” don’t overlap, this seems eminently reasonable. And Matt McCarten can think independently… who would have thought?! Hold the presses! Such a surprise, oh dear, I shall have to go and get a flat white without delay.
Except to say that I am not sure that a pay increase, especially a dramatic one, can be “inexorable” (see OED definition below). Maybe it can at the margin, but why not just stop trying to impress with your tenuous grasp of educated English; “inevitable” is what you mean, Franks. You’re a Nat now, remember, so you’re supposed to be anti-intellectual.
inexorable, a. (n.) Incapable of being persuaded or moved by entreaty; that cannot be prevailed upon to yield to request, esp. in the way of mercy or indulgence; not to be moved from one’s purpose or determination; relentless, rigidly severe. a. Of persons, their actions or attributes.
Oh, and also, is Ranapia developing a “silent T” also. Thought he was doing very well there, until I got to the gratuitous “silent T”.
Vote:May 4th, 2008 at 10:36 am
Commie infighting
Vote:May 4th, 2008 at 10:57 am
Childish I know, but I wonder if Farr has a silent “t” as well. eh! pete
Vote:May 4th, 2008 at 11:29 am
I suppose that’s the problem with the CTU trying to stick their cock in two cash registers
Vote:May 4th, 2008 at 12:08 pm
Great piece from McCarten.
I wonder if Kelly’s attitude would have been the same if it was a more traditional “Labour” union entering the fight.
I am a Senior Medical Officer in a major DHB and I can tell you that the RMOs are definitely prepared to negotiate. But the DHBs interpretation of negotiation is best summarised as “Nah”.
I can also tell you with absolute certainty that if the oft-denied exodus of NZ trained doctors to Australia is a problem right now, you ain’t seen nothing yet. If the DHBs are triumphant, the current staffing crisis for RMOs will look like a kindergarten picnic.
But then we can always rape the developed world for their best doctors. We’re buying their food to make petrol now anyway so what’s another kick in the guts for them……………..
And jafapete, how about some constructive comments rather than smart-arse ad hominem. Please.
Vote:May 4th, 2008 at 12:13 pm
McCarten is right, of course. Well, actually he’s left but in this instance he’s spot on. Has he been reading No Minister?
http://nominister.blogspot.com/2008/04/open-letter-to-andrew-little.html
Vote:May 4th, 2008 at 12:19 pm
That would be jafapete with a silent “t” then …
Vote:May 4th, 2008 at 12:32 pm
“And jafapete, how about some constructive comments rather than smart-arse ad hominem. Please.”
He saves it for his blog. Hard to log onto tho, so many people reading.
Vote:May 4th, 2008 at 12:32 pm
Okay rightofleftcentre, just for you. Sorry about the ad hominum, just couldn’t resist the pompos… oops, there I go again. And I still think the “silent T” was uncalled for.
I’m right with you and Matt (and Franks, I guess).
You may have heard the excellent coverage of this dispute a couple of weeks ago on RadioNZ, where all sides got a thorough airing. What became clear is that, when all is said and done, it’s about the international labour market, stupid.
So I’m more inclined to think that the DHBs are the meat in the sandwich, and that the real villains are the MoH bureaucrats, who must be providing some appalling advice to their minister. In the long-term I think it would be a very constructive thing to hold these people accountable. I have noted elsewhere on kiwiblog that I think that bureaucratic capture has played a major role in the current government’s problems, and here’s another example, it seems.
Where to get the money in the meantime? Well, when the massive increase in spending on MFAT was announced recently I tried to argue on this blog that spending the money on junior docs should be a greater priority than new embassies in Stockholm, etc. Got little or no support…
Edit, good one virtualmark! Hadn’t thought of that.
Vote:May 4th, 2008 at 12:37 pm
Thanks jafapete – I think you are absolutely right (no pun intended
) when you say the DHBs are the meat in a very tight sandwich – the MOH and Cunnliffe in particular have defined the gameplay, no question.
And a minor though important correction to my post – I meant we can rape the _developing_ world – not the developed. We have for years taken the best that the Pacific Islands have to offer and only given tokens back.
Vote:May 4th, 2008 at 12:45 pm
jafapete, I’m inclined to agree with you that the MoH have managed to both capture the decision making and escape both responsibility and public scrutiny. If what the doctors are saying is true … that their pay scales are well well below Australia let alone other countries like the US, and that the money spent on locums is as big as it is … then it’s hard to see how any of us citizens are going to be well served by saying no to the junior doctors.
It seems pretty clear that the current structure & culture in the public health sector isn’t working. But I wonder if any of the political parties are prepared to have another go at re-organising it …
Vote:May 4th, 2008 at 12:53 pm
“But I wonder if any of the political parties are prepared to have another go at re-organising it …?”
NO! I know a few DHB managers, some quite senior, and they are adamant that it would be a very bad thing to try anymore restructuring, whatever the flaws in the current regime. This is yet another area crying out for a non-partisan approach…
Vote:May 4th, 2008 at 1:00 pm
This is an admission that unions (or at least the CTU-centric ones) are part of the State apparatus rather than there to support improved pay and working conditions for their members. This was rather like the situation in the former USSR.
This reminds me of the devout French communist who emigrated to Russia in the 1960′s. He got a factory job and in due course got disenchanted with things, so he organised a strike. The authorities put him into a mental hospital. Their thinking was impeccible – anyone who organised a strike in this way in USSR had to be nuts.
Vote:May 4th, 2008 at 1:08 pm
McCarten is right to criticise Helen Kelly on this – I commented last week that her comments in the SST were out of line, and I’ve even told her as much myself. When workers are on strike you support them, you don’t backstab them, whether or not they’re part of the CTU.
I don’t see any evidence that this is part of a wider power-play on Matt’s part, just another attempt at wedge politics from the right.
[DPF: Yes Matt is known for his lack of ambition, and just accepting the status quo instead of trying to change it]
Vote:May 4th, 2008 at 1:13 pm
“You may have heard the excellent coverage of this dispute a couple of weeks ago on RadioNZ”
Haw haw.. wot a troglodyte. Radio Soviet Socialist NZ? Only the party faithful still bother. One dimensional leftist rubbish disguised as objective comment. Truly Stalinist.
“wedge politics from the right”
Hahaha.. its nothing to fucken do with the ‘right’. Its M.. M.. M.. McCarten taking a political shot at someone with a job he reckons he could do better.
Vote:May 4th, 2008 at 1:18 pm
“I don’t see any evidence that this is part of a wider power-play on Matt’s part, just another attempt at wedge politics from the right.”
You sad little leftie wanker Tane, so Matt is a rightie now because he has spoken the truth, still maybe he is as he probably is on a good little earner now what with all his income from the filthy right wing rags he writes for—he may be heading for “rich prick” status.
Vote:May 4th, 2008 at 1:20 pm
“But I wonder if any of the political parties are prepared to have another go at re-organising it …?” Easy, get Michael Laws and Wayne Brown to propose a set of changes and implement them. Centralise IT has to be a no brainer, there will be at least another half dozen things that could be done to free up a bit of money to spend on the frontline.
Vote:May 4th, 2008 at 1:54 pm
“…just another attempt at wedge politics from the right.”
Plain words from McCarten and nothing else. Give up your conspiracy theories and face up reality: the CTU is a mouthpiece of the socialist Labour Party and Kelly, its boss, will obey whatever orders she’s given.
FLG Tane, what are you smoking these days?
Vote:May 4th, 2008 at 1:54 pm
One of the funniest things on the NZ blogosphere in recent times has been the attempts by right-wingers, who know nothing about these matters, to promote the idea of a power wrangle within the NZCTU.
Such tosh. There may very well be some trade unionists who think that Kelly has had an easy ride to the top, but she’s only just been installed and is not under any threat and is not likely to be in the foreseeable future. Contrary to what the right-wing Hive people would have you believe, Laila and Matt are fully occupied at the moment in negotiations over the proposed merger between their unions and the SFWU, on top of everything else on their busy schedules. As Tane puts it, this is just another attempt at wedge politics from the right.
Vote:May 4th, 2008 at 2:53 pm
“One of the funniest things on the NZ blogosphere in recent times has been the attempts by right-wingers, who know nothing about these matters, to promote the idea of a power wrangle within the NZCTU.”
Course we know about these matters jafa. I hear that ten of the members walked out of the last meeting to set up their own union when the other nine voted for only purchasing their cloth caps from a proper unionised hat maker, not the Chinese hat maker who is ten times cheaper and has been officially approved by the labour parties political wing.
Meanwhile the poor of south jafaland are still starving!
Vote:May 4th, 2008 at 3:00 pm
Most of the Unionists are in it for themselves and are waiting for thier change to became a Labour MP.
They have no interest in the worker.
Vote:May 4th, 2008 at 4:02 pm
“Most of the Unionists are in it for themselves and are waiting for thier change to became a Labour MP.
They have no interest in the worker.”
Bugger me Mark how can you say this when you really know that Andrew Little spends all his waking (wanking) hours worrying about the workers of his EMUs union.
Vote:He has absolutely NO interest in getting a cushy job with the Liars Party.
If it was not for the (stupid) worker, people like Andrew (and his bum-boy Tane) would have to seek real work.
Since they have all been to UNI and are superior to common people that be very unfair.
So keep paying your $6 a week EMU people (or has it gone up since I arseholed them) so the EMUs can fight for your (their) rights.
May 4th, 2008 at 5:23 pm
McCarten’s wrong here. There are times when criticism of one union by another is valid – especially when the union is demanding overly inflationary wage/salary increases which result in unemployment. A good Union leadership is a disciplined and realistic one. Whether or not that’s the case in the instance of the Junior doctor’s strike, I’m not sure.
Vote:May 4th, 2008 at 5:33 pm
McCarten is right. Well actually, he’s left but in this instance he’s right on the button. Maybe he has been reading No Minister.
http://nominister.blogspot.com/2008/04/open-letter-to-andrew-little.html
Vote:May 4th, 2008 at 5:38 pm
“McCarten’s wrong here. There are times when criticism of one union by another is valid – especially when the union is demanding overly inflationary wage/salary increases which result in unemployment. A good Union leadership is a disciplined and realistic one. Whether or not that’s the case in the instance of the Junior doctor’s strike, I’m not sure.”
Much as I dislike it Nomestradamus I must agree with you here. When the British Union of Facists (who had a very well disciplined and realistic leadership under Oswald Mosely) said “Kill the commie bastards” how could I not agree with you.
Vote:May 4th, 2008 at 5:52 pm
I must say that I have the doubtful privelege of sort of knowing Ms Powell, and unless she has changed over the years her main interest is in causing as much trouble for “the boss class” as she can, regardless of who that may be. Negotiating with her can be extremely frustrating.
That said, Cunliffe has brought this upon himself and the health system by trying to buy peace and quiet with the senior doctors in an election year. One major group in the health sector gets 10% per year for 3 years, why should the next major group to enter bargaining settle for less ? To be fair, there are many possible reasons why perhaps they should, now go and explain to the junior doctors why the senior doctors on, what was it, an average of $180K pa, should get 10% while they, on something like $75K (which includes a lot of overtime hours), should take 3%. You can see why they don’t like it, but for that to happen now, Cunliffe has to make a big backdown, and I doubt that he has the guts to do so. Look for more personal attacks against Ms Powell and the JD’s, that is Labours modus operandi after all.
Hey JP, you win my prize for the most unintentionally hilarious statement of the year to date, to wit “One of the funniest things on the NZ blogosphere in recent times has been the attempts by right-wingers, who know nothing about these matters, to promote the idea of a power wrangle within the NZCTU”. Almost as funny as the attempts by the left to deny it ! Remember, the script requires you to add “nothing to see, move along” at the end.
Vote:May 4th, 2008 at 6:11 pm
[DPF: Yes Matt is known for his lack of ambition, and just accepting the status quo instead of trying to change it]
Very snide David, but it still doesn’t give your clumsy attempt at wedge politics any credibility.
Vote:May 4th, 2008 at 6:14 pm
You sad little leftie wanker Tane, so Matt is a rightie now because he has spoken the truth,
If you read my comment, I made it clear I’m with Matt on this one. The attempt at wedge politics I’m referring to is DPF’s.
Vote:May 4th, 2008 at 6:30 pm
Are you with matt here Tane.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/author/story.cfm?a_id=284&objectid=10494170
Vote:May 4th, 2008 at 6:37 pm
Jafapete:
I suggest you have your little hissy at his colleagues in the Labour Party who coined it — there’s more than a few people who find his bumptious egotism less than endearing, and certainly don’t think his macho posturing is constructive in a complex and sensitive portfolio like Health. You don’t have to be a militant unionist to see why it’s plain stupid for a Minister of the Crown to attack one party in an already fraught public sector industrial dispute — unless you’re more interested in trying to built your media profile as a hard man with the common touch than anything else . Do you?
By the way Pete, I’ve had every vulgar descriptor for the vagina applied to me at one time or another around here. Coming from people whose opinions I don’t give a proverbial rat’s arse for, so what? I also fail to see the insult: It strikes me as a great compliment being compared to a functional and aesthetically pleasing part of the female body that has contributed much to human health and pleasure. Certainly more than you or Cunliffe ever will.
Vote:May 4th, 2008 at 7:41 pm
I have to agree with Matt M too. I don’t agree with his politics, but at least he is upfront about what he wants, and clear about how he thinks we should get there. I prefer the left to work that way – the sneaking sort of socialism is so much harder to combat.
The problem here is that most NZers don’t really care if we pay our managers too little and so get poor managers. How many discussions have I had on here about how being a manager is easy, and there are plenty of people who want the job, so why not just give some of them a chance.
They also don’t care if we pay our IT folk too little and get crap IT, if we pay our bureaucrats too little and get crap bureaucracy, all this stuff is just about the rich pricks complaining about not being rich enough. And if they just up and leave, well, good riddance.
But when it comes to health, well, everyone goes to a doctor eventually. And you notice when Auntie Joyce goes to a bad doctor and dies from something that was preventable in a first world country. Health care is where we first notice that we aren’t quite so first world as we used to be. And the problem is that you cannot have a first world health care system without a first world economy.
When Roger Nome bleats on about “endless growth” and how we evil righties live in la-la land. How growth must one day stop, because people today have everything they need – right now right here, out of all times in human history, out of all countries in the world, right now in NZ is the time that growth should stop. What he forgets is that one of the things that growth gives us is better health care. And if we want that, we have to keep growing.
I’m hoping that this argument festers on, that it becomes an even more expensive strike, and that the doctors start pointing out how their pay really compares with offshore. Because once we agree that it is important to pay them more, we’ll also have to start thinking about whether health is a protected sector of the economy (you know, like Cuba – great doctors but the rest of the place is crap), or whether we need the whole country to get richer.
Vote:May 4th, 2008 at 9:40 pm
Ratnapia: “It strikes me as a great compliment being compared to a functional and aesthetically pleasing part of the female body that has contributed much to human health and pleasure.”
Oh, I didn’t realise you were paying Cunnliffe a compliment. Silly me.
Seriously, I agree with you about being abused by some people in these environs, one of whom seems to be taking an enforced break for too much of said abusing; so you may take it as a compliment that I was so disappointed that you should stoop to this. Cunnliffe is an over-ambitious, smarmy bastard to be sure, but does not deserve that level of abuse.
I’ve blogged on this story elsewhere, BTW.
Vote:May 4th, 2008 at 10:03 pm
“I’ve blogged on this story elsewhere, BTW.”
Wow…!! Server dealing with the traffic OK??
Vote:May 4th, 2008 at 10:09 pm
Now, that’s mildly funny. As for levels of abuse, I will spare the delicate sensibilities of your average Kiwiblog reader and decline to share some uncensored assessments of Cunliffe I’ve heard from various folks in the health sector. I just hope they brush their teeth and gargle before giving CPR.
Vote:May 4th, 2008 at 11:26 pm
I just love the leftie spin that this is all rightwing weg politics.
The Union movement was more meek during the term of this Government than any other in our history ….. and what has it got?……. or at least that will probably be McCarten’s view.
Just look at McCarten’s record in taking over and reinventing the Hotel Workers Union – a Union that suffered from poor leadership and was ‘conservative’ and certainly not a mover and shaker in the Labour Party.
I suspect the McCarten &Co think the CTU is fat and lazy, and that despite a Labour Government it’s done precious little to rebuild the union movement. It’s been too willing to put the political interests of the Labour Party ahead of the interests of members, in return relatively small concessions from Labour – who despite the rhetoric pretty much leave the market to operate and have resisted changing many of the fundamentals inherited from National.
They are also expecting a change of government and a slowing of the economy coinciding with a new National led Government. This is fertile ground for a newly assertive union movement – one builds via the struggle. This profile and organisation will have an affect on a Labour Party that is somewhat lost with the defeat of Clark – with a power vacuum and decisions to make about “what went wrong”. The McCarten & Co analysis will be that Labour in Government was just far too timid – not really statist enough.
Vote:May 5th, 2008 at 7:17 am
Sorry about the double post. David, would you kindly delete one of them? The first one did not appear for an hour or so.
Vote:May 5th, 2008 at 10:32 am
BTW, nice to see there’s no spare dosh to settle the junior doctors’ pay claim, but over $600 million (and how much more to come we’ve not been told about?) to buy Michael Cullen a shiny new train set. Talk about FUBAR priorities…
Vote:May 5th, 2008 at 7:10 pm
Graig, it’s actually a dull old worn out train set.
Vote: