Well done Len
January 9th, 2012 at 12:00 pm by David FarrarIt only took a couple of blog posts pointing out his donations from the Maritime Union, and Len has leapt into life on the issue of the militant industrial action by the union. Better late than never, I say. The Herald reports:
Auckland Mayor Len Brown has issued an ultimatum to the Maritime Union in the bitter industrial dispute on the city’s wharves, saying there must be more flexibility in work practices to make the port more productive and profitable for the council.
Excellent. It is not just a matter of being more profitable for the Council – it is also being productive and competitive for its customers. They do have choice, and have been using it to desert Auckland.
Mr Brown – a member of the Labour Party who received a $2000 donation from the Maritime Union towards his 2010 election campaign – yesterday said the board and management of the 100 per cent council-owned port company had his full confidence but he refused to express confidence in the union, which he was not responsible for.
It is good he has now backed the Council owned company.
In a sign that he is standing up to the union, which is set to strike again tomorrow for 48 hours, Mr Brown said it was time to review some of the decades-long work practices to reflect the increasing and changing trends of the international shipping market.
The practices are probably little changed from the 70s.
Maritime Union president Garry Parsloe said the union had offered to investigate changes to improve productivity …
Ha, offered to investigate. How stupid does he think Ports of Auckland management are, that they don’t realise that is no commitment at all.
Related posts:
- Is this why Len won’t back his board?
- Maritime Union wants total control
- The national interest in making the ports more efficient
- Twyford attacks Brown over POAL
January 9th, 2012 at 12:17 pm
As a matter of interest, where is the ‘ultimatum’ that was mentioned by the Herald? I can’t see one in any report – an ultimatum means… ‘If you don’t do so and so,. then we will [fill in the gap].
No such ultimatum mentioned by Len in any reports – just a wish that the parties could resolve the dispute ASAP.
Quelle surprise – looks like the Herald has inserted words not uttered by Len / left out Len’s ‘ultimatum’ / or they have just made something up.
Vote:January 9th, 2012 at 12:22 pm
Would you prefer he said he wouldn’t investigate David.
Vote:I noted in the article that the management shouted a bbq or similar last year for record productivity, very odd.
But at least old Lenny is rattling the sabres which should keep a few peeps happy, I think I can hear them from here.
January 9th, 2012 at 12:24 pm
From my experience fifty odd years ago, their practices are little changed from those of the sixties and possibly even the fifties.
Back then, product was loaded by way of sling, with a gang on the wharf loading the sling from a railway wagon while another gang working on board stowed the product in the hold. In my case is was frozen lamb and butter, loaded at Opua. Being cockies and cockies’ sons, we worked like hell and achieved record productivity – with record bonuses for same. In 1964 my take home pay for eight days work was eighty pounds.
The Auckland unionists must have been given a rev up by the shipping companies because they sent a ‘heavy’ up to Opua to tell the bumpkins the error of their ways. You see, in Auckland they had to have two gangs for each sling so that the poor bastards could have an hour off in the shade after each hour of work.
He was frog marched the length of the wharf and thrown into the sea, never to be seen again.
This episode is unlikely to be found in the official history of MUNZ, or as it is known today, MUNTERNZ.
Vote:January 9th, 2012 at 12:26 pm
An ultimatum usually infers at least one alternative.
Vote:Privatisation?
See – http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10777330
January 9th, 2012 at 12:33 pm
“Maritime Union president Garry Parsloe said the union had offered to investigate changes to improve productivity …”
Oh the arrogance of some socialists.
Vote:Message to Gary………
The PoA belongs to the ratepayers, not to you.
It is our money, not yours.
You buy the place Garry, then you can run it.
January 9th, 2012 at 12:34 pm
It’s hard to escape the conclusion that Len Brown is running with the fox and hunting with the hounds.
Vote:January 9th, 2012 at 12:52 pm
@Yvette – that biased view was penned by Matt McCarten. If any suggestion of ‘privatisation’ was based on pillow talk from his partner on the Auckland Council, then McCarten should say so – but Len has come out today saying that the sale / privatisation of the POA, is currently not an option.
What Brown should state, is that this has gone on far too long and he is appalled that the value of this ratepayer asset is dropping like a stone. So, unless the militant Maritime Union pulls their head in / stops striking / gets back to work, then Brown will put to Council a recommendation that the POA is sold off before the asset becomes a liability.
But don’t expect this any time soon. Len is a Clayton’s Mayor – the Mayor you have when you don’t have a Mayor. As soon as the going gets tough, Len disappears.
Vote:January 9th, 2012 at 1:05 pm
Did I understand that McCarten’s pillow talk partner is a Union supporting member of the Auckland Council ?
Vote:Please correct me if I misunderstood.
January 9th, 2012 at 1:16 pm
What Brown should … put to Council a recommendation that the POA is sold off before the asset becomes a liability.
I thought Brown is a Labour man
Vote:Labour campaigned not to sell our assets
January 9th, 2012 at 1:46 pm
@Paulus
From what I have heard…
Vote:Former Alliance president Cathy Casey is Matt McCarten’s partner.
She is a former member of the “National Distribution Union” and in the 2010 Auckland Council elections Casey was elected from the Albert-Eden-Roskill ward.
January 9th, 2012 at 1:53 pm
@Paulus / Other Andy:
Confirmation here – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cathy_Casey
Vote:January 9th, 2012 at 2:46 pm
What Brown should state, is that this has gone on far too long and he is appalled that the value of this ratepayer asset is dropping like a stone.
It seems odd no-one’s actually holding accountable for it the man who’s accountable for it: the CEO. He’s picked a fight with the union, got one, and is now whinging about the bad effect it’s having. Instead of handwringing about how it might be better to have a de-unionised workforce, how about some enquiries into how this master of the universe got his company into this situation and what he plans to do about it beyond bleating pathetically to the nation’s business journos?
Vote:January 9th, 2012 at 2:49 pm
An ultimatum usually infers at least one alternative.
Privatisation?
That’s the Herald putting words in Brown’s mouth. You’ll notice in the article he actually makes no ultimatum and rules out privatisation. Just the Herald jollying Christine Fletcher’s agenda along a bit.
Vote:January 9th, 2012 at 3:17 pm
The solution isn’t hard. Get rid of anything / anyone to do with the militant Maritime Union and run the Ports of Auckland along the same lines as the highly successful and equally efficient, Port of Tauranga.
The CEO at Auckland has already offered the Union very generous increases [to their $91,000+ pa) but the Union has seen fit to dig in its toes and demand (yes, demand) the right to tell the POA who they will employ! Whaaaat?
The Union has no ‘right’ to ‘demand’ anything in any Company including the POA. And the intransigent attitude of the Maritime Union will now cost jobs at the POA because the strike action has prompted customers to modify their supply chain to drop Auckland and include Tauranga (and Napier).
Gee – these job losses will come as a surprise, won’t they?
Vote:January 9th, 2012 at 3:24 pm
Psycho Milt seems to have summed this up very well.
Vote:January 9th, 2012 at 4:26 pm
Unlucky – the grandstanding / posturing by the Maritime Union (and the leftards) has been overtaken by events.
The POA has just delivered an ultimatum – take the offer as tabled or they will contract out. The CEO has clearly had enough.
Excellent.
Vote:January 9th, 2012 at 6:00 pm
@ Adolf 12:24 pm …
Thanks for the chuckle, “MUNTERNZ” indeed. And thanks for the reminder too….
‘m surprised you got away with that back then. As you likely know, in those days Wharfies were right up there with the Boilermakers Union for that sort of system-rorting and for the Heavies. I’ve been in rooms where men spoke proudly of how the Union made a “co-op” agreement with the Service Workers Union so that if Union X (choose one of 2 above) went on strike, the tea ladies and Caf girls would go out … thereby forcing the rest of the unions to support. Yup, real good faith bargaining that.
Vote: