Indeed, Waterfront reads like a political thriller, right down to the story of the union's own 'deepthroats' inside Workplace Relations Minister Peter Reith's own department and amongst the non-unionised 'mercenary' workforce of Fynwest, destined for training in Dubai, who provided valuable leaks to John Coombs of the MUA about both the government's and Patrick's actions and intentions. Through an intelligent legal campaign and clever use of the militant tactics of community pickets and 'peaceful assemblies', the MUA was able to get its members back to work and thus prevent the successful establishment of non-unionised labour on the Australian wharves. There was a trade off, however. The deal eventually struck with Patrick Stevedores led to an increase in casualised workers on the wharves. The share prices of Patrick's parent company, Lang Corp, increased significantly and the MUA and trade union movement had to operate under the reality of the restrictive provisions of the federal government's Workplace Relations Act .
Waterfront captures the ambiguous nature of the union's victory.
Waterfront is written by two working journalists, and perhaps this accounts for their interpretation of the dispute largely as a conflict between individuals. On the one hand, this is a strength, because it makes for a compelling read. However by representing the dispute as a story of political intrigue, the authors have tended to overlook the broader issues which are crucial to understanding such industrial conflict. The MUA dispute is presented as a clash between an old-style union culture and the realities of the modern economy, whereas such militant conflict between, workers, business and the state, has been and continues to be a characteristic of working life in Australia. It is portrayed as something unique, rather than an example of conflict that is at the core of the relationship between capital and labour.