The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > IR reforms herald prosperity > Comments

IR reforms herald prosperity : Comments

By Paul Gollan, published 30/9/2005

Paul Gollan argues the success of the IR reforms will be based on employees' perception of them.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. All
It is clear who will be the first to fall over the edge. The young and the unskilled. I thought the comments on apprentaships a little naive. High rates of pay stopping employers taking them on.Give it a rest.No matter what twist Govt. supporters attempt to put on the IR changes nothing will alter the fact that it is about making people work harder and longer for less. It is about increasing profits at the expense of wages. It has been acknowledged that it is about removing fairness from the system. The changes will not improve productivity. Mr Howard knows his constituents and he serves them well, the big end of town.The working people and thier Unions survived and outlasted Kennett and Court and it will be the same with the Wee Man.
Posted by hedgehog, Friday, 30 September 2005 10:17:36 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I shudder to think what will happen as under the current laws companies are trying to shift workers to AWA's and pay them less as evidenced by the court case that has just been completed (http://smh.com.au/news/banking/judge-blocks-bank-pay-cuts/2005/09/26/1127586791009.html) to quote from this article "(Justice) Merkel described the bank's individual and "unregulated contracts of employment" as an industrial regulation avoidance scheme which "possesses an ingenuity that is reminiscent of the tax avoidance schemes of the 1970s"."

Enjoyable reading for those on low rates of pay..........
Posted by ricthewheelie, Friday, 30 September 2005 10:53:59 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"relatively high-level apprenticeship wage " yes peanuts instead of dirt. I wonder if any of the people pushing these so called reforms has family members that work in unskilled or semi-skilled jobs?
Posted by Kenny, Friday, 30 September 2005 12:45:38 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul Gollan would like us to believe that all employers are benevolent and are going to ensure that AWAs will be fair for each employee. Ask the workers at Aldi supermarkets how much say they have had in negotiating a workplace agreement that suit their individual circumstances - it just didn't happen. They can be called to work at any time they might be needed, too bad if your childcare provisions don't match company needs.

He would have us believe that the planned IR changes will result in increased productivity. They may, and probably will, increase profitability, but productivity is a different matter entirely. All that will happen is that workers will lose their penalty rates for working outside what normal people consider to be normal working hours, they are unlikely to produce "more" in a given time period just because it happens to suit their bosses.

He would have us believe that the proposed IR law changes will result in higher levels of employment. Again, there is no strict correlation between profitability and a willingness to employ more people. It is far more likely that with the abolition of such things as penalty rates the same number of workers will be required to work longer hours. This is not a productivity increase - productivity means using fewer workers, working harder, to produce more widgets in a given hour.

Unless we can move away from this ideologically driven view of what the workplace should be like, we cannot begin to make sense of what can be done to end the under-employment and unemployment that is increasing the number of marginalised people in our community.

Trying to understand things from a purely economic point of view leaves out so much of what makes a nation operate. Then again, if you don't have to count those who have given up trying to get into the workforce then you can claim (!?!) to have reduced unemployment - or is that just typical government spin?
Posted by jimoctec, Friday, 30 September 2005 12:57:22 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Excellent post jimoctec. The IR changes will allow companies to pay their employees less. What they do with the resultant excess money is the key issue. Increased employment? That is an enormous leap of faith. If you own a business and come across a windfall of money, do you employ more people to soak that up? No. Decisions to hire or fire are mostly influenced by the demand of your product and your capacity to serve that demand. I agree with others before me in that the savings will transfer directly into profits, as with other cost cutting exercises. Far from reducing unemployment, the AFPC will only serve to increase employees’ subsidy of employers’ wealth.
Posted by Shan, Friday, 30 September 2005 2:35:24 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Mr Gollan says that "Business has argued that the relatively high-level apprenticeship wage used in state awards is a disincentive for employers." This is an attributed comment from "business" and I would be interested in knowing the source.

In a time of low unemployment, the laws of supply and demand suggest the opposite - that falling apprenticeship wages would exacerbate the skills shortage as young adults abandoned the system. According to a June 2005 DEST survey, the greatest problem for apprentices completing their studies was low wages (http://www.dest.gov.au/NR/rdonlyres/A496076E-DA01-44D9-A168-264FB98DCF20/5948/RevisedDSIReportSynopsisjune8.pdf page 14)

When business complains about the high cost of an input, it implies that they are assured of it's supply. If business is serious about addressing the skills shortage, they wouldn't be complaining about apprenticeship wages, and I don't believe that they are. Checkout this 2005 ACCI report: http://www.tcci.com.au/content/EET%20Policy/Apprenticeship%20Survey%20Attachment.pdf.

Finally, allow me to review the words "relatively-high wages". I suggest these words are correct if comparing Australian wages with wages in developing nations. Certainly, an apprentice wage of $242 per week cannot be considered high by any domestic standard.

Mr Gollan critiques the AIRC for putting "ambit claims by vested interests" ahead of "economic and labour market fundamentals. Given that business and government are vested interests, surely it is not the AIRC but the author who is deserving of this insulting remark.
Posted by David Latimer, Friday, 30 September 2005 2:48:59 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
In a time of low wages and near full employment howard sees a need for change, I wonder why?.
It has been shown that howard is a liar, according to n/paper polls the electors distrust him.
Howard is trying to emulate America and create a permanent low paid under class. As well it must be remembered that the underprivileged are ,or could be seen as Greens, Democrat or labour voters. The libs by pushing these people down will weaken their political opposition.
This push to demonise the ordinary worker is also liberal policy just like the destruction of medi-bank.
No one should trust howard or his mean spirited and miserable party. numbat
Posted by numbat, Friday, 30 September 2005 4:02:38 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I dispute that unemployment is the lowest its been for 25 years, lets not forget that 25 years ago unemployed was the number of people looking for full time work, whereas today a person working in paid or non-paid capacity for 30 minutes per week is "employed".

As I remember it the largest employers of apprentices used to be government departments like the PMG, Railways, Electricity Commission. My friends who started apprenticeships with private employers did not complete their apprenticeships when their employers went bankrupt or retired.

My experience with AWAs is sobering. I was sent an abbreviated AWA to sign and upon return of AWA I was rostered for casual work at various sites in the metro area. One day I was contacted at 11:30 am to start work at 2:30 pm that day. When I arrived at the work place I was told that I was no longer required. Upon investigation I found there was no mention of minimum call out times in the abbreviated AWA that I signed and the full copy of the AWA was held at the employers office.

I can't see people who work for other people having a decent and frugally comfortable future in our current industrial relations landscape.
Posted by sand between my toes, Friday, 30 September 2005 4:29:06 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
This is the kind of newspeak crap that is destroying this country. War is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength. Now let's add "AWAs are job security" and "long working hours and low wages is wealth."

I can't believe businesses and politicians actually promote this with a straight face, arguing that the already appalling slave labour apprentice wages are a disincentive to employing people. We must have a near third-world American system before employers will feel confident enough to start employing more people.

Mobility and flexibility, and the other newspeak terms used by businesses and politicians, is code for freedom to enslave people and sack them on a whim, among other things. Don't be fooled by the language that hides what they are really talking about.

Employers and right wing politicians won't be happy until they've driven us into the ground and we're too busy trying to survive to notice anything else, when they'll slip in voluntary voting, more corporate control and excessive privatisation, and goodbye Australia, hello Amerikkka...
Posted by ConspiracyTheory, Friday, 30 September 2005 4:33:06 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Australia is going to the dogs.

I'm outta here.
Posted by matt42, Friday, 30 September 2005 7:00:46 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
An open letter to John Howard:

Dear Prime Minister,

Why are you leading Australia down the path of greed, selfishness and the strong dominating the weak.

Since you have come to power:
1. WHAT have you done to improve egalitarianism in this country?
2. WHAT reform have you championed to reduce the gap between the rich and the poor?
3. WHAT legislation have you rushed through the Senate to help the poor, the destitute, the homeless.

That is apart from make the richest even richer so some of their scraps can trickle down to the masses.

Please Mr Prime Minister, remember: the rich factory owners don't need you to fight for them. Commercial Magnates do need you drafting new legislation to improve their rights. The strong, wealthy and the powerfull don't need you as their Hero.

If they did, they wouldn't be where they are now.

But there are THOUSANDS who are depending on you. It's the immigrant factory worker earning minimum award rates and who can't really read english. It's the single mum clerical worker who works lives from hand to mouth in Sydney and can't save for a house deposit. It's the 16 year old shop assistant who puts in unpaid overtime because she's afraid of loosing her job.

If YOU abandon them and hack away at the rights, who will be their defender! Who else will protect their standard of living? Big business don't care about the little people. All they care about is their bottom line.

It's one thing to try and make Australia more competitive, but why haven't we also heard from you regarding reducing the gap between the richest and the poorest. Not a day goes by without some Corporate Profit record being broken ... but haven't heard much from you about bold new initiatives to reduce poverty, protect workers rights or for that matter increase in Aboriginal life expectancy.

Protect the weak, champion the silent, defend the powerless. This, Prime Minister should be your supreme charge ... the needs of the wealthy can wait a little bit.

Yours sincerely,
A Concerned Australian.
Posted by Jebediah, Friday, 30 September 2005 11:06:07 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
What utter drivel, There will be nothing 'fair'about a system that abolishes a working AIRC and replaces it with an appointed panel of politically appointed cronies whose mission is to increase profits at the expense of workers.
What irks me is that the opposition has removed themselves from being the Party representing workers.They are afraid of being labelled Socialist.There is a desperate need for a party that sincerely strives for the welfare of the whole society instead of Corporate Australia..A Party with genuine passion
Wake up Australia.......Your Country needs you!
Posted by maracas, Friday, 30 September 2005 11:14:53 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
John Howard has forgotten what the real world is like. Employers are definitely not Santa Clauses, thats why unions were formed in the first place. I recall a lot of employer tricks, like firing a person just before a 20 year payout, or conning young people into working as a 'trial' and then informing them that they're not suitable - no pay, of course. The unfair dismissal laws need to be tightened, not abolished. What is to stop employers returning to the bad old days when you could lose your position because some manager didnt like you, or someone wanted your job for their cousin.

The IR laws need to be streamlined and tightened, but this seems to be going too far in the other direction.
Posted by dee, Friday, 30 September 2005 11:47:47 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Prosperity for who, Mr Gollan?

“Where wages are high, accordingly we shall always find the workmen more active, diligent, and expeditious than when wages are low: Adam Smith - “Wealth of Nations.”

From a great thinker who not only invented the free market, but also had the insight and common sense to reason that because his Laissez-faire gave freedom for the entrepreneur from government interference, the worker also had to be better looked after by governments by instilling better wages and better conditions.

It is the reason we have an arbitration system to handle such things lawfully, as Smith would have wanted, but with the Howard government virtually in full control with a captured Senate, there must be or should be, what hopes to be a host of older lawful and experienced eyes focused on this government, making sure that our existing arbitration laws are not interfered with.

Adam Smith’s quote gives reminder of my young wife at the time when we had been farming enough years to put on workers. In this case it was the fairer sex who suggested we offer our tried workers a reasonably good wage, and in a good season even a share of the crop. It was where an interest in sport sort of helped to bind boss and worker together. In this way it makes one feel grateful to a wonderful personage like Smith in his Wealth of Nations, for reminding us that though seeing the need for entrepreneurs, he would have also welcomed the later arbitration system to counteract the greed - a system that in all truth is now also part of his “invisible hand,” for those who believe in fair play.

George C, WA - Bushbred
Posted by bushbred, Saturday, 1 October 2005 2:17:00 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Mr. Gollan stated: "Changes to unfair dismissal laws will also be a major element in the forthcoming IR package and could be the litmus test for the eventual success of the reform package as a whole."

Unfair dismissal laws are unfair whether they are for an employer with more than 100 employees or only 3 employees. My understanding is that with these IR reforms, for employers with less than 100 employees there will be no unfair dismissal requirement.

I oppose unfair dismissal, no matter how many employees. Is justice for employees of small employers going down the tube with this IR reform?

Will Senator Barnaby Joyce stand up for employees of small employers this time?
Posted by OzSpen, Saturday, 1 October 2005 12:22:46 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
In this morning's paper john howard said - "IR laws will get rid of pests" That's sacking those who fellow employees, and the boss no doubt, consider to be a 'pain in the neck'(fair honest john's term)
Such as those who don't like dirty jokes eh little john.
Or those who have a different belief system and who want live by their beliefs at work.
Or perhaps those who do not like their bosses and/or workmates acting like sexual predators.
There are a stack of reasons fellow employees or bosses can use to paint the one who doesn't fit in as in honest little john's words 'a pain in the neck' worthy of being unemployed.
Please see this man er politician for exactly what he is. numbat
Posted by numbat, Saturday, 1 October 2005 12:57:01 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
More than 90% of jobs created since 1996, have been casual part time of less than 25 hours a week.

As most receive less $15 per hr, the average take home pay for these jobs, equates to under $250 a week.

These reforms are just another step on the road to one party control (lib/lab) and dictatorship. They both give the illusion that they are different, but reality shows that they are one and the same evil.

But wait, don't you all vote for either one, if not why are they still there. No excuse saying, no choice, after all we all have ideas that seem to be better than the ruling class, as can be seen by these forums.

So why wouldn't non aligned, ordinary people be more capable of running this country for us rather than for the minority elite, that is destroying all facets of our enjoyable society.

Could it be that we are too enslaved to have other than a voice in the background whilst our lives deteriorate into slavery.
Posted by The alchemist, Sunday, 2 October 2005 8:10:31 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Quite right Alchemist and such a movement has to start somewhere.What better start than " Now We the People" whose third National Conference in Melbourne last July to 'Advance Australia Fair--building sustainability,justice and peace' has made a start to reinvigorate our democratic institutions and the community's collective strength. Check it out on www.nowwethepeople.org and become a part of positive democratic change.
Posted by maracas, Sunday, 2 October 2005 10:51:38 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I fail to see how Mr GOllan can see the proposed IR reforms - as poorly defined and articualted as they are as an opportunity for prosperity rather than a recipe for for insecurity - or how any employee could either.

THe nfair dismissal changes are simply a power shifting mechanism; no employer group or employer has - contrary to the cliams by the Minister or the PM - claimed that the changes will bring about employment growth.

No employer group has claimed that the changes will give rise to increased profitabiltiy per se; they might generate more profits as condiitons are compromised but they do nothing to enhanve productivity.

Far from being revolutionary as they are claimmed they are in fact retrograde. These starry eyed economists need to take a reality check. If the fiar wage Commission looks to profts as a sign post to wage adjustments employees should expect a windfall - but I cant see that happening

Claims of falling prosperity in this country are usuially linked to poor business planning associated with a failure to invest.

Some economist insist on looking to China and India as competetive benchmarks - wage points we will never match - although there are some employers who yearn for the day we do -.
Posted by sneekeepete, Monday, 3 October 2005 9:34:24 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The unfair dismissal laws as they currently stand were introduced by Keating in 1993. Based on what some people are saying on this forum, the sky should have fallen well before 1993! It didn't.
Posted by FlipTop, Tuesday, 4 October 2005 12:54:09 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Flipflop, you are right in that regard, however in this case it is the underlying agenda that is the real problem. We are at a point in history where an attempt is being made to take full control of the world. That has been attempted on many occasions with varying success.

What faces us now, is that our world is technically smaller than in the past and the forces involved in the struggle are huge and far reaching. It is like mass wrestling. In one corner we have the elite intend in global economic and social control, opposed to balanced sustainable growth and environmental responsibility.

In the other two corners the religious zealots from all sides fighting for psychological and physical control. All opponents are prepared to use whatever it takes to win and they don't care as to what casualties they produce, economically, environmentally or physically.

When you remove social and workplace standards for fiscal gains, you reduce the strength of the social fabric, resulting in confusion and economic downturn. We must remember that economics is a concept and in reality has a very limited lifespan, before drastic change brings reality.

Maracas, that site, is dominated by those with current vested interests, and are a part of the problem. Unions, feminists, journalists, academics and beaurucratic elite. All will stick together until they need to push their own barrow, then watch out. They have failed in the past, what should be different now. Especially as they have no idea as to what path to take, or what to do, just more of the same cloaked in semantic waffle.

Anyone with methods that would alleviate the problems we face, would be walked over by their massive and irrational ego's. They are a part of the ruling elite, no direction, no policies, just a desire for control.

I am afraid that it may take the total demise of society to change anything to a better way. As the saying goes, out of the ashes, new growth springs.
Posted by The alchemist, Tuesday, 4 October 2005 7:14:31 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
From just a bush thinker, who has studied a bit in his older days, congrats to most of the Posts, which would have gained full marks from great thinkers like Adam Smith and John Stuart Mill, and from Thomas Jefferson, incidently, who would not have had a bar of what Americana is up to now, along with her Anglipholic accomplices, the Brits and us Aussies.

The point is what can thinkers like us do about it? The worry is under the wartime anti-democratic kind of laws that are probably now necessary owing to terrorism, the true rational thinkers along with others in the same vein, are forced to become sort of comatose or dumbed down.

Not that we can get any help from our gallant Laborites, who with the fear of terrorism have just about joined up with the JohnnyHowardites.

However, though we could kind of agree with the Poster, who declared he or she was fed and "outta here", it is believed a Forum like we are mutually engaged in, must keep going, for it is - oh, so necessary - in today's messed up world.

George C - WA - Bushbred
Posted by bushbred, Tuesday, 4 October 2005 11:22:52 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Employers are already dragging out their 'workers kit of terror'. Salespeople working for a Company in Melbourne (with branches in other states) being FORCED to sign an agreement that they will now accept lower commissions, keep the amount of their current retainer - minimal wage line, and, agree that, should they leave the job, they will not work within that industry for 12 months. No package payout, just whatever commisions owed to the date of leaving. A CEO in a multinational company can usually stand a 12 month ruling - their payouts alone will keep them and their families safe financially, they also receive a lucrative 6-12 month payout. Figure a commission salesperson who earns no more than $35,000 a year. What does he/she live on in the mean time? Consider if this happened in the car dealerships, retail sector. The mind boggles at these draconion rulings from employers. (These employees mentioned at the beginning of my post, have been told to sign within the next 7 days or get out).
To those who seriously feel that employers will care about employees, think again. Its about power. Pity the worker.
Posted by tinkerbell1952, Wednesday, 5 October 2005 7:31:48 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dare to struggle Dare to win Alchemist. ‘That Site’ isn’t dominated by anybody. Its open to all and anybody who have a desire to discuss alternatives to ‘ Advance Australia Fair, building Sustainability, Justice and Peace’.Those are the ‘vested interests’ and so long as there is an endeavour to reach those goals, they can dominate me.

I have heard your song before “ Quote…it may take the total demise of society to change anything to a better way..As the saying goes ..out of the ashes, new growth springs”.end Quote.

I remember my early days in left politics the notion amongst the anarchist element insisting that the workers lot had to get much much worse before they would fight, Therefore to act to improve workers conditions was counter-revolutionary….
To oppose the draconian laws of the Howard Regime we need to propose alternatives and 'NOWWETHEPEOPLE' looks like its on the correct path
Posted by maracas, Wednesday, 5 October 2005 8:27:58 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Mr Gollan, no one appears to be with u on this one. The IR reforms are a draconian power grab by the elites. No amount of framing and spin will hide that fact.
Posted by hedgehog, Thursday, 6 October 2005 12:39:24 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Maracas, I have looked through the entire site of we the people and haven't found anything different to what is espoused by many. Sorry but I class union leaders, feminist leaders, senior beaurucrats and elite journalists as being a part of the problem. Reinventing Feminist goals, allowing freedom of entry to all refugees, not controlling religious expression outside the home and church, are just some of the problems that put us here in the first place. No specific policies that actually confront the problems, just feel good fluffy meaningless statements.

As to having an anarchistic viewpoint, very far from the truth. My statement “it may take the total demise of society to change anything to a better way. As the saying goes ..out of the ashes, new growth springs”, relates to historical evidence concerning the collapse of societies throughout history. Not for any self interest or ideology.

Unless there is some form of dramatic intervention, then history will repeat itself. The approach hasn't changed so we will repeat the former collapses, no matter what you or I want to think. The struggle we need to under go, should be worthy of the future, not the past.

IR, should be moving in other directions, which would enhance all involved. Bringing in more people to try to fill vacancies and shortages, will only exasperate the problem. IR, should be looking at the imbalance in society, and how to fix that. It also should be about protecting Australian jobs and improving job security by proper planning and industrial methods.

Currently its develop and damn the consequences. If you really look at the economics, you would find that the approach we are talking presently, actually brings down productivity, job satisfaction and increases long term costs. But all those that are in the upper middle income brackets don't want that, as it would take away some of their elitist power.

The wethepeople site is run by those upper middle class elite, so it is just more of the same. Unless you can point me to where it actually states, reasonable lateral policies.
Posted by The alchemist, Friday, 7 October 2005 11:39:41 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy