The Forum > Article Comments > Right to withdraw labour is a human right > Comments
Right to withdraw labour is a human right : Comments
By Tristan Ewins, published 24/4/2007Rudd’s position on WorkChoices is likely to prevail with barely a whimper, with a pre-conference stitch-up reducing ALP democracy to a media stunt.
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- Page 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- ...
- 10
- 11
- 12
-
- All
Once withdrawn the AWA can be ripped up and re offered, with any conditions and you know it mate. If Doc thinks people are not sacked for refusing to sign AWA's he's living in the Wild West where his beliefs belong. Being sacked doesn't always mean just told to nick off. It also includes a new AWA you can't survive on so refuse. That's not choice.
Could Doc explain to us why John Howard isn't on an AWA? Why he hasn't negotiated away his entitlements for extra $? You know why. It wouldn't work and he wouldn't even get an offer from his electorate today.
If we are going to persist with the silly Left and Right business and you have read or experienced a few elections you should know that Rudd is doing exactly what Hawke did. That is stealing the ground Howard initially trod on. That's why he will win.
Howard has moved dramatically to the right (ask Malcolm Fraser) and left the slightly right of centre ground vacant. That's where Rudd is now. There is no Left in the major parties at all. The Greens are as Left as it gets.
Where does Rudd differ from Howard?
The right to strike is the workers ONLY weapon. Without that they are back to the 1800's and everyone should know that. What else can workers do but unite and work together in the face of the advantage an employer has.
By the way a survey today actually shows business itself is not that keen on No Choices at all. They know the matter is one of negotiation, not bullying.
Those employers that are using Howard's atrocious legislation will fall by the wayside and the moderate employers will benefit, as ever. In the short term things will though devastate many and that falls at the feet of one person (I can't call him a man), Howard.