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 > General Discussion > Unions call for secure jobs, too little, too late, you can't say you were not warned.

Unions call for secure jobs, too little, too late, you can't say you were not warned.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 7
  7. 8
  8. 9
  9. All
This casualization of the workforce goes back almost three decades, with the introduction of unfair dismissal laws. Even then they (the unions) all of which have secure jobs BTW, were warned as the age old saying goes, for every action there is a reaction and this is the result.

The whole idea had a shot in the arm with the mining boom, whereby ridiculous pays and conditions were being negotiated where $150K/year 2 on 2 off became the norm. Of cause this was acceptable when coal was mega bucks per ton, yet now with coal worth much less, the unions objected to pay and condition cuts but the miners obviously saw this coming and as such had already lured their workforce into contract work, with huge bucks, thus providing them with a 'get out of jail free card' if you like, a move that obviously outsmarted the unions. Not hard I guess because let's face it, who's the smarter, the CEO on millions, or the unions official on pittance in comparison.

So while I do feel for the many workers caught in the cross fire, collateral damage I guess, the fact of the of matter employers don't start businesses to employ people, they do it to make money. So if you put hurdles in their path, they will find a way to bypass them, and here in lies a prime example.

So unfortunately people the only ones who have managed to get that secure job through all this, is the unions, the ones who you used to fight your battle in the first place, and of cause with you guessed it, your funds.

Sorry, but you were warned, and it does not help that Aussies are more reactive than pro active, but I guess that's life.
Posted by rehctub, Thursday, 7 June 2018 7:45:17 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
The main culprit is not unfair dismissal laws (though they add a bit), not even the second-main culprit, globalisation.

The main culprit is the devastating introduction of computer technology in all walks of life, including in the workplace.
I understand that computers and similar equipment are necessary for science, engineering and medicine, but everywhere else?

Well, progressives wanted progress, now they got it.
Posted by Yuyutsu, Friday, 8 June 2018 5:12:12 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 feel for people who can't make plans, get a mortgage, take a holiday and so on because they are casual workers, or on short term contracts. But, unions are to blame for their woes - all their demands have made it too expensive for employers to permanently employ workers. The only reason unions are interested in seeing more secure employment is it might provide them with members. But even most full timers don't bother with unions anymore.
Posted by ttbn, Friday, 8 June 2018 5:29:22 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
Proud ex union official I will never say workers play no roll in mass casualization, but that roll is not found in unfair dismissals, a butcher shop is very different than a power station being built, or multi million dollar road construction site,*are all of us aware a casual if they do not earn a certain amount get zero super?*two casuals can share one job and no super is earned,union action in OVER PRICING labour during a boom, cost full time jobs, one union, by over pricing its laborers, saw tradesmen on lower wages do the labouring work in some country areas,profits, not always unions, drove this rush, it remains my view some part of wage rises should be bargained away to limit casual workers,and yes, unions should reverse the trend by pushing the casual rates higher
Posted by Belly, Friday, 8 June 2018 6:17:05 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
Belly, you are fudging the figures old mate by trying to make a mountain out of a mole hill on super and, you forget I am an employer and have been prior to the introduction of UFD laws.

First to super. You are correct in saying it is possible for an employer to avoid super with casuals, however, the cut in rate for super is around $450 PER MONTH and, with a casual tradie on at least $45 per hour, this means only 10 hours (not days) per month. Very very unlikely as most awards provide for a min of a 4 hour shift, or $180, so just three minimal shifts per month an you have to pay super.
Workers, aided by unions have forced the costs up as they have negotiated stupid deals using the supply V demand to their advantage. Unfortunately the demand is dwindling but the unions don't want to give up their unfairly gained perks, perks that were obtained due to their advantage at the time. So unless unions accept that what goes up in good times, must be allowed to come back down in tough times, workers will be the big losers.

Since UFD laws there have been so many deterrents placed on employers to directly employ. Super, with staff having the right to force employers to change their super payment arrangements at their free will, with no consideration to the employers out of pocket expenses, nor any compensation for same, casual loading increases, parental leave and other leaves either implemented and/or floated, the list goes on.
It's not rocket science, because as long as an employer can offload the responsibility of employing (labour hire) or be rewarded for investing in infrastructure while being punished for employing, the situation will never change as casualisation of the workforce is nothing more than a reaction to an action but the likes of the unions just don't get it. To be continued.
Posted by rehctub, Saturday, 9 June 2018 7:31:40 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
Another furphy used in advertising is that as a casual you don't get holiday pay or sick pay, where in fact they do as that is why the loading is placed on pay rates for casuals.21 to 25% to my knowledge.
The fact that the worker spends this extra on a weekly basis is not the fault of the employer as they have paid the extra to compensate.
The fact is the wheels were put in motion almost 30 years ago and unions were warned then, but they just kept pushing, for better rates, better conditions, more flexibility, the list goes on.
There is no turning back now and it is the unions that have blood on their hands and ironically the real victims are the workers, the very people who contributed the union funds to fight the battle that killed their dreams. How bazar and how very wrong, in fact it is almost criminal to think of the damage the unions have done and that they are still getting paid in full time jobs, while those who they say they protect are being forced into unsecure roles.
Yes, it's simply a reaction to an action, and every action has one.
Posted by rehctub, Saturday, 9 June 2018 7:39:14 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
FACT not fudge old mate!thought my insight was very near unbiased and that it put some of the blame on my side, however you from your maybe several? butcher shops hardly have insight in to over all industrial relations, we need to address the super issue, people starting a worklife today, may very well never get the pension, age 70 is a target they may never each, my answer is super paid on every dolar earned,casuals to get an extra one percent, a fund that can be trusted, to be set up, as they have multiple employers a life long fee free one, one day every one may need to live without a pension, and most of us do not want to work till 70
Posted by Belly, Saturday, 9 June 2018 7:40:45 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
Butch not only has the faults he has the solutions before anyone else can have a say.
I think this story goes back to butchers being paid butchers wages for sweeping the floor.
You employ someone for eight hours on one wage, your idea was to have multiple wage structures throughout the day. That is where casual or part time came from. Plus the over servicing sector wanting lower wages. Some businesses just do not have a life as a business.
Unions will have a resurgence because of exploitation of workers which the laws have failed to protect. Would higher rates for casualís force employers back to lower paid full time workers. It would cause rationalization of businesses built on casual employees only.
The only ones that need hourly work times are persons under the 20year age group. All others must be full time. Workers need stability in the workforce as a future builder.
We do not need the attitude of if you want more hours get an extra job, the working day is eight hours.
Posted by doog, Saturday, 9 June 2018 8:43:57 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
You miss one major point doog, that to be a worker, first you need a job. It is all well & good to tell us that workers need full time jobs, & stability, don't we all.

It is all well & good to state you ideal working conditions, & pay rates you would like to get. This has only one problem, unless an employer can make a profit paying those rates, there is no job at all to be had.

Running boats in the Whitsundays I had 2 large high speed catamarans, a 60 Ft ferry, a 96 Ft barge, a 60 Ft imitation submarine coral viewing boat, a 30 Ft game boat, plus a few sundry glass bottom boats & other craft.

The 2 big boats ran 6 days with a day off for maintenance each week, & had 3 full time crews to manage this. The main crew on each did the weekends, & with penalty rates skippers & engineers in the early 80s earned over $1100 a week, more than I did for six & a half days on average running the show.

The big boats owed the company about $1800 a day each in fixed overheads just sitting there, before a crew & fuel added about another $1000. On the underwater observatory run it required 148 full fares to cover a days costs.

During a downturn we could not get anything like this, & the outer reef trip was also running 4 days at a loss. To avoid the company going broke I dropped all weekend runs, so only 10 crew days required, & a huge saving in fuel. Now of course I needed only 2 crews.

I got them all together & gave them the choice. There would be no weekend high penalty rate work for any. I could sack one complete crew no longer needed, or I would give them all 4 days a week work, which would include 2 on the ferry for the relief crew, & let them decide. They chose the 4 day week. They chose the 4 day week.

Continued.
Posted by Hasbeen, Saturday, 9 June 2018 11:16:24 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
Continued.
The barge crew were doing it tough, both had mortgages & were getting no overtime or weekend work penalty rates at all.

Beaches wash away in the strong tides of the reef. A resort island wanted to hire the barge & a front end loader to bring theirs back from the point to the resort, but could not afford the $1500 a day for weekend daily hire. They offered me $750 a day.

I put it to the barge crew that I could pay week day rates, with usual penalties for 3 week ends work, if they were interested. They jumped at it. The company barely covered costs, but the boys kept their mortgage payments up.

You have to realise doog, most of us like the blokes we work with, but companies are not charities, or cash cows, [except for government bureaucrats & union bosses]. Jobs can only be paid for by profits. No profits, no job. It would be nice if we could all get what we would like, but demanding too much just means no jobs to be had.

That company got something wrong a couple of years after I left, & went broke. The boats were sold & moved away. No jobs for many of those blokes in the area now.

Companies are not charities funded by the taxpayer doog. Make the cost of your labour too high for companies to pay, & still make a profit, & the companies will simply disappear, not out of spite, but because they go broke. Then we can all sit around & remember how good it was once, as we eat our bowl of lentil soup
Posted by Hasbeen, Saturday, 9 June 2018 11:18:59 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
Finding the thread hard yaka, it is hard to find answer if we can one one hand find small business needs protection, but ignore the truth a worker is in fact a one man/woman business, IF our economy needs low wages, insecure jobs, to thrive it is not worth saving
Posted by Belly, Saturday, 9 June 2018 3:02:07 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
You're right Belly, it's most likely not worth saving, well at least for the sake of the worker, as more and more businesses are turning to automated system, and ironically being rewarded for their efforts by way of government incentives. It's just a pity similar incentives didn't apply to employing, in fact, if you employ too many you get taxed extra for your efforts. One reason behind contract/labour hire.

You see people think employers need staff, but they are wrong. Employers need the work done and, if there is an alternative whereby the work gets done, the likes of sick leave and other forms of leave are eliminated, and the machine does as it's told, no if, buts or maybes. As development forges ahead in this field, machines that were once out of range for many, are now becoming a real alternative.

Luckily I have great staff, but, as an employer you get what you give, and my guys, while expecting a fair days pay for a fair days work, actually provide the fair days work, before they get paid.

Doog, all I can say to you is dream on, because the full time job you talk of is long gone, never to return as the machine, which has been developed out of necessity is taking over, while the likes of labour hire and contractors are filling the voids. The past two to three decades have made history by changing employment forever. So we had best get used to it. Continued
Posted by rehctub, Saturday, 9 June 2018 7:53:46 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
You do what you have to do. Evolution will take care of itself. The world is not reliant on employers sacrificing automation and keeping workers on poverty wages because you think it is best for the worker.
Wake up to yourself and look after yourself with automation instead of dragging workers into poverty.
Automation is as old as the first employer that ever hired labor. Not exactly new as you seem to think.
The world will never come to its end of evolution, your $8 eggs will still be $8 with automation. That is the nature of business.
Posted by doog, Saturday, 9 June 2018 8:55:53 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
Doog, the point is automation that was only really available to big business, the car industry as an example, is now becoming affordable to many smaller businesses and the likes of government incentives/tax breaks and easier financing options have aided this.

Take butchery. A small butcher shops wage bill used to be in the order of 10 to 12% of sales back in the early 90's, where as now it's more like 18 to 22%. So wages have increased, rents have increased and energy costs have skyrocketed, so while 12% was quite affordable, 22% means ways to save wages become very attractive to many operators.

So you can try any way you like to turn this around, but the reality is the perm job is fast approaching distinction and the main driver of this is the unions and lobbyists who continually push for better pay and conditions, but hey, believe what you may.
The reality is the working world has changed, and these changes, implemented by the employers, have been forced upon them simply because the number one aim in business is to make profits, and while the work must be done, there is no guarantee it has to be done by workers, especially with the increasing accessibility to automation.
Posted by rehctub, Sunday, 10 June 2018 5:07:47 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
OK lets do it! reduce workers to forever low income wages slaves, serve the buggers right? ah hang on, who buys the sausages? who consumes the stuff? an economy is a finely balanced thing if you care to think about it
Posted by Belly, Sunday, 10 June 2018 6:46:59 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
The idea of working for yourself was because you did not like working for a boss, profits did not get a mention.
Anyone that goes into business specifically to earn a profit will be disappointed, as profits have to be earnít they are not there by putting your hand out.
The farmer that used horse and walk behind plough his job does not exist any more, the world did not stop because of that, no different to what you are trying to defend. As Belly says the very persons that you are making into living poor are your customers.
Drive through coffee is the latest smash hit here.
Unions are a very necessary evil, to protect workers from human nature.
Posted by doog, Sunday, 10 June 2018 9:56:13 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
Come on Belly, fair go mate. Our "workers" are paid some of the highest wages in the world, & unfortunately more than they are worth to an employer. Employees are only worth about half what they can earn for an employer, after he has paid his operational overheads. Any more & the employer can not maintain & renew his plant, & goes out of business.

In the early 60s I was a technical expert in the plastics industry. We had my equivalent coming out here from the states to show us what they had developed, & we went over there to show them what we were developing. These people & us were on the same level in the company, & we were amazed how much they were paid.

I used the house/car comparison. They could buy 3 new Chevs a year with their take home pay, or a new house a year. I could just manage a new Holden, but it took 5 years to earn the cost of a house. The blokes working at an injection moulding machine in the US could buy 2 Chevs, where the bloke in Oz could only buy 3/4 of a Holden.

Today the bloke at the machine in Oz could buy 1 & 1/2 Holdens, but the bloke in the US would struggle to buy one. This is why we are loosing all our industry. We pay ourselves more than we are worth to the rest of the world.

We have to compete because world transport has become so cheap. Once transport costs isolated us, but not today. Today we can get a new car from Korea to Sydney, cheaper than from Sydney to Wagga.

Continued.
Posted by Hasbeen, Sunday, 10 June 2018 12:11:41 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
Continued.

We have done something wrong. If we could find out what & reverse it, we might improve things. Despite huge increases in wages, making us unemployable in world competition, people are not much better if any better off. After housing costs, most, even on 2 incomes, are no better off than I was 50+ years ago, paying my mortgage on one income.

In the 70s my dairy farmer neighbour could employ a couple of staff, milking 80 cows. Today milking 180 cows, they earn just enough to keep him & his son & family. They can't afford to employ anyone.

I wish I knew the answer, but doog type blaming the boss is a fruitless exercise in stupidity.
Posted by Hasbeen, Sunday, 10 June 2018 12:11:48 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
Hi there BELLY...

It's really great that you're back BELLY. Your defence of unionism is laudable however misplaced, when you try to juxtapose unions such as the CFMEU, with any other honourable group of unionists. I've belonged to a union all my working life (except in the Military), and I joined the Police Association upon being sworn-in, and all of our own free will. The NSWPA perform exactly the same functions as any other reputable union; advocacy, overseeing members conditions, salaries, support etc.

Whereas the CFMEU and other outlaw trade unions, are doing everything possible to drag the law-abiding unionists down, with their bullying ways and their 'gun at their heads' style of industrial disputation! Be advised BELLY, the days of the CFMEU and their cohorts, with their hitherto unfettered power base, together with their industrial muscle, are dwindling, from the whispers I've heard.
Posted by o sung wu, Sunday, 10 June 2018 12:13:02 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
O sung wo! mate! I consider you that, but gee you insult me, see the thugs and mugs union, the CFMEU are a bigger threat to unionism the that lost Cash woman! and PLEASE, the ALP controlling faction came about to control that part of the very left such folk belong to,When Shorten was Australian Workers Union head, that mob took us to court trying to MUSCLE in on our membership,I my proudest moments have come standing toe to toe with them and winning, our rights to keep our coverage, their members becoming ours, and in no way are these leas ever running my movement or party, a workers has every right to be paid a fair wage Police too have a union, one I have marched with and supported
Posted by Belly, Sunday, 10 June 2018 12:32:03 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
Hi (again) BELLY Old Friend...

Mate, if all unions and unionists were as ethical and decent as you, we'd never have a problem (EVER) with outlaw unions such as the CFMEU. As I mentioned in my initial Email, I've been a member of the NSW Police Association, the entire time I was a police member - over 32 years. And I couldn't agree with you more, we need unions and unionists for the protection of all workers, probably more so now then ever before. As I said earlier on BELLY my friend - It's really great to have you back.
Posted by o sung wu, Sunday, 10 June 2018 1:29:24 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
A fact few know bosses often, called us/me to get the thugs and mugs off their back, even home invasions took place terrorizing wives,a bulldog in defense of workers I helped only if workers gained a benefit, and you would be surprised at just what country workers think about that union *every workers has the right to have his dispute arbitrated* Sir Robert Menzies said that, he also spoke about a wage they can live on
Posted by Belly, Sunday, 10 June 2018 3:47:09 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
Doog, a late response to one of your posts and different pay levels for different tasks. Of cause this is what happens.

Take almost any industry, mine being retail. Why in the hell would I employ a fully qualified butcher to do things such as mincing, sausage making and cleaning. Prices would go even higher, and remember, the labour cost we are factoring in is half of what a builder or plumber does. Imagine the cost of meat if we were paying $50 per hour for butchers, and employing butchers for all tasks. On that note, imaging the cost of building a house without the use of low/unskilled labourers or apprentices, using only qualified tradesmen to perform every task including carting the bricks and clean ups.

So, having put that argument to bed, I now move onto being self employed. The best jobs I ever did were for bosses, one being working at a land fill, the other on a tropical island.
The reason I went into business was to make money, build an empire and provide a better lifestyle, although with competition and cost increases, the lifestyle is no longer a real attraction, in my industry at least because so many seek the cheaper option, even if they are knowingly costing local jobs.

Finally, some of our best ever customers have bee welfare recipients, because they have the most reliable income, and money in their banks seems to be a disease. But that's about to change with the new welfare system where they are not only restricted on what they can buy, but also where they can buy it.

Small butchers have lost the middle ground to the supermarkets, and are about to loose the bottom ground as well, because welfare recipients will no longer be able to shop with them, due to the changes. Of cause a small amount can be spent in cash, but take away gambling, ciggs and grog, that won't leave much. Top end is the only future for us, but that requires highly trained, highly motivated staff, and that's where it can get ugly.
Posted by rehctub, Monday, 11 June 2018 8:12:10 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
Unions were created when the Lords of industry screwed the working class just once too often. The Unions did an admirable job to give workers the break they so desperately needed.
Then, when all the good work was done, the unions didn't step back & say to themselves "we did a good job, all's good now, relax'. No, they could see power & money in being like ticks on backs of the workers. Unions have become extortion organisations & now are doing far greater harm than good by literally destroying the same people they're supposed to be helping.
All they do now is demand payrise after payrise without any consideration of the economic consequence to all. They have become economic terrorists using their members as weapons against infrastructure sustainability.
They were good but aren't anymore!
Posted by individual, Monday, 11 June 2018 7:26:14 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
Yes Indi, I find it ironic that the unions are using members funds to force their members into casual/contract work, while they (the unions) have secure full time work. Very bazar
Posted by rehctub, Monday, 11 June 2018 9:13:01 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
Rechtub even you can not justifie or prove your latest post, unions right now, are running a change the rules campaign targeting with other things increasing casual jobs, it will be seen as every bit as big as the anti work choice one, the anti union tool big money and its union, this government back is basically a tool to keep a section of fellow Australians on low pay and a lessor lifestyle so business can profit
Posted by Belly, Tuesday, 12 June 2018 6:53:31 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
When you really & sincerely want to to help people, you don't first of all live off their backs & secondly you don't ruin their prospects by destroying any prospect of creating more jobs. constant wage rise demands are killing industry but unions appear to unable to comprehend that. If unions really want to help this nation's workers then they should target the mismanagement of the public Service & the sabotage of manufacturing by it's members. Then, only then can the equality we all desire be achieved. I suggest for the unions to stop, look & listen before their next move towards unsustainability.
Posted by individual, Tuesday, 12 June 2018 7:36:43 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
indy sorry but your mind seems a dark place YES some in SOME unions have let the side down, such people are filth, but you see some thing that never existed and never will, unions started by workers are run by workers in the interests of workers and yes they formed the ALP so like this country's biggest union the current government, they serve their members
Posted by Belly, Tuesday, 12 June 2018 1:22:45 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
Belly,
I appreciate you want to portray the Unions in the the positive light they should be portrayed in for what they have achieved in the past but we're talking about now, in your & my lifetime.
I lost my job & had to leave Nth Qld because I couldn't afford to join the Union even though I told them I'd pay upon my next pay. That wasn't good enough for some insufferable obese moron called L....g.
As I said before, the unions DID an admirable job but not anymore. What is your opinion on asking for lesser Govt. charges instead of payrises ? If the unions did that it would make Australian industry compeditive again & in turn provide the employment that the modern unions are preventing. I'd be their greatest supporter if they had the interests of the Nation at heart not only a selected group of which they sponge of. I'm not asking for the world just some integrity & responsibilty, that's all.
Posted by individual, Tuesday, 12 June 2018 5:46:11 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
individual,
Would I be correct in deducing your experience with unions was more than thirty years ago?
Posted by Aidan, Tuesday, 12 June 2018 6:32:36 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
Belly, how many unions jobs would you suggest are casual, as a percentage of their workforce. Are there any?

As for you comment about trying to change the laws, you can bet your bottom dollar the wheels are already in motion by business on ways to overcome such unworkable laws. When you have union supporters the likes of Doog, who thinks the highest qualified should perform all tasks, this just shows how out of touch some are.

You see in the past 20 years we have seen the domination of extended hours and the seven day working week, all of which make predicting spending habits of the consumers unpredictable. As a small business owner we have no idea when people are going to shop and, because there is no more money to spend, it means the takings are spread out over much more hours, making staffing costs skyrocket, all to the advantage of the big end of town, from Coles and Woolies, to the likes of Bunnings, all of which have put so many small traders/operators out of business. Fancy suggesting 20 years ago that a hardware store, office supply chain, department store, or grocery store would be open till 9pm 6 nights out of 7. Well we have it, and how many families have been ruined in the process. Where were the unions in protecting the family unit from the likes of anti sociable working hours. Asleep at the wheel, or what?
Posted by rehctub, Tuesday, 12 June 2018 7:47:55 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
Aidan,
Yes & again in the 90's to 2004 when i was a member but got so fed up with them because when a group of us wanted their help we were told we were too small a group.
Also, all the rep did was Howard bashing right or wrong, it became tiresome & produced no outcome apart from us being left where we were.
Posted by individual, Tuesday, 12 June 2018 11:12:15 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
If anyone wants to bring governments into this, then they need look no further than a comparison from 2006/07 to 2013. And of cause it's gone from bad to worse from that point on, partly due to accumulated inherited debt, that is simply unserviceable, and party from stupidity of current mob of incompetents.

But the one thing that unions and unionists alike just never seem to understand, is that workers are employed out of necessity, not for the sense of creating jobs, and while some employers may crow about how great they are and how many jobs they have created, the reality is the search for ways to replace workers with machines will never stop, at least not when the unions and lobbyists keep pushing for more and more.

Of cause they bang on about safety. The reality is you can't legislate against stupidity, and while there have been some terrible unavoidable accidents, there have also been plenty of stupid ones, so automation was the outcome.

They, the unions, just have to accept that the cost of living increases in the likes of energy, along with fees and charges are neither the fault of employers, nor the problem of employers. Because if it's not cost of living expenses they want us to address with pay increases, it's wanting us to increase super contributions, or provide more secure jobs.

The reality is, in this life you can have anything you want, but you can't have it for nothing. Increased cost burdens placed on businesses must be paid for, and not from profits, otherwise the worker wins, while the employer looses. The simple rule is, to get, one must give.

In the past three decades we have worn a 9.5% increase just in super alone, without a single mandatory cent being put in by workers. Tell me, at what point should they contribute to their own futures?

Welcome to your world, the world your unions have created for you. A world of uncertainty and insecurity, all fought for by your unions, with your funds, all to your detriment.
Posted by rehctub, Wednesday, 13 June 2018 7:26:09 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
Unions aren't zeroing in on economic sustainability yet that's what they should be doing. When has a union ever been seen or heard of saying about highly paid that they're getting too much ?
It's that selfish indifference to this inbalance that causes them to go for raises instead of lesser charges & fees. On one hand unions are highly political yet on the other hand when they should be political they're not.
I don't think the unions have it in them to work on a balanced income scheme simply because their own quest for more reward yet no increased effort is as far as they can see. This is really disappointing because they really could do a lot of good if they disengaged themselves from the ALP first of all.
Posted by individual, Wednesday, 13 June 2018 7:54:59 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
In for a penny in for a pound this still staunch unionist has failed! see I have failed to ever see one multi national, you know the ones, they never pay ANY TAX one of their workers pays more than them, say we made too much profit, here is some of it back, never saw a wages slave, on the lowest income having too much to spend on his/her kids at Christmas, it has taken me all these years and still I can not get my head around the thought an economy is to make the rich richer
Posted by Belly, Wednesday, 13 June 2018 3:04:41 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
rehctub,
You are simply lying when you claim our debt to be unserviceable. Not only is the cost of servicing our debt rather small, but we are a sovereign currency issuer with unlimited capacity to service our debt.

Unions should not be trying to stop the replacement of workers with machines; if anything they should be trying to accelerate it, as this makes each worker more productive. But the government have been failing in their duty to ensure there are enough new jobs available to replace the old ones. In the Gillard era things were worse, as the RBA board actively sabotaged the economy because they didn't think enough people were unemployed to keep inflation down!

Although you can't legislate against stupidity itself, you can legislate to minimise its consequences.

In the past three decades, labour productivity has increased much more than wages. Despite extra costs such as superannuation, profits rose as a proportion of GDP.
Posted by Aidan, Wednesday, 13 June 2018 3:19:27 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
the massive increase in Government at all levels where many(not all) are well overpaid has been paid for by small business's. Government workers now have massives amount of leave, higher superuannation than most and almost have to kill someone or speak against homosexuality to get the sack. The average man pays for all this.
Posted by runner, Wednesday, 13 June 2018 5:03:07 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
profits rose as a proportion of GDP.
Aidan,
I'd be more incined to believe profits rose due to tax loopholes.
I agree with Belly on his take on the multinationals, but that's where the unions have failed us also. Instead of just going for higher wages they should take industrial action to force Government to make changes to the Tax system. Just about every Australian would join a union if they promised to act on that & get away from Labor.
Posted by individual, Wednesday, 13 June 2018 5:06:28 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
individual,
I, and I think the majority of Australians, would very strongly oppose private sector workers taking "industrial action" against the government. I do not want the unions holding the government to ransom. And your obsession with getting away from Labor is quite illogical, as such changes to the tax system are more likely to be made under Labor.

I think your inclined conclusion that profits rising as a proportion of GDP is due to tax loopholes is quite unlikely. I'm no accountant, but I'd expect such tax loopholes to also depress the GDP figure.

You have certainly had some bad experiences with unions, and with reps like that it's no surprise how much their membership had declined. But your main criticism of unions seems quite baffling to me - for it accurately describes the 'dinosaur' unions of Britain, but not the Australian unions. Because in Australia they generally do consider the consequences of their actions and seek solutions that benefit the employers as well as the employees. AIUI most pay rises are productivity related.
Posted by Aidan, Thursday, 14 June 2018 1:53:50 AM
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
Aiden, how does a machine, that replaces workers, make workers more productive.

Of cause the worker that gets to operate the machine produces more work, but at the cost of other workers jobs/shifts. I'm baffled!

As for debt, if it is so serviceable, as you claim, why then has it not gone down?

Of cause we can keep printing money, but it is my understanding that to print money, one has to put up security. Or are you suggesting we just keep printing money forever. Would that not make $1000 worth 50 cents in time?
Posted by rehctub, Thursday, 14 June 2018 7:22:11 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
As for debt, if it is so serviceable, as you claim, why then has it not gone down?
rechtub,
You should put that question to QLD Treasurer Jackie Trad.
Posted by individual, Thursday, 14 June 2018 7:24:05 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
do not want the unions holding the government to ransom
Aidan,
The opposition doesn't do it's job so who better than a Union not aligned with any political party to be the watchdog over a Government to keep it accountable ? Lesser Govt fees & chatges are really a no brainer to get costs back to an internationally competitive level.
Posted by individual, Thursday, 14 June 2018 7:28:26 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
Belly, I see you're on about multinationals not paying tax again. Any luck with the comparison?

You simply can not make a claim that these entities don't pay one cent in tax until you have the facts, otherwise it's just here say.

In order to make a claim you must look at all the contributing factors, not just the juicy bits.
Posted by rehctub, Thursday, 14 June 2018 7:34:29 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 have read all the posts and find it amazing that those defending the unions refuse to accept, what has been made patently clear, on this particular topic alone, so far.
It must be said that the union movement was started by people who were no better than politicians.
They were predators.
They saw an opportunity to make money and at the same time make themselves look good.
There has NEVER been a social conscience in their rise to stardom.
I won't say that the govt is also to blame because those who are pro union will jump on that statement and not let it go, at the expense of the truth.
I have discussed this in previous topics and what MUST happen now that we're neck deep in doo-doo, is for our economy to take a haircut.
We must lower our standing of living.
The unions in their haste to acquire power and wealth, as they could see a better and socially more acceptable format than just being another political party (labour), decided to make it appear they were the workers champions and produced a very ill-conceived mantra.
They were successful in selling themselves to the those of less fortitude and lacking in self worth or convictions.
Most joined the unions because of peer pressure, others because they just didn't care one way or another.
Few were staunch believers of the union 'faith'.
As much as the faithful want to demonise the company, I'm sorry, your taking the lazy way again.
If you have a problem with big companies not paying enough tax, it won't be long till the even more useless ones will be back in govt, you can put it to your soul mates then to get them to change the tax system for big business and multi nationals.
Good luck with that.
If they say they will, they will make it appear as though they have, but nothing will really change.
BTW, if you think that the political parties are all independent, think again.
It is one big SWAMP.
Posted by ALTRAV, Thursday, 14 June 2018 10:22:31 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
"It must be said that the union movement was started by people who were no better than politicians.
They were predators."

Tell that to the Tolpuddle Martyrs.
Posted by Is Mise, Friday, 15 June 2018 12:31:20 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
is mise,
very interesting, I had never heard of them. I imagine they'd be turning in their graves at today's
outfits.
Posted by individual, Friday, 15 June 2018 5:13:40 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
rehctub,
>Aiden, how does a machine, that replaces workers, make workers more productive.
>...the worker that gets to operate the machine produces more work, but at the cost of other workers jobs/shifts.
You shouldn't be baffled, because you've answered your own question. The workers who operate the machine produces more work, and others are freed up to do produce more work elsewhere.

>As for debt, if it is so serviceable, as you claim, why then has it not gone down?
Because the government has been putting more money into the economy than it's been taking out.

Electronic money effectively operates as a closed loop, so this shows up on the accounts as debt, but there is never any problem servicing it.

>Of cause we can keep printing money, but it is my understanding that to print money, one has to put up security.
Your understanding is incorrect; security is not needed with a floating currency the government issues, for there's no chance at all of the government being unable to repay it. "Printing money" nowadays doesn't usually mean physical printing; it means the government effectively borrowing from itself - though for reasons of history and bank liquidity, it's usually done via a bond issue rather than directly.

>Or are you suggesting we just keep printing money forever. Would that not make $1000 worth 50 cents in time?
Increasing the money supply is inflationary whether it is done in the public or private sector. But meanwhile there's a strong deflationary effect from advancing technology and mechanisation (those machines get things done a lot more cheaply than more workers). The main function of economic policy should be to balance those out, so that we get adequate job creation everywhere without excessive inflation. But for about a decade in general, and longer in my state, too little money has been going into the economy, so we've needlessly had high unemployment.

In boom times, and indeed boom locations, the government should take more money out of the economy than it puts in (aka run a surplus) to control inflation. But surpluses aren't intrinsically desirable.
Posted by Aidan, Friday, 15 June 2018 6:45:08 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
individual,
"The opposition doesn't do it's job so who better than a Union not aligned with any political party to be the watchdog over a Government to keep it accountable ?"
EVERYONE!
I mean that in two ways: firstly I can't think of anyone WORSE than a union to keep the government accountable, even before we consider the problem of keeping the union accountable. Secondly, we should crowdsource scrutiny of almost everything.

"Lesser Govt fees & chatges are really a no brainer to get costs back to an internationally competitive level."
That could help, but at most it's only a small part of the solution.
Posted by Aidan, Friday, 15 June 2018 6:57:52 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
Aidan, so just where are these extra jobs you speak of?

Belly, if you're still around, the conditions workers are enjoying now were agreed to in boom times. Take mining. Like all expenses, wages come from profits, and when profits go south, big time, from a unionists point of view, do you expect wages and conditions to follow, or do you want to protect what was gained? A simple question.
Posted by rehctub, Saturday, 16 June 2018 7:07:15 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. ...
  6. 7
  7. 8
  8. 9
  9. All

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