C'mon Billy your touted as the shining light of the union movement. Whats the plan? How do the workers protect thier rights at work? WorkChoices appears to have shut off every tactic traditionally used by the Unions to secure enforcable rights for workers. The cynic might argue that Johnnie floated his radical plans, sat back and watched the response, then set about shutting all the gates.Chin up Bill you have work to do.

I think it is rather simplistic to dismiss individual workplace agreements, as those workers who have scarce skills will always benefit from being able to sell their skills to competing employers.

Similarly, those who can by the withdrawal of their labour bring an employer's financial world crashing down will also have nothing to fear from individual workplace agreements.

However, it is those who have little to offer than being there to push a broom, pour a cup of coffee, or any of the many part-time and casual hospitality industry type jobs have everything to fear. There are plenty of other unskilled workers waiting to take their jobs, so those who hold down these low-paid, low-skilled jobs will suffer a race-to-the-bottom competition for lower and lower wages and conditions in any workplace "agreement". Do the words "take-it or leave-it" come to mind?

The trouble is, despite the figures touted of low unemployment, there are many who are uncounted who have withdrawn from even being seekers of work in the current labour market. They live at home and make their contributions in ways which are just as vital for our community but which do not make economic statistics. They provide child care for friends and relations, they cook meals, do shopping and gardening, but they do not appear as real people to the bean-counters and economists.

I know, because I am one of "them". I was forced to take a medical retirement, so I no longer "count" to the economy.

Bill Shorten is right; the ideology of the Howard government is more about destroying the union movement; the proposed changes will not contribute one iota to improved productivity (productivity = doing more with less staff in less time). It will push more marginalised people out of the employment statistics and into non-person status.

By the way, the only reason I was able to win the few extra benefits of being medically retired rather than just redundant was through the support of my union. Giving up on unions is a very bad idea.

Bill, and Jimotec, if mr Howards aim is to destroy the union movement, lets look at a couple of reasons he may wish to do so.

1/ My son works at (thankfully) $20/hour in factory process work at a car parts maker. I consider this a great opportunity for him, and the pay is great.
2/ Ion Engineering in Woodonga, a car parts maker of gearboxes for Ford, is shedding heaps of workers. The contracts are now being sourced 'overseas'

Can anyone see a connection ? How long can it last, that a vehicle manufacturer will continue to buy parts based on AUD$20/hour, when the competition is outsourcing to China or wherever.

How many of us remember the number of Vehicle parts makers who have closed down, or become 'importers' over the past 6 months alone ?

The high pay my son is currently experiencing, is probably due to the 'fine work of the Union movement' to improve pay and conditions as they say. But is it sustainable ?.....what next ? What about more jobs, which an industry CAN sustain, to keep more people employed ?

Who is to blame, for the 'pay and conditions' which are in fact decimating job opportunities in Australia ?

I struggle to accept that Bills eloquent woffle about the 'threat to the world' as we know it, is not in fact just a last ditch attempt at 'relevance'. I mean, Bill has a vested interest in being seen to be 'doing' something ..right ?

All I can say, is that we should be moving much more to a non 'them/us' mentality, and look for creative ways of enhancing our life styles and quality of life, which does not cause manufacturers to simply 'outsource'overseas.

I am an employer, and I simply cannot afford to pay $12.00 for a circuit board, and stay competitive with those who are paying $5.00
I've been lucky to export (on quality,performance and customer service) to the USA, but they constantly remind me of how much CHEAPER my competition is

Existing entitlements are not "up for grabs" as Bill Shorten implies. Rather they will now be "open to negotiation".

The presumption that workers are individually weak and meek is a convenient worldview to promote when you make your living from being a union rep. Unions could choose to empower their constituents with knowledge and negotiating skills but that might not work in the unions interests. It is easier to scare the crap out of people and then sell yourself as their only hope for salvation.

One person commented here suggesting that the new IR system will involve a race to the bottom. Well that will not be true when unemployment hits 0% and when that happens we will be at the point where a minimum wage is reasonable. In practice the IR reforms still include retension of the current minimum wage which is probably the biggest failing of these reforms. The current minimum is too high so long as unemployment stands as it does.

Calling these reforms radical is laughable. They are so mild it is embarassing. Its not like people have never worked on a Sunday before.

I prefer Bill Shorten when he talks tax policy. Removing the tariff on inter-household trade is a much better way to boost wages than price regulation.

Bill's argument is the one we've heard time and time again.

The idea that the Howard government is going to ruin everyone's lives with the WorkChoices reforms is a scare campaign that could really cause problems to Unions when the reforms are passed and the sky doesn't fall - hint who is the Chicken Little - perhaps the Unions.

It is also a joke that the Unions tried to shut down the Government's advertising campaign. I'm no fan of government propoganda nor the associated cost - however the Howard government is not alone in ad campaigns - indeed Keating started the trend, but the unions and ALPs move to challenge the ads in the Courts really STANK (like rotting fish) of trying to shut down democracy and instead propogate one side of the debate. What unions and the ALP have forgotten (and still seem in the clouds about) is the fact that the Howard governments were elected (96,98,01,04) by a majority of Australians and thus this Government has the mandate to put forward policy and legislate for Australia as it was elected to do so.

Quite frankly, I think the campaign on the pro-WorkChoices side of the campaign should have been better organised and the actual legislation released much earlier so that ALP and union scare campaigns would have had no chance to propogate mistruths and literally frighten Australian workers. But in any case, I think these lies will soon be shown to be just that - and unions (Chicken Littles) will wake up and realise the sky really is not falling.

C'mon folks, let's try to take a bit of personal responsibility. The advent of these IR reforms will probably lower the price employers are willing to pay for unskilled labour - but who is responsible for these labourers being unskilled?

How many of these unskilled workers decided that they were not going to improve their skills some time in the past?

How many left school at 15 years of age thinking they did not have to learn anything else - they knew everything necessesary to support themselves.

There are always self improvement courses available somewhere. We don't need to wait for the government to erect buildings, hire instructors, and invite us to participate. Local communities have computer literacy programs, public speaking courses, and any number of other self improvement courses that can improve the workers value to his employer.

Unskilled workers need to pay attention to what is going on around them. It is in their own personel best interests to make themselves into higher skilled workers. It is not really the governments problem if low skilled workers are unwilling to improve their lot.

What a bleak view of the world you have BOAZ_David to see the rise of the working poor as inevitable.

The ION plant at Lavington [Wodonga} was establlished by Repco when it was still under Australian management when the manager got $75000. When he retired he was replaced by 2 managers who voted themselves salaries of $125,000 12 months later. The massive salaries paid to current [often mediocre] management is not sustainable or fair.

Also on the subject of the car industry, when I worked on the line I always wondered how Joseph Lucas Australia made a profit. They didn't but it didn't matter because the losses made on their Australian plant were written off on the parent company's profit and loss sheet in the UK. They actually made a profit by importing sealed beam headlights from Canada via HongKong. They bought cheap in Canada, sold to Hong Kong who raised the price and on sold the product. Hong Kong's tax rate was 15%.

Bruce's charity must impress the 80% of Australian IT graduates who were unable to find work from 2000 onwards, the 100% of Victorian trained teachers who were unemployed from 1992 - 2000, the Victorian trained physiotherapists and occupational therapists who moved to Canada in 1992 onwards. These university graduates have large HECS debts to pay back. The only occupations where you are unlikely to be "unskilled" are sales or import/export or services like medical, dentistry, plumbing, electrician. Law and accounting are the next professions to be outsourced to India.

Australian workers over age 45 are also considered "unskilled" irrespective of their previous experience, education etc. If you still need to save for your retirement over age 44, stiff!

As the Australian media is controlled by PBL and Murdoch the ACTU has an uphill battle getting workers rights heard. Non-high profile employees of PBL subsidiaries all have horror stories to tell about IR and low pay rates. The ACTU is the only organisation large enough to mobilise people to protest about plans to build this country's economic future by massive increases in the numbers of working poor.

Bruce
you have a point, and I think most of us do. But the level of blindness pervading most of the thinking behind many of the posts is beyond abysmal.
We are going to wake up one morning to find that we have all these skilled people, but no manufacturing to employ them in. This is a cold harsh reality that is 'progressivly' actually happening.

The ONLY response our government has is this "go high tech/value added"

But there are a limited number of entrepreneurs who can do this.

At the same time, our universities (and those of other western countries) are churning out Phd's and Engineers who are then returning to Asia to put into practice the 'Hi-Tech/Value added' principles they learnt here, and translating them into the very products which our government suggests we move into and with access to labor rates our employers only dream of. (but are increasingly seeking via outsourcing)

Then we have the relevance challenged likes of Bill, and other Unionsts who still live in some 'us/them' class war fantasyland, or perhaps its just the on going ego war that carried over from Uni days and student activism ? and who can only retain their (probably well paid) positions by 'appearing' relevant and 'doing' things.

I call on all of us to seek a better understanding of the global and regional dynamics that are happening around us, like smoking, u don't die after the first puff, but sure enough it will get the smoker in the end.

Unless we 'spoon fed' Aussies re-learn the value of extended family, and creative living and re-discover some 'pioneer' spirit, we are to be frank.....doomed.

Having said all that in on a 'social' level, I add this on a spiritual -'and turn away from our self filled lives, back to our Creator through Christ' Saying such things might impact on my own credibility to some, but I speak as one who knows the result in my own life.

The majority of Posts appear to believe that something had to be done to improve the position of the employer not the worker. Point taken, but with permission to answer, however, is it justifiable to get rid of an arbitration system based on democratic and moralistic values, to replace it with a tag to a trickle-down economy where the ordinary worker can only rely on a stroke of luck to finish with a good boss-man.

Tied to the trickle-down economy, as Professor Ron Mcallum, Dean of Law at Sydney University, points out, is the Neo-Liberal agenda to individualise the workplace now having replaced former more harmonic labour laws in the USA. It goes on to say that the free-marketeers who adhere to the neo-liberal agenda have made no secret of the view that workplace relations are best conducted directly between employers and employees without the intrusion of unions or industrial tribunals. This could mean that a wealthy boss and the usual non-wealthy worker must meet each other on the same ground, the boss-man under the new laws, at will to call in a lawyer, whereas the usual battling worker, will have no protection whatever.

It is also well to remember that the free-market neo-liberal agenda is nothing new, as the prefix (neo) implies, having been born in the early 19th century, died down in the early 20th century, active again in the Roaring 1920s, and collapsing again during the Great Depression, only rising again with Thatcherism and Reagonomics. It is also well to remember, that most political scientists hope it will collapse again.

Great BOAZ, so we should pray to Jesus Christ while employers prey upon our carcass? If this is salvation, count me out!

Dear Sand
your response is appreciated, because it illustrates exactly the point I'm trying to make.

Did you note that I left my spiritual exhortation until after I had said my piece on the social issue ?

You came back to me with the 'us/them' approach which is tragic today. "The evil employers are just waiting to screw us"

I am an employer, and to find a good worker is a joy, it is something you seek opportunities to reward. If we don't, they will become increasingly 'self oriented' in the work, they will not be there as part of the team, they will seek every opportunity to minimize work, and maximize self benefit. In my last place of employment, I watched this pattern over and over, and I also experienced it myself.
So, I know from both sides of the fence.
Some employers value 'control' much more than they value productivity and growth. So, one has to decide "stay...or go".. I chose GO..and have been self employed since 1995, and have earned up to $34,000 in one month, with regular monthly company income of $20,000 (gross)

Its not so fruitful now, because just as I had 'circumstances' which fell into place for that, they also fall 'out' of place and it all changes. For the past 3 yrs, I've probably drawn the dole and thats about it. (from my company I mean)

Concerning 'Lets pray to Jesus'.. yes.. lets, but not to give us special financial blessings, or better jobs, but to make us better more ethical people. To give us the inner peace and fulfillment which will make us more attractive to prospective employers and a blessing to our fellow workers, or to give us the vision to make it on our own.

Your 'so the employers can prey on our carcases' seemed like you have locked yourself into an 'employee' mentality. Think further, outside that loop, be liberated from that near victim mentality.
If you take something on urself, and make it, great ! if things don't work out, learn from it and try again.

IR reform is a lovely way to put it, perhaps pre emptive retaliation
is also nice.
If they're not selling us a pup, why spend so much advertising it.
why advertise something without all the details? dosent that seem like shifty business?
As somebody who's going to enter the workforce at the educated end of the spectrum (ha ha ha), if the conditions dont suit me I'll go overseas(ha ha ha), leaving the morons to whinge about the skills shortage.
might even get the mail redirected to address the old HECS debt
(ha ha ha).
So yeah, its a real winner this mythical "reform".
Like most problems, its not planned beyond the term of political tenure.

The IR changes are about maximising profits at the expense of workers. This is obvious. Howard asserts that the economy will be better off. And that the measure of any industrial relations system is its ability to improve the economy. Well, that cannot happen unless businesses make more profit. There is nothing wrong with increased profit per se, just how you go about getting it. Increased revenue? Reduction in costs? The IR changes are about the latter. It’s about moving benefits (which is a cost) from being mandatory to being negotiable. The overall effect from this is that businesses get to make more money. The current challenge we see Howard confronting is how to make it sound like it’ll be good for workers too. That’s where facts end and ideology begins. There is no evidence to suggest that the IR changes will boost wages, productivity or reduce unemployment. If there were such evidence, it would be rolled out pretty quickly. What he rolls out instead is what you see in those ads, which are just lies. If something is negotiable, then I’m sorry to say it’s not ‘protected by law’. Howard’s ideology goes something like this:

When a business makes more money, it grows. As it grows, it needs more workers so management hire more people.

This is theory. A company only hires more people when it cannot produce enough product or service to meet demand. It has nothing to do with profitability directly.

Another one is that as a company makes more money, they can afford to pay their employees more. Well, in a sense that’s true. Executive salaries have boomed in recent years. In the case of a corporation, capital is raised by shareholder investment. In order to attract and retain shareholders, it follows that shareholders must be looked after. As a CEO, try telling your shareholders at your next AGM that since the company’s profits are up by 15%, you’re giving every employee a raise instead of issuing a dividend. The fact is that companies pay employees as little as they can get away with.

There’s also the issue about removing unfair dismissal laws for businesses with less that 100 employees. This is important. The argument says that employers can confidently hire new staff without having to worry about getting stuck with them when the good times turn bad. Redundancy is already a mechanism to cater for that problem. There is no need to remove unfair dismissal laws. What this actually is designed to do is help to create a sense of job insecurity in the workplace. Creating a sense of job insecurity is an excellent way to push bargaining power further towards employers. Apart from the obvious problem with that scenario is the effect that will have on consumer spending. People tend not to spend as much if they think they might not have a job next week. If people don’t spend, companies don’t make enough money. How will companies respond? By cutting costs. Here we go again.

Re bargaining power, I read a good comment on a different forum by someone with the alias ‘bdm’ and I think he/she sums it up:

“For those that believe there will be plenty of negotiation at all workplaces, consider this - how often do you get to negotiate the terms and conditions of your banking, your mortgage, your mobile telephone, your internet access, your pay television and so forth? These are all market-driven services governed by non-negotiable contracts. Where's the evidence to suggest that every employer will offer a customised workplace contract with every employee? Far more likely is that many employers will use "standard" agreements with no negotiation possible, and the employee's only choice will be to sign it or work elsewhere.”

SHAN... I feel sorry for you.

Quote: "The IR changes are about maximising profits at the expense of workers. This is obvious"

Given the choice,
1/ A job..... which pays something.
2/ No job, and a poor country which cannot afford to pay the welfare level you would feel entitled to if point 1 applied to you..

Which would you choose ?

You began your tirade with an immediate reference to THEM/US "The evil employers and their lacky John Howard" and the "Poor victim/vulnerable workers, and their hero the Union Movement."

Have you been declared 'legally blind' due to your inability to notice the NUMEROUS factory closures and bank etc downsizings over 2005 due to OUTSOURCING to China, India, Phillipines etc etc of Vehicle parts, Call centres, and Back office functions of other corporations ?

Your portrayal of industrial relations changes in terms of some outmoded class warfare might suit your purposes, (which appear to be extremely short term and self interested and definitely not sustainable) but as a true characterization of where the rubber meets the road, it is innacurate, misguided, not representative and sounds like a rather shabby effort at simple propoganda.

To be fair, I guess I can see the 'potential' for employer abuse in some things, just as now, the unfair dismissal laws provide the potential for employee abuse.

Considering that it is the employers who actually provide the jobs, I'd rather they were the ones protected more. Abusive employers will get the message when no one wants to work for them... or.. do you not understand 2+2=4 ?

In the current global climate, the changes needed to our work ethic and lifestyle for our economic survival,are radical! I think the lack of response to this point I've rather labored is a sign of 'head in the sand/dont annoy me with reality' by those speaking from a polarized view of the situation.

Employers want 'some' profit or.. 'a' profit, and without many painful changes to our lifestyle we will not have any profit OR any jobs.

Hello BOAZ. You appear to agree more with Shan than you disagree, except on the point of a solution to our current (& future) problems with industrial employment.
I’m a manufacturing manager/engineer of the ‘progressive’ school (plastics & packaging), currently completely dismayed with what’s on offer for the Oz manufacturer. So much so that I’m changing career to the service industry. Here are my observations.
We will never compete with high vol/ labour intensive manufacturers in India/Asia while the predominantly US based multinationals are allowed to exploit the fragile Labour laws of these nations.
There is no point for Oz manufacturers to attempt to compete.
We still have our niches, & always will have. The above-mentioned cheaper mauf. Costs in Asia are balanced against transport & quality logistics & their cost. Food packaging will always be local, for example. High volume, low mass products will never be cheap to transport.
The Howard gov’t recognises the challenges Oz Manufacturers are facing. Screwing the worker is the only way it can see to keep the numbers good. The use of force, not brain is being advocated. Nearly all of the manufacturers I’ve worked for in Oz put no value in progressive planning such as R&D. We do not plan & spent for the future, unlike our competitors. ‘Self service’ & short-term planning are the attributes of local manufacturers. Face it, big boys. We need to work smarter & this will cost money. A good Oz government would be presently be attending to the employer, in all ways other than the reduction of labour costs.
The Gov’t claims that the changes forthcoming are to inprove productivity. The changes cannot affect ‘productivity’, it being a measure of worker output/hr. As a matter of fact’ countries that have been through Howards process report a fall in productivity (USA a fine example).
I find the ad at the top of this page highly annoying.
More later

Swilkie good observations ! and I fully understand your career move.
I invested in 6 acres of land at the bottom of the Dandenongs in 98 (a golf course on my back fence also)and have always had 'small scale tourist accomodation' in mind. as an alternative to small manufacturing.

The thing is, Shan does not seem to 'get' what you are saying, he still sees things as 'greedy employers' rather than global dynamics.

Sadly, your comments about lack of foresight/long term strategic planning may be right enough to make Shan also right to a degree.

If we could only humble ourselves enough to learn from the Chinese and set up 'special economic zones' my goodness, we could probably turn things around. Example. Darwin, which special guest worker status for unending supplies of Indonesian labor.

Who would fight against this ? why it would be UNIONS of course.. "We must not lower the pay and conditions of workers in Australia" bah ! what absolute unadulterated 'bs'. There is a simple choice- 'do it or die' Except for the cunning ones like you and perhaps me who have 'service' in the back or front of their long term planning.

We are also under the thumb of the Pastoralists who want to continue selling to China, and who are quite happy to sacrifice other industries to do so. - so politics also impacts here.

My company (employees 1... me :) is quite a niche effort. I can compete with the chinese made product on customer service and not too far behind on price when I put my mind to it, but man..one has to roll up ones sleeves and get right into it or fade into oblivion.
Even my chinese contacts in Singapore prefer what I make than what China offers.

I'm more concerned for the HUGE numbers of jobs IN... the support roles of major businesses.. even service industries, where everything but the hands on work here will be coming out of CyberJaya, Malaysia etc. Invoicing, Customer support, Sales.. etc

In time..social unrest... hmm lets beef up anti terror laws

May I pick up on the proposed Office of Workplace Services. I was watching one of the numerous advertisements last night (for each of the commercial stations, I estimate every second break included one of the adverts).

I was struck by the thought that the Office of Workplace Services is the government's replacement for the union. I believe the advert said it would support employees for negotiations and in unfair dismissal actions. There's a $4,000 grant available for legal action.

If this is the fundamental intention, that union's become redundant or in competition with a government institution, then this represents an expansion of government. Taxpayers will be funding services which are currently paid directly by workers and operated by workers. This is a reverse of the trend elsewhere to privatise. Here are private organisations now competing against new government services.

Has anyone worked out the overall ongoing cost to taxpayers of these reforms?

When the Liberals loose government (which must happen eventually), the opposition may respond to any deficiencies of support for employees by (a) increasing the number of standard protections, eg legislating for penalty rates on public holidays (b) expanding or empowering the Office of Workplace Services.

So I don't see this as a deregulation of industrial relations at all. My comments are speculative, but I would love to see some deeper analysis of what these reforms mean in the long-term from those with industrial relations expertise.

These arrangemetns are a well crafted and expensive trojan horse: for all the hoopla about protecting existing conditions - over time new workers coming on stream will be bargaining with less for less; given work place turn over a few years will see most outfits with total revision of conditions.

And to David latimer: the most extensive analysis of the reofrms has been done by a raft of academics; I dont have the web site at hand but google IRreportcard and you will hit up the right one.

I know the mention of the word academic will give rise to unridled sneers from some posters but to date these guys are the only ones who have delivered some reasoned analysis on the issue rather than hollow assertions.

Bill, there's no need for all this. Your place on the front bench of the federal ALP is guaranteed. I can't remember if Simon managed any profound and stylish essays but he ended up at head office. Bill, we've had an endless supply of experts from the unions who were going to save the workers from the clutches of ravenous and evil capitalist predators. One ACTU hero of the working class ended up posing in a bathrobe for a magazine owned by a person who used the sobriquet 'goanna' to disguise the fact he was a capitalist predator.

Bill, how are you at churning out potboilers? You know the kind of book I mean; the one that ends up in the fiction/fantasy section of major booksellers.

Bill, It is a great pity that the Awu is so right wing that it does hardly anything to protect workers rights at anytime. From my experience with the union it would rather takes the bosses side than it's member's, it's about time the Awu, got active and represented it's members, because if it continues to be so weak, it won't have any!

Solomon said many years ago: “A rebuke goes deeper into a wise man, than a hundred blows into a fool” (Prov 17:10)

So, here goes.....

Many posts here are BLIND, DUMB or STUPID .... or.. (God forbid) ALLL of the above.

It’s not often I’ll take to personal attacks on the character of my fellow posters, but this time it has a strategic and positive reason. (get the juices going :)

1/ BLIND .. Its right there, in front of you, uncompetitive short term me me me ism is doomed to failure and you don’t “see” it.

2/ DUMB You see it, but it just does not register.

3/ STUPID You see it, it registers, but you do nothing to change.

If these things characterize government, woe betide us.

Then there is the even worse scenario: Government see’s it, it registers, they try to do something about it, and are thwarted by “massive industrial unrest” and “huge union campaigns to protect the rights of workers”... sound familiar ?

The ridiculous thing in that last bit, is the Union leadership simply trying to remain relevant and retain power by the same empty unsustainable promises which give my own son $20 an hour for process work making car parts.... while it sure does help “NOW”, it aint gonna help when that company gets dumped by Mistubishi or Ford when they outsource the same parts from China and he doesn’t have a job.

recent victims:

-Ion Transmissions Woodonga (Gearboxes)
-Wiper blade maker in Melbourne

The interesting point about ION is... that a Japanese company wants to BUY IT..... now what does that tell you ? (c’mon now..... put our thinking caps on..... )

“The announcement follows the sacking of 200 employees at Ion's plant in the Adelaide suburb of Plympton in late August after Holden decided to source components from cheaper offshore suppliers.”
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,16850725%255E601,00.html

Gov’t says “go Hi Tech”.. but here is the reality
http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=161
“China’s ...opportunities for the global giants, especially in capital-intensive and HI-TECH sectors. These giants have helped China connect to the global markets.”

heard the saying “Wake up...Australia” ?

I strongly and completely disagree with the last post about others being "blind, dumb or stupid" or that it's beneficial to say it. I note that no others have made personal remarks.

Interesting how people of fundamentally different backgrounds are reaching the same conclusions in this case. Here are my predictions if ‘workchoice (sic)’ is implemented as planned-
Employers, not employees will initiate the changes progressively after the start date. Employers with less than approx 50 workers usually do not run a dedicated ‘HR’ dept & will probably do nothing proactively. The legal changes will only be apparent when disputes are triggered by individual employees (whatever the reason). It will not be feasible for employers to walk up to workers & say ‘$2 less/hr or your gone’. It will cost them too much time & money.
Conditions for employees in small biz will be eroded by the proactive changes set in forth by the HR heavies usually contracted to companies >100 employees. Workers in these medium-to-large businesses are presently employed under collective agreements (usually Union represented). One by one they will be converted to individual agreements (rendering the Union pointless) & will be offered only what benefits the employer. Only those closest to the decision makers may be in the position to ‘trade’. The average, predominantly ‘powerless’ individual employee will be just that, powerless.
Changes to the ‘award’ system are likely to have little impact, given that awards offered are already nearly always exceeded now. Impact is likely to be felt by junior & unskilled, those already working close to their relevant award.
Social unrest will increase as personal security is generally reduced. Greater load will be placed on charities, govt departments – unemployment (true unemployment, not the bulls--t govt statistics) will increase, probably resulting in a tightening of social security provisions.
All democratic political organisations understand the terms ‘progressive’ & ‘regressive’ in the social sense. This change falls well & truly in the regressive class, & therefore is undemocratic in its implementation.

David,
you may not see any need or validity in my last rather vulgar post, but it might be more beneficial to demonstrate the flaws in reasoning, rather than just express your disdain for it.

"Mene Mene Tekel Upharsin"

Do you know these words ? I think you might. They are Aramaic and from them we have gained the saying "The writing is on the wall"

They occurred in 539 just as King Belshazar of Babylon, had induldged himself in an orgy of self glorification and human pride before a 1000 of his nobles.

The words mean, "It has been counted and counted, weighed and divided."

We have a society, as reflected by many posts and the author of the article himself, of self interested, self indulgent, self glorifying indivuals, who see most others who think differently as the 'enemy of my rights'

On the Babylonian theme, there is another relevance. During that feast, the king brought out all the previously plundered temple vessels from Jerusalem. Background was that King Hezekiah had welcomed the Babylonian envoy and shown him all the treasures. The prophet Isaiah then told him as follows:

"Hear the word of the LORD Almighty: 6 The time will surely come when everything in your palace, and all that your fathers have stored up until this day, will be carried off to Babylon. Nothing will be left, says the LORD.

There are many parallels to our situation today. We educate foreigners, we show them all we have, what we know, and the time will come, when they 'take all we have'. Funny thing about human nature, it seldom changes.

So, I made specific assertions regarding trends and attitudes among us. Take issue with them and show me that we are not in fact Blind,Dumb, or stupid..and that

...the writing is not on the wall

Umm swilkie I think Your thinking a bit to radically what you have predicted is unobtainable even by a society where profits are the only concern. What U have proposed is basically slavery, John Howards workchoices are aimed not to reduce employees rights or decrease their wages but to lessen the risk of employers employing new staff, this in turn will enable further employment and allow for increases in wages. Workchoices also guarantee that no wages will decrease or nobody will lose benefits. How can u judge the changes on the basis of actu promotions, the only judgement can be based upon the legislation which is passed.

Anyway why would JOhn HOward introduce these laws if they would worsen his public image?

Because he is soon to retire and dosn't especially care... He is in the lovely position of soon to be recieving a golden handshake, his children are all well-educated and established in secure jobs, and despite his claims to understand the "average person", he dosn't really 'get' that there are people out there who would be ripped off by employers who are trying to get the most out of people for the least amount of money. He dosn't really see that there are kids who leave school at sixteen, or that people at 45 who suddenly find themselves redundant can be considered to be 'scrapheaped', and that there are many people who do not have the English language skills to even really know what they are signing away.

Just because 'a job' is better than 'no job', that does not mean we should go back to 1900s sweatshops. And just because crappy conditions exist elsewhere, does not mean we should put up with them. We should be trying to raise everyone's standards, not lower outrs.

Hello Bubsodian,
I'm merely extrapolating the direction we've been heading for the past 10yrs, with the added effect of 'workchoice (sic)'. I haven't taken into account government evolution of policy in response to public opinion, as it has not altered anything up until now (regarding this matter). It may.
If you honestly believe that 'workchoice (sic)' is a good thing for Australia please explain in detail how? You may wish to remove your rose coloured glasses beforehand.

LAURIE
I'd like to address 2 points in your post.

1/ "He doesn't care" (Howard)... I don't think thats entirely correct, but I think he expresses his care through his own ideological blinkers, which are apparently not the same as yours. (and in many cases not like mine either)

2/ You said "We should be trying to raise living standards not reduce them", and you amplified this with your comment about sweat shops etc.

While I agree with your sentiments, I'm skeptical about the viability of continually raising living standards when we have to compete in the same market place as those around us (say Indonesia) where the Monthly wage is around USD$115/month I believe.

If we have some niche product where we have few competitors, which may be because we have a raw or intellectual material advantage over others, then, with increased efficiency and productivity, there is indeed scope for improving our incomes at employer and employee levels. But in companies run by boards and shareholders, there would be more resistance to ANY increase in costs, or reductions in profits. .

But, to be honest, scope for raising living standards is definitely not something that can be applied across the board. It will depend on a variety of factors, including industry sector, competition (current and on the horizon), relationship with customers, quality etc.

If you work now in the commodities industry, you probably have a good chance at medium term better living standard/income, but if you are in the manufacturing sector, forget it totally. The only direction margins are going in manufacturing which is not protected by world wide patents or tarrifs is 'squeeeezed'. For those sectors where there is no protection, its not a matter of 'if' but 'when' they are displaced by some Chinese supplier.

Most large corporations are shedding costly "high living standard" Australian workers from their 'back office' and customer relations, even sales departments and replacing them with Asians in Bangalore (software and call centres) or Manila etc.

So its not 'just' manufacturing that's in jeapordy.

Hey I wear no rose colored glasses or do I? But anyway Workchoices is aimed at removing previous restrictions upon employers and enabling employers and employees to reach agreement. It also allows competition within the workplace as workers will strive to show improved productivity to increase their own personal wage. As we know increased productivity leads to economic growth, and with strong economic growth over the past decade living standards can only increase. Workchoices or the current IR reform should promote this growth.

To address the issue of radicalism of the reform, it is in fact not radical enough some believe. These reforms were due long ago and infact more was needed to free the workplace of regulations which have constricted Australias industry.

Anyway the liberals so far have managed the economy in a plausible stable way maintaining strong economic growth over the past decade, If this reform where to change that record the would not make the decision.

Too much there seems to be the view that higher productivity means working harder or longer. Historically it hasn't. Higher productivity over the long term has meant more income, more leisure time, better working conditions

Terjey, Productivity is defined as 'output per working hour' by professional economists, industrial managers etc & is used for statistical performance comparisons of individual & group situations. It has no relevence in the fashion you describe..

Why am I still posting here?

Workers need more rights?
>

Drunk broker gets $10K compo
(http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,16976212-29277,00.html)

A SACKED insurance broker who repeatedly came to work drunk has been awarded $10,000 after claiming discrimination against his attention deficit disorder.

Experts warn the Federal Magistrate's Court decision in favour of Jirra Collings Ware could open the floodgates for employees to claim similar disabilities in termination cases when unfair dismissal protection is removed.

The Federal Government plans to scrap unfair dismissal laws under its controversial industrial relations reform.

News Ltd newspapers report Mr Ware told the court he had a drinking problem and frequently returned late from long lunches involving alcohol.

On one occasion in October 2002, he returned to the office after drinking at the pub and urinated in the wastepaper basket.

He was warned several times by his employer that his drinking habits were unacceptable and given more reprimands before his dismissal in September 2003.

Mr Ware was awarded $10,000 compensation, plus termination payments and other costs.

Workplace lawyer Sue Barns said the removal of unfair dismissal laws would create similar claims

Under the new reforms that workers will be entitled to $4,000 in legal assistance if they have been unlawfully dismissed, which includes dismissal based on discrimination.

Unfair dismissal is a different matter, involving the process of giving reprimands for things like long-lunches. The article appears to say that appropriate dismissal processes were followed.

Swilkie
I hope you are still posting here because you clearly have a lot to offer....

Your experience is important, and we can all learn from it.
It seems more 'connected' to reality than many.

I still think people are missing the big picture. Its like shuffling deck chairs on the Titanic.
HA !.. your deckchair is prettier than mine.. I want a better one ! duh -all this while the ship is SINKING.

I'll repeat it gain 'BLIND, DUMB, STUPID'

There are legislative answers to many job threatening trends in Australia now, they are where we should be focusing.

As I've repeatedly said. IT'S NOT JUST MANUFACTURING which is being outsourced to Asia !

SALES
CUSTOMER SERVICE
TECHNICAL SUPPORT
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
CLERICAL/BACK OFFICE tasks.

If fact, ANYTHING which can be accomplished with a telephone, is being outsourced to Asia.

For those (like myself) who have 'tourism' as an option, remember the Video of the Asian tour group in Brisbane, there the leader told them (In Chinese) "Don't goto this or that shop, they are owned by Australians, goto such and such a shop, owned by Asians" ? (I saw this, I'm not being 'xenophobic')

We either find a legislative response to this, or we end up with so many intelligent people unemployed or under-employed, that they will begin to feel 'socially restless' so to speak, trapped, used up, neglected, ANGRY.... frustrated....cheated.. deceived... let down... rebellious.... etc.. and any thinking person knows where 'that' situation could lead .... right ?

The annoying part of all this, is that there will be opportunistic responses which don't have any other outcome or goal than to 'gain power' for some group. Just like the standard catch cry of all oppositions in the Phillipines is 'Corruption' .. until of course they get power.

...and....

AIRCRAFT MAINTAINANCE (this mornings news)

to mention just a few of the industries effected by the migration of Jobs to other countries.

Now.. 'why' are so few people up in arms about the legistlative framework which allows this ?

Most likely its the 'frog in beaker' effect. If you boil it slowly it doesn't know its being cooked.... and will just die.

Bit by bit, industries and jobs are being 're-settled' in other countries. Just keep up with the news over a one year period with this theme in mind.

RESPONSES ? Well, just like a corrupt political opposition in the Philippines will cry and rant and rail about 'CORRUPTION' in the status quo, Bill Shortern and others cry and rant about 'ATTACK ON FAMILIES'.. duh....(hmm why ? for families ? hah ! no, because of a political ambition)

When in fact, the Industrial relations changes are simply a short term government knee jerk reaction and bandaid attempt to make us "more competitive" AT THE EXPENSE of all the industries listed above.

CAPITALIST corporations are faced with this: =>Increase profits, reduce costs.

Capitalist corporations "without a social conscience" will add to the 2nd point "At any cost" (cost reduction) which leads of course to overseas outsourcing.

When asked WHY ? the obvious (and correct) answer would be:

"Because union demands for better pay and conditions have not just lessened our profitability, they have made us 'not viable' as a company. (this would be true of many, but not all, e.g. Qantas is profitable NOW, but still wants to outsource maintainance o'seas)

So, perhaps the goal of our community should be to inculcate a sense of social conscience in our corporate fabric at BOTH ends of the spectrum .. the organized labor and the managerial.

Continued demands for better pay will only fuel this cyclical syndrome unless productivity likewise improves.

NO! to being 'BLIND, DUMB and/or STUPID

I myself raised in another discussion (http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=181) the issue of compeition from low wage companies that BOAZ_David has repeatedly raised on this forum.

Over there, BOAZ_David seems to have argued that Malaysian workers are doing really well, so why are jobs being lost to Malaysia?

When we embarked upon the globalisation experiment back in the 1980's under the Hawke and Keating government, the common sense objections that most of us held, that low wages from overseas could destroy many of our industries including our manufacturing industries, were brushed aside by the same people who are now preaching that we have to lower our living standards in order to compete with those wage levels.

If we continue with the present trend, we will have little basis for our economy, other than property speculation, the export of non-renewable natural resources, and a lot of paper shuffling.

This can only lead to dependency and impoverishment in the longer run, particularly when the dwindling supplies of non-renewable petroleum inevitably make large scale global trade impossible in the near future.

It is time we abandoned the reckless economic experiment of globalisation and neo-liberalism and it is time that our Government got back to the job of looking after the long term welfare of all Australians.

Dagget, I could not agree more mate.

There are only 2 possible responses to the trend you well recognize.

1/ Let it continue and see all that you stated be fulfilled
2/ Legislate for our own benefit and protection.

Point 2 is not suggesting protecting inefficient industries and prop them up. It is saying protect them from UNfair playing fields and artificially low labor rates by dictatorial regimes.
It IS saying, that the practice of outsourcing large chunks of the labor force to cheap Asian countries by businesses who's bulk operations are in Australia should be OUTLAWED !

It mainly produces lower 'business costs' but seldom 'lower prices'.

A SMART government can make appropriate decisions along these lines,
A DUMB government will simply reap the short term rewards, allow the dramatic and probably irreversible social restructuring to occur (save by revolution of masses of unemployed dissaffected people) and continue the cocktail party circuit of self congratulation.

I have zero faith in the Bill Shorterns of this world, who seem to be driven by ambition and party doctrine of 'LABOR' I have almost the same lack of confidence in the Coalition, who are also driven by the obscure 'productivity commission' and various other agricultural and commodity power bases.

As a Christian I do have confidence in the politics of Justice and Honouring God and His standards in our national life and Government.

Apart from miniscule Family First, I don't see to many effectual luminaries on the horizon. So perhaps it's up to us, the voters to drag our government, kicking and screaming if need be, to see the folly of their ways and start looking after the country rather than simply selected vested interests.

Maybe it's also time for the 'vested interests' to see past their next balance sheet to a better future for all of us.

Let me close with a quote from the prophet Isaiah, never one to mince words:
Is 1.7
Your country is desolate,
your cities burned with fire;
your fields are being stripped by foreigners
right before you,
laid waste as when overthrown by strangers

Does anyone in this forum find it a contradiction in terms, that we can't afford pay rises for the workforce, however business owners get such a great advantage from the A.T.O. and can clain things on tax, that we can't claim, and big organisation like Telstra and Quantas "who can not afford Australian workers" and move our jobs off shore, always seem to easily afford golden handshakes of $ millions for the C.E.O who sacks us.

Shonga, you've got it in a nutshell. Yes there is a huge inequity where workers are expected to do more on less and the upper echelon (CEO's etc) are paid way beyond their true worth.

We are heading for a class of working poor - just like in the USA.

I have recently become unemployed - have a mortgage to pay (not excessive very modest) and I will be expected to take any job for any rate of pay - looks like I'll be selling my home soon if I can't find work that pays a liveable income. Of course people like me don't matter - I'm single have no children to support - I don't count at all.

Scout, I am amazed at the concern that politicians express about families, everyone builds a picture of mum, dad and 3 kids. That really isn't the reality.

I was a census collector in 2001 and in my inner city collection district if I remember my preliminary count properly the population was 70% female. Only 10% of households had male female who could have been married or partnered.

Coupled with "the lowest unemployment rates for 29 years" I am deeply suspicious of all Australian statistics. I can remember 29 years ago. I can't remember skilled workers being rung at 7:15am to start work at 8:30am. 10% of Victorian teachers are hired that way daily. Reminiscent of the waterside workers "bull system" of the 1930s and 1940s.

I am sure the IR changes and proposed welfare changes will force people to rely on their families because government and church welfare will be severely limited and strained.

I was always taught to look out for my younger siblings and not to take advantage of those who couldn't defend themselves and I thought that's what society was all about. Hmmm stupid me!

Boaz, I know from your posts that your business is in the thick of this battle, so I'm happy to apply different rules to your posts than those from academics who have never actually worked.

In a company founded on risk capital, that is.

But I wonder if you have fully thought through the implications of your comment:

>>It IS saying, that the practice of outsourcing large chunks of the labor force to cheap Asian countries by businesses who's bulk operations are in Australia should be OUTLAWED !<<

Isolationism is not really a twentyfirst century option, unless we choose to become a pariah state such as North Korea and live by making demands on the rest of the world. You are closer to the mark when you point out, as you have on a number of occasions, that our economy is in for a very rude shock as the cumulative effects of our job export programme come home to roost. As they of course will.

Unfortunately, picking up our ball and going home won't improve anything.

The fact is that there isn't a politician in sight - or even in living memory - that has the intellectual nous to understand the problem, let alone formulate a plan that will enable us to survive without a major and disruptive shock to our collective systems.

The present status is insupportable, but no reasonable alternatives have been proposed. We have our heads firmly in the sand, hoping it will all go away, and that we will suddenly find ourselves living again in the oh-so-simple nineteen fifties.

Shonga has indeed pointed out some important issues. Basically echoing what I alluded to.

The problem in ancient Israel, was that selfishness overode all sense of social responsibility which itself was a byproduct of being rightly related to Yahweh through the temple ceremonial life.

The CEO's of that day went after the 'Baal' and 'Ashteroth' idols, today they are after the latest Jet ski, SUV, Toorak Mansion, or Park Orchards sprawling estate, along with the Holiday places in various locations. They love the gold plated taps and bathroom furniture, and the Pearl handled this or that the private chopper or Learjet etc...
"Same sh*t, different shovel"

Scout,
if I may, yes, in a self centred world, your are right. You don't matter, you and many others are quite expendable. Leave God out of the picture and its every man for himself. None of this 'Do for your neighbour as you would have them do for you'...no..its dog eat dog....(Pericles will disagree with me on this, but its ok)

But in a Christ centred world/community/country, it is this:

"And no one said what he had was his own, but they had all things in common, and shared according to the need" (Acts 2)

We 'lived' this in a protestant interdenominational Mission, 950 members, the General Director was paid the same out of the pooled resources just like the ordinary worker.. mostly $20/week disposable income (after food and lodging)for 8 yrs.

Pericles. Agreed, though I confess its not my own business so much effected by this, though one would need therapy if one thought they could make something the chinese are making and stay afloat. I am, but its on quality, customer service, niche market and that all important thing 'connections' etc

I'm far more concerned by the call centre people, sales, etc.. all the 'phone' related jobs of others. Your right, there are no serious solutions being presented, so I make bold statements "OUTLAW IT" ..hopefully to get some thinking going. I do see a role for selective legislative responses, but which ones, I don't know.

D'you know Boaz, it has always fascinated me that:

"And no one said what he had was his own, but they had all things in common, and shared according to the need" (Acts 2)

is so close in concept to:

"From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs!" Karl Marx

Given that the communist experiment was such an economic disaster, isn't there an inference to be drawn here that an economy based upon Christian principles would be equally catastrophic?

Only teasing.

If it wasn't for the natural greed and venality of man, communism would have worked well.

Just like capitalism would have worked well, but for the natural greed and venality of man.

Coincidence? I don't think so...

Sandy toes - perhaps we are getting somewhere now. Families should be looking after each other and I am sure will find many successful people have had or continue to have good family networks. We shouldn't rely on the government for everything, that is lazy and not cost effective.
Church and community groups are better than governments and I would rather see them helping out more as well.
I would much rather donate my $14,000 tax bill to a charity than to the tax office - it would spread further and get better grass roots results, without the bureaucratic paper shuffling.
I bit off topic I know, but if Sandy thinks these IR changes will reignite familial responsibility, that is another tick in the positive column for mine.

t.u.s.

Pericles,
it would not surprise me if Marx 'plagerised' his saying from Acts.

Your quite right, it did actually fail (to a degree) in Acts.

Soon after that description of social harmony and generosity, we read

'And the greeks complained that their widows were being neglected in the daily distribution'.

It was in reality a spiritual problem (selfishness) but the Apostles attempted to remedy it with an administrative response.

"So they appointed so and so, of good repute etc, to make the distribution..." ( an examination of the names, shows they are all greek :)

I actually think they made a bit of a blue there. They probably exacerbated it, replacing 'suspicious greeks' with now suspicious Jews...possibly.

Bottom line, Spiritual renewal is a moment by moment thing. Repentance in the bible usually has the 'present continuous tense' rather than a once of point in time.

Though, I observe human nature to be rather oblivious of 'others' when dutifully looking after ones own.

I see the evidence of a workable 'Acts 2' in our own fellowship where we have a 'food bank' of meals for those in short term hardship, and there are many ways to deal with it. One of the best ways is the 'country spirit' where this is normal practice.

Marxism failed for the same reasons the Fellowship of the apostles also had problems. Human greed. One form of medication I know is a stern rebuke :) though the Bible puts this better.

"Those of you who are strong, should build up the brother who is weak"

"If anyone is found in sin, restore him in a spirit of gentleness"

etc.

I don't mention such things as a 'social policy' but as an ideal to strive for. The closer we are to God, the more we will care about our neighbour.

Whether you people are for or against the IR "reform", none of you seem to realise the real reason the Howard government is doing this.

While we are hearing all of these economic benefits and increases in low-paid, casual job positions, the country as a whole is failing to see the more sinister reasons for the changes. They are...

1. If the Liberals can weaken the unions to the point where they are almost non-existant, then the ALP will lose most of it's funding, particularly at election time and we are then likely to become a one party country with no real alternative. We can then kiss our democracy good-bye and say hello to facism. The Liberal party's ultimate goal it total control.

2. It's the perfect opportunity for Howard to hit the working class where it hurts. Something he has wanted to do for a long time to a demographic that he has nothing but utter contempt for. He has even been known to say "Give 'em f---ing nothing" when referring to the working class while drinking wine with friends and cronies at Kiribilli house.

Why do my fellow citizens want this for their country? Why are we willing to lose our democracy and civil rights to a bunch of right-wing radicals?

I for one have no desire to live in this country anymore.

I agree Mr Man, I too see for the first time in the history of this country people immigrating from Australia. I don’t like the direction this country is heading and I will be seeking in the future overseas employment with a view of moving my family from Australia. This may seem radical but people have been doing it for centuries to seek a better way of life. A major result of these proposed IR policies is that we are going to see an increase in crime, decrease in public services and a stuff you attitude from fellow employees. Look at the state of our public hospitals, imagine what they are going to be like when there is a down turn in the economy and unemployment is high. I will consider taking my skill overseas and let this country go down the sh*tter.

Come please, what can Bill do about it? well the best thing is get into the house and seak a leading role now.
We like our grand fathers can do a great deal, stay in our unions get active in letters to those who impose this crime on us and vote only Labor.
To manufacture a poorer working class is the aim of this dreadfull bill and that alone.
As a unionist prison awaits me that holds no fears are you ready to defend your rights?

Up the thread it is said the AWU fails to look after its members, nearly 40 years as a unionist I know that to be a lie more militant unions use.
Its those radical unions that made victims of all Australian workers and focused Howards so called reform on us all.
The AWU has produced a lifetime of sevice to middle Australia ,and one day in Bill Shorten will again give great leadership to the country.

People usually assume unions exist to advance the working conditions of their employees, and some posters object to unions expressing opinions on social justice / political issues.

How many old buildings would Sydney have if the BLF hadn't banned some sites?

I just remembered when unions have really been most helpful to me. There was a building site behind my house actually a 8 metre deep hole, 3 metres from my bed.
As is usual on inner city building sites work started at 5am. The building code says work can't start until 7am but the police said it was a council problem and the local council opened its office at 8:30 am and had the attitude if we were rich enough to live here then we could suffer for once.

Some one told me to try the union. I rang the union and they acted immediately, no more 7am starts and a minimum of 2 people on site at all times.

So don't forget to tell John Howard on Tuesday November 15th that you disagree with his "Kill the unions bill" also known as "IR reforms" and how can 1300 pages of legislation and a seperate AWA for each worker at each place of work [probably 14,000,000 AWAs] be more efficient that 4000 awards?

see for http://www.rightsatwork.com.au/ for details.

How did I get the figure of 14,000,000 AWAs.
Assume 6,000,000 workers.
Assume 2,000,000 in full time work with one job.
Assume other 4,000,000 are part time.
Assume part timers have 3 jobs per year. My nieces will have 2 employers, I have 6 employers

It just has to be the differences in our lifetime experences that gives us such different views.
Yes I am a Labor activist, and after a lifetime unionist a union official.
My only intent as a unionist is to represent my members, no standover tactics no threats, just do my best to help while not distroying needed relation ships with most bosses.
Yes Howard is concerned only with distroying wage suport for workers and unions, but some do not see it?
Last week 8 low paid workers voted by request on a EBA put to them by the boss, he had told them to vote for it or be reduced to award payments [about $14 an hour not the few dollars more they get].
And demanded a secrete ballot! his workers backed that ballot 4 votes to take agreement 2 not to 2 absent from work.
They voted the next day and a hung ballot was the result 4 for 4 against.
1 hour into our re hashing this EBA union got 3 issues improved 2 hour minimum for call back to work raised to 4.
3% more pay raise than offer.
And lunch [usualy provided and required under existing EBA [miles away from shops] if unplaned overtime is worked, now a fee is to be paid if meal can not be sorced.
The doctors certificate for each sick day[ average per employee is 2.3 per year has been with drawn new EBA to be signed very soon.
So union won why? this national firms HQ had no part to play in the EBA draft and did not share managers views .
In what way did union not act with honour? these folk earn $32.000 a year hardly in need of a wage cut.

Will it pass the senate? Barnaby has the answer we must wait

A country born trade unionist I have walked over many padocks on the darkest of nights.
Just one hour ago a small light was born that will change Australia.
Bill Shorten told us he would run for parlement, I breath again full of hope.
Some not all of the left in the ALP would be glad to NEVER win an election than be forced to give up policys that give up 4 votes for each one they win.
No ALP federal goverment can be put in place unless based in the center right of the party.
Bill will revitalise my birthright the ALP as he did with the other half of my life the AWU.
Both must never be afraid of change.
And NEVER fear being from the majority.

You are a crazy loon Belly. The light on the hill , what guff.