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.