BOAZ_David, in your last post you say put aside hysteria. Thats a good commonsens approach; however, how do you trust a government that has been deceptive? One example from the last election was Medicare, during the campaign we were told that there would be no changes to the safety net. Evidence now coming forward indicates that the Coalition government had knowledge that it would not be possible to sustain the Medicare safety net prior to the last election. They were saying one thing, but had evidence to suggest the opposite.

Already there are complaints from working people about having been forced to sign Australian Workplace Agreements and as a result lost hard won entitlements without gaining extra financial consideration. Such a working agreement was read to a group of Unionists on 30th June at a demonstration. There was nothing ambiguous about what was read, the employing company had abused it's power.

Big business wishes the IR changes, shouldn't they be setting an example? The CEO of the Commonwealth Bank gaining a payout of $28 million is obscene to say the least (reported on Saturday 16 July 2005). There has been a very apparent trend in the last few years,to screw down the little person, while those in power are advantaged. The recent tax cuts promised by the Coalition Government give very litle support to those who need them, those on the minimum wage.

Arjay, BD if you can't afford to pay a decent living wage to your employees - then sell up now; our economy cannot afford to sustain unviable businesses.

If you are continually hiring problem employees then you need to reform your hiring policies.

Good employees need good employers.

The current IR charade is Howard's last stand to set himself in history - however history will judge him harshly for installing a divisive two tiered system of employment. He knows this is his last term. There is no justification for these 'reforms' just political ego.

Well Trinity, I'm rather glad you showed your true colors :).....

We call for 'middle ground which will benefit all"

and you say -paraphrasing.
-"Your hiring policies suck"
-"You don't know enough about business to survive, you should be CULLED"
-"You are the newly appointed guardian and all knowing one concerning the economic future of our country"

Myyyyy God, I'll resist the EXTREME temptation to ascribe about 20 juicy adjectives to your 'wisdom' :) I feel others can see for themselves.

One of my newly decided "hiring policy" questions will now be

"Do you feel the world and my company owes you a living ? and can you accept that as the newest member of the team, you may have to be let go if things take a nosedive" ?

Trinity, you work for others, yet you have the 'all knowingness' to decide their suitability to run and manage the business that (in my case) they took a punt on with all their super, long service and gut feeling), and how much they should pay their employees. This is amazing :) If I don't pay enough, they will walk or not even start. duh.

You have a fully comprehensive handle on all factors effecting their global and local competitiveness, thus, you can make sweeping pronouncements about them, from your desk ... this is almost too good to be true. I've been hoping someone will take you to task for your obvious bias and you DID IT YOURSELF :) thanx.

There is something quite unsettling about your way, if we disagree with you WE KNOW NOTHING , if we disagree with Islam "WE HATE MUSLIMS"

We advocate middle ground and WE SHOULD BE CULLED from the economy.

Err, something about the 'meeeeee meeeeee meeeee' generation comes to mind :

The only extreme views being expressed here is the utterly false claims you make regarding my post.

Your call for moderation only applies to others and not for yourself. This is apparent through out all your posts be it your religion and your attitude to anyone with a different perspective.

I presume then from the extreme hysteria of your emotive reaction above that you do not wish to pay employees a living wage and therefore, would rather exploit them as the new IR laws will enable you to do.

As for your hiring policy - I work in HR and am well versed in assesing aspiring employees. Perhaps I could assist you so that in future you won't find yourself stuck with problem workers. Please let me know I am happy to provide literature on the psychology of work place interviews - clearly you could use some help here. After all we do not want your business to fail.

Cheers

BD do not be silly, how can word get around about bad employers? Maybe in a few cases, this could be true but not in the majority of cases. I have a daughter-in-law who does temping work and has much experience of how different business can be. There are many ‘bad’ employers out there.

You provide an example in which you have a dud employee and I agree that this is a cryin' shame. However, I can provide an example in which my mother, one of the worst employers I have ever known, got rid of a perfectly good hard-working employee simply because the person was overweight and she did not 'like' her. She got rid of her by being so nasty that the girl resigned. Perhaps you could try this.

But the complaints in this forum are not about the unfair dismissal part of the reforms. Did you miss that point? I speak from knowledge and experience and cold hard reason, not from emotion and irrational hysteria and I am quite sure that we are already too far toward the employer side of the road.

I agree that what is important is the values we promote. Valuing material wealth and conspicuous consumption come from the capitalist ideology that greed is good, that consumption keeps the economy ticking over nicely. It was not the 60’s that brought about this bad attitude; it was the 80’s. It was the backlash against the so-called socialist, bleeding heart, policies and they were initiated by the Labor governments and being promoted mercilessly by the current government.

TRINITY
P.O. Box 843 Bayswater, 3153 :) thanx ("The Owner" will work for addressee.)

-"then sell up now"= 'your business should be culled' ? (am I missing something?)
-"our economy cannot afford.." ="You are the 'master economist" :)

Your had a point about "If you are continually hiring problem employees" (no, don't have that problem myself) so I withdraw my 'stone' aimed at that one.

But, I desire to have a productive business, hence I want happy motivated employees, who will not be so if they are underpaid. I've always paid at the TOP end of the award structure in contrast to my own former employer who paid at the bottom end. I chafed under the feeling of 3 yrs without a COL index increment, it sucks.

ANT...
they are ALL a slippery opportunistic deceptive mob mate.
The Libs deceive about such and such, Labor/ACTU decieve about 'forcing' only 2 weeks leave, (when its a CHOICE)
Greens and Dems about something else.

So, I'm not prepared to cast my vote for anything but a 'message' .ie. I would probably vote for Family First at this stage. Some of the Christian parties are on another planet, like one I saw which had as part of its platform "Queen Elizabeth is our sovereign".. It just struck me as anachronistic and flawed from a 'Christian' point of view, unless your C of E.

MOLLY
I appreciated the nice tone of your post, (except for the mean "your silly" :) In our area,
(actually yes, I did miss the rest of the stuff, I was focused mainly on the unfair dismissal procedure which is VERY unfair to employers in its current form. To be honest, it WOULD stop me from employing in anything other than permanent casual, which is needed anyway under the current business climate to remain viable. (paying people to stand around doing zilch has not, to my knowledge helped business success/survivability :)