Well Said!

*applause*

Ray Cleary finds it hard to believe that the Government’s intended changes to IR laws are not ideologically motivated. They probably are. All political parties have ideologies, and those of the Coalition were apparent before the last election when they said what they were going to do with IR.

But if his bio is correct: connection with the Uniting Church and Anglicare and associated welfare functions, Mr. Cleary’s concerns are also ideologically based.

Everybody has an axe to grind in the matter of industrial relations. So far we have only heard employers say the changes will be good, and the unions say they will be bad.

We should all cool off and wait to see what is actually entailed.

Show me a liberal government that has the workers' best interest at heart. Unions, and they have many faults, have, at least hit the goals for the workers, not the govt. Just watch every AIRC Living Wage case and hear what the govt (and employers) always says. "We can't afford a $12 increase in basic wage" And pocket their increases which are never thrown out to the general public. The obscenity in this govt is that they will and do! get their snoughty payouts/increases within a passed motion in Parliament and we only ever hear about it after it's already been passed thanks to the media. And read about some loser that's been appointed or head hunted by the govt to head up and "fix" certain outfits like banks etc., sits around for 12 months just sending emails back to his mates from another country and living off the purse. Deemed incompetent by the board that appointed him/her and sent packing with a very nice package. That is Animal Farm at it's most incogruous. And to think that we all thought George Orwell was talking communism!

All animals are equal. But the ones at the Paris end HAVE TWO LEGS... NOT FOUR. And a dirty big snout that fits rather snugly in the trough. No Clovers or Boxers here, just dogs, thinking we're all Molly's. Sorry if I'm raving but getting really annoyed at the whole philosphy of this govt. And we all know what happened to Boxer. Be very, very alarmed.

The claim that the US minimum wage is set a US$5 per hour misses the fact that the individual states are free to set a higher minimum and most do.

Australia should have no national minimum wage and give the power to legislate such a thing to local councils. That way the minimum could be set according to the economic and social circumstances as judged by individual communities

,Terje wrote: The claim that the US minimum wage is set a US$5 per hour misses the fact that the individual states are free to set a higher minimum and most do.

The fact that the individual states are free to set higher minimum wages does not in fact occur in most states in the USA. Many workers who previously worked for commission (long hours to achieve good results) are often given a low minimum wage with a small percentage of commission 'once targets are reached'. These targets often change each month, with the result that many workers in areas such as sales, take home a salary of $1,500.00 per month. Some of these sales people were earning $125,000 three years ago, and now can barely afford to live. Large retail outlets are the worse offenders of this mode of employment and wages, and they have been gradually lowering the income of their workers over the past 15 years.
Companies well known around the world are some of the the greatest offenders. I have known people to leave one job at the end of their shift, and go to another just to pay the rent, let alone have any disposable income. Some companies even have forms there for employees to fill out for low income housing (how considerate of them!) No overtime. No sick leave (casual) No paid days off (casual)
There is no ideology in the IR reforms. It is just a matter of political gain, reaping wealth for the haves and leaving the have nots to rot on the ground like discarded fruit crops. It is not a matter of the Unions bashing Governments, it is a matter of the rights of workers, the rights of humans and the rights of families to exist.
The short time we have had rights as workers has always been under threat by Governments, and it is time that people realise just what is really at stake. Little Johnny Howard is not a man who cares for the battler. It was just lip service - now THAT'S politics!

I am one of the disabled people with limited bargaining power that Ray Cleary mentioned in this article. I am fearful of what the future holds in store for me. I can't work full-time, and the Government is steadily scaling back the Disability Support Pension along with these IR reforms. This is hardly fair, or humane. The Coalition has systematically perverted or destroyed so many of the things that I love most about this country.

Mr Cleary discusses the concept of 'if it ain't broken don't fix it'. What is the government to do-wait until the boom busts and then try? I'd much rather sure up the foundations now because contrary to popular belief amongst the left, it will be the poor suffering if the economy flounders. Remember the late 80's under the ALP? Was it the wealthy who suffered most as interst rates hit 17%, and unemployment went close to 10%?
Those who are disabled, disadvantaged, and battling generally are the ones who suffer the most as resources strain supporting themany who rort the system. Why is it so wrong to try to improve this situation? Shouldn't abled bodied people be working for $450.00p/w week rather than collecting $375.00p/w from welfare?
We are losing hundreds of talented people each week to places such as New York and London because this country takes half of every dollar they earn in income tax (not including GST!). Where is the notion of a fair go in that? Once again the irony is that it isn't those moving to London on a 100k a year that suffer now is it?

Agree with you WRE that the rich will always benefit as they have bigger buffers to ride out any downturns in the economy. However, i don't think any of the IR proposals Little big man is going to address that issue, rather, they will marginalise the lower skilled workers even more and make their particular jobs much more transient and easier to swap and change, which means less security and a downward spiral re real wages and conditions.

Don't confuse the welfare issue with real jobs just waiting for unemployed people to snap them up as an answer. The problem is that there is a swag of young people out there that are so illiterate and alienated, they don't know how to fill out a job application, let alone write a resume or turn up to an interview in a proper state, and neither did their parents. No one would employ them, and rightly so. There is a huuuuuuge gap between jobs going around and kids wanting to get work.

That, by the way, is not to let the govt and the way it has (not) tackled the issue of employment in this country, off the hook. They've dumbed us down on literacy, apprenticeships (traineeships are a bogus) R & D, as well as real job paths through proper channels. Not to mention moving cattle jobs such as tele-centres off shore to New Delhi (and don't get me started on that one!) because it's cheaper to shove it OS. Where is the incentive unless one has a silver spoon up one's rectum safely inserted by Mummy and Daddy's super to pay for the education?

"By the Time, I get to Uni, I'll be sleeping...
I'll probably hang that HECS debt on the door,
When I reach the part that says I'm poor, I'll be weeping
To a govt I never voted for"

All apologies and respect to Jimmy Webb and Glen Campbell

Di I see some of your points. However i'd like to draw a few distinctions.
Firstly you say the government has done nothing regarding literacy. It is the ALP that sides with the teachers unions who refuse our children access to phonetics and foreign languages, and confine under tens to play dough. As if that's not disadvantage enough it is the left again that insists on the ridiculous notion of everybody being university educated-much to the frustration of all those young people dying to get into trades before the system fails them and they give up trying.
What the IR reforms have the potential to do is not marginalise the poor, but actually increase the middle class. The U.S cannot be used as a case study in this area because its working class is ten times larger, and welfare is non-existent. In addition America does have very real (and huge)class/race divisions that run parallel to eachother.
What we need is for a semi intelligent, independant senator to stand up and connnect the issues of tax, IR, and welfare together. It's no use saying nothing works, and then fixing nothing. The bottom line is there are too many bludgers on the dole, being supported by an ever decreasing skilleed workforce who pay more tax than the workers of any other nation in the world. Who will stand up for the workers?

I am an employee (I have never been a employer, however I have previously been in the position of responsibility for the hiring and firing staff in a small business).
I am currently in favor of the new IR reforms as from the information I've seen something needs to be done and this is best option I've seen.

however a few questions to all of these opinionated minds, on both sides.

1. were can I find more information? I.e. details and facts of the new reforms

2. From the information I have form http://www.workplace.gov.au
The reforms will:
• Not cut minimum and award classification wages
• Not abolish awards
• Not remove the right to join a union
• Not take away the right to strike
• Not outlaw union agreements
• Not abolish the AIRC

will establish the Australian Fair Pay Commission to protect minimum and award classification wages;
• enshrine minimum conditions in legislation for the first time;
• introduce the Australian Fair Pay and Conditions Standard to protect workers in the bargaining process;
• simplify the agreement making process at the workplace;
• provide modern award protection for those not covered by agreements;
• ensure an ongoing role, for the Australian Industrial Relations Commission;
• better balance the unfair dismissal laws; and
• introduce a national system of workplace relations.

Is there anything wrong with this info?

3. workers opinions have also been polled and they have swung towards agreeing with individual contracts (as opposed to th 80's)
see Policy http://66.102.7.104/custom?q=cache:QPgu-oXtIJ8J:www.cis.org.au/Policy/winter05/polwin05-6.htm+%22Industrial+relations+reforms%22+economy&hl=en&lr=lang_en&ie=UTF-8
Is there any information to dispute these claims of popular opinion?

In response to quis I suggest that you visit the ACTU website.

Clearly there are two sides to all stories however on the face of the information provided so far in this debate:

1. Awards will cease to be a minimum safety net in favour of five or so minimum conditions. In some states awards currently protect up to 45-50 conditions which are deemed as a minima.

2. Employees employed in organisations of less that 100 employees will lose access to an indepandant umpire in the case of "unfair" as opposed to the Governments "unlawful" dismissal. This will exclude or at best make it financvially unviable for low income earners to pursue as they will need to engage a lawyer.

3. The indepedence of the AIRC will be removed as the forum by which minimum wages can be set.

In terms of the other matters listed, a cynical mind may suggest that as is so often the case, the real detail is somewhere behind the government rhetoric.

There is much debate in the community right now in relation to the broader issues, I accept the views of prominent community and church leaders who currently express severe reservations about the government agenda.

“The Howard Government’s proposed industrial relations reforms will reshape the workplace landscape in a manner that will tilt the balance firmly in favour of employers at the expense of the Prime Minister’s “battlers”.”
This is certainly true COMPARED to how the system is now, but if we look at it from a clean slate, would not the system still be balanced in favour of employees.

In essence employment is an ongoing contract between two parties in order to trade services for cash. Subject to fixed period contracts, an employee has the absolute right to terminate, with notice, the contract anytime he or she wished. The same can’t be said for an employer with over 100 employees.
In an alleged liberal democratic egalitarian society such as ours aren’t all parties to a contract supposed to be treated equally? Isn’t there some adage somewhere in that Rule of Law thing about all people being equal under the law?

I can see why the author Ray Cleary declared: “Sound and equitable social policy should not be driven by ideology.”
Ideology is the antithesis of pragmatism. The philosophy of whatever it takes. Or in other words, a nice way of saying that the ends justify the means.

While browsing for information regarding an essay I have to submit, I came across this site. I read 'wre's comments about weekly wages for those on benefits and felt I had to clarify just how much those on welfare receive. I am on Austudy which is the equivalent to what unemployment benefits pay....not $375pw...I wish! The amount is $398 per fortnight. If it were in fact $375pw, nobody would want a job. My essay is about the struggles and current debates over the Industrial relations reform and how these struggles reflect power in organised society. My conclusion...this government is greedy, power mad and reflects a country that is becoming very Americanised. We are in big trouble!

More and more is being exposed (or not as the govt would have it) on this Fair Go stuff which actually used to have a name as Industrial Relations rather than a dumbing down "nice guy" moniker.

It's not really about the libs vs labor (the Big Kim being vomitously silent). Wre (sorry if I got your moniker wrong) is right. Some of its about taxpayers on a shoestring paying for people that are "welfared" out of the job cycle, systemically, through dumbing down of education, lack of opportunities for all that are not uni education, things that have gone on for years.

The whole thing about the IR issue is white anting the conditions that Australian workers already have. What is given up through lack of foresight is usually regretted down the track. Little Johnyy's scenario about workers having the luxury of sitting down and shooting the breeze about bargaining away, say 3 weeks of holiday pay with their employer for an equivalent dollar is up there with the ugly step sister fitting into the glass slipper and marrying the prince. Don't shove Cinderella out of the way.

Show me a worker that successfully has a economic and healthy relationship with their employer (as i do and some of my friends are currently negotiating as they are seasoned) - it will not be the norm. Especially with young ones entering the workforce. They'll be cheap fodder. Workers have never sent the country broke.

Yukky poo!! There is a govt advertisement blinging on my monitor as I posted my last comment, promoting this whole "fair manure for all you fodder" thingy by the govt. Flaming or spam! Tres uncool, like that's gonna change my learned opinion!

There are those who defend the Industrial changes and those that do not. However, as a humble transport operator, I have come from a country as you may see by my handle, that has been living under this system for a number of years. What are the consequences? We have a high rate of crime, the courthouses are packed out every week. There are numerous mortgagee sales nationwide, repossessions, broken homes and most of all HURT! HURT! HURT!

Unless you come from a system that J.H. and his monsters are pushing for then you will never know the consequences first hand. I have had experiences with unscrupilous employers who use the system totally to their advantage. I can go on and on about this mis-used system, with wage comparisons, living costs and so on but it will obiviously not alter the thinking of some, who obviously are situated quite comfortably in their employment, as I would term, "The Boss Lickers". Australia! Wake Up!. There are some who say we are here to steal jobs? If this reform goes through, you can have your jobs, and most of all you can have your Prime Minister, and good luck to you.

Here are some wage examples in NZ under the same system that J.H. is pushing for...

Line-haul driving...$9.80 per hour...flat rate...t\half=nil
d\time=nil
Local delivery......$12.50-14.00 per hour...same as above

Most safety and work clothing to be provivded by the employee.

I was required to work 17-18 hours a day for that sort of pay.
6 days on and 2 days off was the norm and if a day off was taken you would lose your rostered day off which gave you 7 days on and 1 day off for that week. Everyone was on a casual basis with full time opportunity at the discretion of the company. Casuals in NZ are paid less than full time employees, so I hope you will get an indication of "what's up" and what may happen under the "new reform"

Here's a goody! My Grandad died. I asked for time off to attend his funeral. I was asked to provide proof that he was was my Grandad.

Good luck Aussies!

Good luck Aussies!

I am not one for big words, but I do know when there is a need for common sense and wise judgment. Now "The Business Council Of Australia" have got their finger in the pie, with a well strategized campaign through the media trying to convince the general public of the benefits of the I.R. reform.

Remember this! Business is about profit, which is good depending on which side of the table you're on. Back home the "Big Businesses" win under the same proposed I.R. reform, with the small business operator going under. Cut back on Union representation, and certain rights and privileges are thrown out the back door.

Australia in the eyes of the rest of the world is and has been a country where people can live decent lives with priveleges and comforts second to none. Look around you! Why are there so many different nationalities? Because of the opportunity that this great country has to offer.

It seems to me that this current government has on it's agenda a "Let's be like America" also coupled with greed which is normal with most leaders of every country. It annoys me to think that a lot of people can be so complacent and think it is going to "Work Out". Sorry, no such thing. Get real everybody! Think about your children, and their children! I used to call my Prime Minister..."Her Worship The Prime Monster" I think she has a brother here in Australia.

Cmon' Aussies! Wakey Wakey!