The Forum > Article Comments > The ALP should take on the IR laws > Comments
The ALP should take on the IR laws : Comments
By Mark Hearn and Grant Michelson, published 20/4/2006Labor should be bold enough to offer Australia a better way.
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- ...
- 18
- 19
- 20
- Page 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- ...
- 28
- 29
- 30
-
- All
Posted by Scout, Saturday, 3 June 2006 2:45:04 PM
| |
And SHONGA,
Now the truth comes out – today’s “weak and subservient employees”. How do you think they have become that way? It wouldn’t be because of the continual betrayals of the ALP and the unions would it? In 1975 workers spontaneously walked off the job in protest at Whitlam’s dismissal. What did Bob Hawke do? – here is a quote – “ we have got to show we are not going to allow this situation to snowball and there is a real possibility it will snowball into violence ….. What has happened today could unleash forces in this country the like of which we have never seen ….it is therefore important that the Australian people respond to leadership.” Yes, the ALP and union leadership prevented the eruption of a general strike and any direct challenge to the dismissal – despite the fact that workers would have “stood” together. And again: Hawke and Keating brought in the military to break up the pilots strike. And again: In 1996, after 5,000 workers stormed Parliament House in Canberra, George and other ACTU officials worked closely with Cheryl Kernot …..now a Labor Party figurehead, to ensure passage of the legislation. Kernot and the ACTU leaders were intimately involved, with Reith, in drafting the final version of the act, and specifically those sections OUTLAWING SOLIDARITY ACTION (so-called secondary boycotts) …” http://www.wsws.org/workers/1998/apr1998/actu-a9.shtml The government then used these law – drafted by union officials to crush the waterfront workers. How dare you call workers weak and subservient. If they are it is because the ALP unions have actively worked to undermine any solidarity and strength they have - and told them they should be subservient to the bosses laws - there is no other option right? You disgust me. Posted by tao, Saturday, 3 June 2006 2:57:52 PM
| |
tao,
This situation came about because of the dominance of the right wing awu faction in the ALP. This is why more radicals should join to sieze control from the right. Hawke and Keating were both right wing politicians, tao, you can't sling s@#t from the sidelines if you don't have the guts to get in and try to make a difference, if you pluck up the courage, bring as many of your like minded mates with you as you can, we fighting from the inside need all the help we can get. If you are fair dinkum, it is the only course of action to take, remember New Labor which began in Newcastle it launched with a bang, then fizzled out. The left is split, the right are united, as Scout said united we stand, divided we fall. Posted by SHONGA, Saturday, 3 June 2006 3:51:54 PM
| |
Shonga, Tao, and belly, Can you go back and read Scouts last post. Can all four of us agree with what he says? Can we also agree that ALP and some unions have made mistakes in the past. yes we can.
Tao, The ALP would never do what Howard and the Business Council of Australia are doing with the Work Choices bill. Don't insult me and say they would. Tao, Some of your points are valid as are Belly and shonga. Scout is the common ground and is absolutly spot on the money. Posted by Sly, Saturday, 3 June 2006 5:20:38 PM
| |
The comments that the AWU Austrlian Workers Union alone controls the ALP is a lie.
The bizarre comment that New Labor? is that meant to be in Australia? started in Newcastle is wrong. Within my branch of the AWU I am one of very few who are forever active in the party, and the thought that I want to or could have power is mad! In my view we must sly understand an issue at the core of this insulting debate, the left unions vs the right ,and those two factions within the party. It is not possible to say more clearly than this, both sides blame the other for all the partys problems. For me and I think most Australian workers the acord with Hawke was something that cost workers a lot ,but they did it to cement the ties between the party and the workforce. Now I regrete totally the endless fighting internaly, and want an end to it, but surely no Labor goverment is ever possible EVER if we look only to our wants not the nations. Question to my detractors do you truely think ANY Labor goverment would not be better than Howard? Further question if my faction is so dreadfull how come we outnumber yours on every vote? And how come your leaders are walking our path to help Labor win this election? Solidarity gentlemen please you can not truely think my members are lessor workers than yours? Tao, you walk in bleek country unwanted turf for most working class people, you can not plant spuds and wonder why you are not harvesting pumkin! Posted by Belly, Saturday, 3 June 2006 7:16:52 PM
| |
Belly, At the end of the day Howard must go and the ALP need to get there sh*t together, which they are starting to do.
Posted by Sly, Saturday, 3 June 2006 7:30:53 PM
|
We do benefit from trade and competition - however at present we have too many monopolies and governments supported by these soulless corporations at the expense of the people who elected them.
Unions are a way of uniting people - as individuals we have no chance at all. I agree that some unions such as the AWA worked in too well with the Hawke government - concessions made back then are the price we are paying now.
But to reject unions in totality is nonsense - what would you suggest workers do as individuals? Haven't you of united we stand divided we fall?
Nor can we eliminate captilism, but we can elect governments who will pull the reigns in on unfettered capitalism, by restablishing I.R tribunal as a truly independant organisation and setting standards that are fair and equitable to the lowest level workers.
Belly isn't quite right and neither are you.