The worst thing is the conflict industrial relations create.The truth is it makes no difference as long as the employer and union are responsible parties. It is not a case of them or us. A buisness with employees is a symbiosis, if it isnt, if it is unbalanced it is inefficient. The problem with the IR laws Howard has emposed onto Australians is they are not balanced, they seek to disempower Australians. The consequences of such vandalism to human rights will be as it is already becoming disaterous.

The unemployment rate is widely quoted as 4% but "Employed" this includes those working for 1 hour per week. People who are studying or work for the dole programs are not counted.

I have reproduced published findings through this forum not ill informed opinions.

"The ABS actually does have a measure that calculates underutilisation. It is called the 'Extended Labour Force Underutilisation Rate'. This measure takes into account underemployment, marginal attachment to the labour force and hidden unemployment (those who have given up the job search and now rely on family or savings for an income). However, the measure is only available after searching the ABS website and rarely gets an airing in public, if at all. The Extended Labour Force Underutilisation Rate shows that the true unemployment rate is probably 15 to 18% at any given time." Michael J. at March 28, 2007 12:35 PM
http://blogs.theage.com.au/yoursay/archives/2007/03/work.html#comments

The same blog has many posts by Tristan detailing the inaccuracy of the counting of vacancies and correcting Joe Hockey's claim to 90% of jobs created in the last 12 months were part time jobs.

Billie and West, thanks for bringing some balance into this discussion.
The biggest threat to Australia is this forcing into two camps. Them and us.

Figures can be skewed to reach any conclusion. Anybody who has ever
done statistics knows this. As Billie said. The unemployment figures
are terribly skewed. I work in Public Health. You may think that there
is this terrible shortage of staff, but many are finding it very, very
difficult to get full-time work. Most are employed part-time or casual.

If you are casually employed you are no longer classified as unemployed,
but you try and get a loan for a house on that. The banks know that
your income is unreliable.

The biggest employer, the private retail industry, employs the
majority of staff as casuals or part-time workers.

In the figures I would like to see how many are actually working
full-time and earning a reasonable and reliable income so you
are confident that you can pay the rent every week. Lets not even
talk of the grocery bill.

The number of plasma TV's sold is not an indication of the financial
security of a Nation's citizens.

Australia is no longer a country where the majority are buying or own
their own house. That statistic now belongs to 'socialist' countries
like the Netherlands. Something in the order of more than 60% of
home mortgages are for 'investment' or 2nd homes. And the rents
keep sky-rocketing.

Am I the only one who found budgeting for the essentials and still
had money for a holiday easier 18 years ago, though my wage has gone
up? I didn't even have a credit card then. Our credit cards has saved
us on many an occasion. I don't even want to confess what we own on
ours. Was it just that I was better at balancing a budget when young
and silly?

The balance argument is a good one. Actually its nice to see that most people agree on this, even though some would tip more towards either end of the scale!

I suspect that the trend towards outsourcing will probably come to an end once business does the figures on the cost-effectiveness vs efficiency. It seems to take big business a while to figure these things out... not the brightest of sparks sometimes.

As far as individual contracting goes, that's currently illegal. There have been a whole heap of court cases in the last few years that confirm that if someone looks like an employee, smells like and employee and acts like an employee, then they are an employee, with full employee entitlements such as leave and superannuation. Doesnt make what you call the arrangement or even if they have an ABN. There are a series of tests that can be applied to determine the situation. Off the top of my head I cant think of one of the case names, but the IT industry and bicycle couriers in particular have been targeted.

Consider in the case of casual employees too, that it is currently law that if casuals actually end up having regular shifts and working similar hours per week, then even if you CALL them casuals, they are under law permanent (perhaps part-time permanent), and as such are entitled to all of the leave entitlements of a permanent employee. Many employees dont know this however, to their detriment.

Something else that comes to mind considering the move towards outsourcing to small business. Many small businesses are run as trusts, partnerships or sole traders, who have employees. Currently in all States except Vic, anyone employed under one of the above structures is OUTSIDE federal jurisdiction, and still employed under State awards, instead of Workchoices. This is something else that needs to be borne in mind when looking at the stats being bandied around.

I think whats being overlooked in this discussion, is how the world
has changed in the last 20 years or so. Things are far more uncertain,
also for business. Lets say, a business tenders for a large contract
and wins it. So they need extra staff to cope. When that contract
ends, they might not have work for all those people anymore. If they
had given them all permanent jobs, it would be nearly impossible to
get rid of them again, work or no work.

So me thinks that casual labour and outsourcing will keep growing.
Short term in some cases it might be more expensive, but if you
look at the big picutre, its the more flexible option and today's
reality.

It can also be a win-win all round. A friend of mine is a spray
painter, a very good one at that. In the old world order, he would
have been stuck on some union award, for some large company.
Now he strips and paints industrial machines, provides his own
gear so that its good and looked after. Companies are thrilled with
his work, so he's got far more offers of work then he could ever do,
he's also making far more then he could dream of, under the old
system. I asked him about employing people. He says its tough,
some don't want to be there, some are on drugs, etc. etc. Its the
same old story it seems.

Yvonne, I agree houses are too expensive. Blame State Labour Govts
for not releasing enough land. Their chardonay set policy writers
don't want urban sprawl. Thats the crux of the problem. There
was an interesting debate on ABC on Monday night about exactly that.

At the end of the day, houses are cheap to build and farmland is
cheap. The rest is a State Govt problem