The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Under Labor, 'no ticket, no start' is back > Comments

Under Labor, 'no ticket, no start' is back : Comments

By Joe Hockey, published 2/5/2007

Its conference showed that the Australian Labor Party is in cahoots with the unions.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 9
  7. 10
  8. 11
  9. Page 12
  10. All
Joe Hockey when are you for once showing a grain of courtesy to respond to correspondence? Or is this just refleccting your ignorance to the people who are paying yout wages?
Last week, I wrote to Steve Knott - Chief Executive Australian Mines and Metals Association (AMMA)about his comments on ABC 7.30 report and have since provided him with quotations of the Framers of the constitution, such as about "civil rights", "Common law rights", etc.
Today, I received a 26 page response setting out why AMMA is opposing the ALP intentions. Sure the document was dated 22 March 2007 but while it argued about freedom of association, a State "common law right", it failed further to rely upon State "civil rights" etc.
to me it appeared to be bashing the ALP rather then being a well balanced document setting out what the relevant State provisions were it had been opposing, etc.

I am due to publish now;
INSPECTOR-RIKATI® on IR WorkChoices legislation
A book about the validity of the High Courts 14-11-2006 decision
ISBN 978-0-9751760-6-1 (Book-CD), ISBN 978-0-9751760-7-8 (Book-B&W), ISBN 978-0-9751760-8-5 (Book-Colour)

IN IT I INCLUDE THE AMMA DOCUMENT ALSO AS WELL AS WHY THE SO CALLED WORKCHOICES LEGISLATION IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND HOW I VIEW THE JUDGES SWINDLED WORKERS OUT OF THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS.

This book is neither against employees and/or employers but rather against the unconstitutional conduct having gone on for far too long by all major political parties.

I challenge you to a debates as to the constitutional validity of the so called WorkChoices legislation, do you dare to put your money where your mouth is? I doubt it.
Posted by Mr Gerrit H Schorel-Hlavka, Tuesday, 8 May 2007 1:24:36 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The unions are not a threat.

That's because a lot of workers these days are not financial enough to join them.

I would have loved to participate in the Labour Day Rally this Monday past, but I couldn't. That's because I only had $3.00 in my bank account. Having paid my mortgage, rates, car insurance, food, petrol, I had the pricely sum of $3.00 to see me through the long weekend.

I'd love to join a union as well, and can see it as more relevant than any other time in my history. But for some reason prosperity has simply side-stepped me. Or is this quite normal for a lot of people?
Posted by Liz, Wednesday, 9 May 2007 12:10:56 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Liz,

Have been done that, so to say.

Some twenty years ago I had to walk with one of my daughters (then little) because I didn’t even have 50 cents to pay for a bus.
I was then re-financing my house again because of borrowing money on bankcard, so I could help others with their court cases. Actually. some of my children held I was stupid.
Yet, now the same children are saying that after all I was the smart one, because I didn’t care about money. I lived my life as I wanted and now reap the benefit of having done so.
Because I know what it is to be struggling I also know what it is not to struggle and to enjoy life.

At least you still got $3.00 in the bank (well by now perhaps gone) but as long as you have your dignity, that is more important then money.

Money might be handy to have but also can be a curse!

As for unions, I view they are a necessary evil. They are needed but more then often they do the wrong thing. But, needed they are. In one incident, I discovered that one of my workers had been underpaid for some time and management refused to back-pay. So, the union called out a strike. The worker got his back pay all right! Now, that was a strike not because of wrongdoing by the union but the company wrongly robbing a worker of his rightful entitlements and refusing to follow my recommendation to back pay. After wards the workers thanked me to having exposed the rot. In turn my production went up and that was after all what I was on about, as without proper production the customers wouldn’t get their goods. Yet, the company could have avoided the strike if just they had been reasonable.
Posted by Mr Gerrit H Schorel-Hlavka, Monday, 14 May 2007 1:42:51 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
What was that Joe? You got it wrong? Workchoices was a mistake after all? Wonder why you didn'ty listen to the crowd yelling that at you for a year?

No response expected here, or anywhere. Hock off Joe.
Posted by pegasus, Wednesday, 23 May 2007 8:47:07 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
To be fair to Joe, it's pretty decent of him to publicly acknowledge they got it wrong.

Takes a good man to do that.

And he wasn't the Minister of that portfolio at the time.

So thanks for that Joe.

But I will be joining a union, and I dread the thought of Liberal being re-elected.
Posted by Liz, Saturday, 26 May 2007 10:03:32 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
What seems to be ignored here is that John Howard became a constitutional TERRORIST to force Federal Members-of-Parliament to vote on the so called WorkChoices legislation without many having been provided with a copy of the Bill.
Why have elected Members-of-Parliament to represent constituents if all they are doing or force to do is to vote on a Bill many never even saw, let alone knew the content off.
Why indeed do we have to elect Members for a seat if all they are doing is to vote along the lines what the leader of the political party dictates?
Keep in mind that people, anyone, who can be in breach or is deemed in breach of WorkChoices can suffer severe financial harm, and then if in the end it turns out that there was a defect in the legislation your local Member merely may respond “I didn’t know, etc".
What else is being pushed through the Parliament where Members vote upon it without having a clue what the legislation stand for?
While you may accept of not accept WorkChoices the issue is here that we elect Members-of-Parliament to represent their constituents and they clearly do not do so and are prevented from doing so because of the dictatorship and TERRORISM now used to force Members to vote blindly upon whatever they are told to do.
One day, some bill might be voted upon where your Members-of-Parliament blindly voted for something, disregarding any attempt or opportunity to consider what he/she voted upon, and next you know your personal life might be totally destroyed because of whatever legislation was passed!
As the Framers of the Constitution made clear that the High Court of Australia could declare legislation ULTRA VIRES if it failed to have been allowed the appropriate processes. Hence, I view, the High Court of Australia by allowing this unconstitutional conduct of voting itself by this must be seen, as I view it, to have supported this kind of TERRORISM, and this from a Court that is supposed to be a GUARDIAN OF THE CONSTITUTION!
Posted by Mr Gerrit H Schorel-Hlavka, Sunday, 27 May 2007 12:26:12 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 9
  7. 10
  8. 11
  9. Page 12
  10. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy