I have a subsidiary in Malaysia:

In Malaysia, the government grants foreign companies 'MSC' status, and provides free office space, staff paid for by the government, and opportunities for innovation that Australia cannot offer.

If it is more profitable and the risk is reduced, companies will do it. People forget that for $12,000 a month spent in Malaysia I run 24 staff, yet here i would get perhaps 2 when expenses are counted. This does not mean I am taking anything away from Australia, in fact, I am creating more for Australia by doing this. The production generated from the Malaysian office means that I can afford to support a further 5 skilled workers back here in Australia, so in reality if i did not have this, the value of my business for Australia is reduced as i have less profits, and less staff back here in Australia.

But all this is doing is keeping that country's employment and pay conditions low, as when costs increase to a certain point, eg wages etc, we will then pull the pin and relocate to the next strategic location. But when this pressure occurs, this country will have achieved its goal as it will have used its resources to be brought into the developed world

Aussie workers, blah blah blah. I want to keep jobs in Australia like everyone else, but not when you are paying exorbidant prices for unskilled labourers. Let us become a skilled society, the baby boomers have forced this on us, and leverage off other nations who share different demographics. Let the developing nations be the labour force in the 21st century if it is going to assist that country in developing to our level. How else can these countries apart from foreign investment develop infrastructure and create employment when they have significant micro issues.

I do not support IR changes, even though as an employer it is to my benefit. The end of the day, we do not want to compete with the rest of the world in unskilled labour as we will end up degradating Australian lifestyles.

I just thought it appropriate to mention,at this point that Leightons boss C.E.O Mr. King will recieve $59 million in remuneration this year, a record for a C.E.O. so far, now we can see why the Howard Government has bought in it's IRlaws, to cut wages and conditions, for ordinary working people, obviously business can't afford the outrageous wages paid to Carpenters,Builders labours,Concreteor's ect, we have to lower the overheads for big business, or they won't survive, luckily they can still afford to pay the C.E.O. or the company would come tumbling down, of course it's not the Carpenter's, Builders labourers ect who make the company their money, they are a liability, why don't we source some Asian worker's who will work for lower pay, maybe that move may help big business stay afloat, not much good for Australian workers or our economy, but who cares about Australian workers anyway?

Shonga,

You do what you are good at. In Australia we are not a manufacturing hub etc, so we have to work with our strenghts and be prudent with how we manage our weaknesses. If we dont outsource we will be left behind, or stand still in comparison with the world. We dont make the rules, but we must play the game. Deal with it.

If the leighton CEO has made that company achieve the desired targets, good on him he deserves it. How much money is compensation for the intense pressure, 70hr weeks, shareholder demands etc. You cannot even imagine. No amount of money compensates, and the pressure on your family is intense.

Do you think leighton are going to say "in light of our CEO being renumerated so well, we are reducing everyones wages and conditions".

This is good news for all those at leighton, if he achieved his bonuses. Yes, some get big salaries in failing companies but to attract those capable, you must pay them accordingly. There is nothing that can be done about it.

Tall poppy syndrome, we should be patting him on the back. He would probably be good for a shout!

The mediocre people of this world get narky at people who earn good money. He is the head of a very large company, he is probably a one in a million for his ability, yet you people sitting in mediocrity can riddicule out of Jealosy. If he was productive enough to be renumerated with that income, good on him. You perhaps would rather see him be a wood duck and earn nothing for his family, or just make ends meet.

We are all born equal in this country, many people at the top came from nothing and have a desire greater than most to achieve. People like you are needed in life, we need plenty of pessamistic middle managers. His salary has nothing to do with you, and is not be frowned apon. Get another job.

Realist
But some of us are more equal

I don't know - it seems to me that we SHOULD be strongly critiquing the idea that a person should be able to be paid $59 million, no matter how hard they work. I just don't see that they could possibly be working $59 million harder than, say, a teacher who works with kids with intellectual disabilities, or a doctor treating someone for cancer.

I think the fact that we are able to have justifications for working to drop the minimum wage (which is what one of the aims of this legislation is, no matter the rhetoric), while supporting the crazy bonuses some top people get shows some very messed up public values in our society.

Realist you wrote: Aussie workers, blah blah blah. I want to keep jobs in Australia like everyone else, but not when you are paying exorbidant prices for unskilled labourers.

I ask what constitutes unskilled labourers? Is it because they do not have a Certificate or a degree behind them? Is not experience in any job,building skills? Who is unskilled? I keep hearing these words, but no job list accompanies them. Is the clerical worker with no degree unskilled, is the salesperson selling furniture unskilled? They dont have degrees or Trades. the work they do. Maybe people need to clearly understand that all people who work are 'workers'. We seem to be focusing on blue collar workers at the lower end of the chain of desired jobs such as cleaners.


To hear comments such as Realists, they (workers) are apparently not worth the money being paid for the work they do. Is this the issue here?

The workers have not created the issues facing companies with costs of goods, it is to be squarely placed back into the lap of the Government who instituted the lousy Trade laws and Trade tarrifs. If workers are to lose income, why is not the entire organisation copping it sweet and reducing spending and wages at every level. A smart business would always look at the whole picture, not just focus of the very people who produce the goods and do the production and labour. A smart business employs the right people and then ensures that those people are looked after, as, they are a vital part of the whole.

Treating staff like turnips will only get you turnip soup, treat them like humans and you will get immense benefits,. Happy staff will produce the best work. I have been both an employee and an employer, and have learned that lesson well from both bad employers and great employers.