So today, or midnight to be exact we will see the end of any new work place agreements.

Have the supporters of these new laws really thought of the possible consequences that may follow or did they, like many others, vote for a change just for the hell of it.

You see many people who were previously deemed to be 'almost unemployable' were happily going about their new jobs in the knowledge that at least they were contributing now which among many things gave them a sense of self satisfaction and a feeling of belonging to the community.

As I have stated before I do not employ anyone on a 'below minimum wage' but I hold grave fears for these poor soles as rather than going off to work, as usual, they may well now see themselves once again going off to the local centre link office.

I just hope that if they do loose their jobs because of the changes, that you people who lobbied so hard for their 'well being' can share some of their anguish as they try to cope on much less than the $500 a week they were used to when they receive their pittance in the form of a dole cheque.

Remember one very critical fact. Many of these people are almost unemployable when compared to normal every day workers. And many of them were happy!

In anticipation to the backlash I may receive, I should elaborate on this topic a bit.

You see many people on minimum wages, or what used to be, were on the brink of being unemployable and if not for the wage rates negotiated through workplace agreements they may well have been unemployed.

Within my industry (the retail side) we rely on mainly skilled staff, they being either trade’s people or well groomed counter staff. Neither of which will work for low wages and nor should they in my view as they are ‘skilled’.

However, when it comes down to loading boxes onto shelves or strapping cartons as examples, both require very little skill hence the low wages that have been paid.

You see as a business owner one has to decide whether they employ staff for the menial jobs or upgrade the plant with a view to minimising staff.

My fear from all of this is that the business owner may well not have to make this choice as the new laws, aimed at protecting these near unemployable’s may well have made their decision for them.

I guess only time will tell, but try telling this to the poor soles who loose their jobs, often the only job they could get, due to the interference from outsiders, of whom many were unaffected personally by the workplace agreements they fought so hard to have abolished.

I remember a time, not to long ago, when we had 10% unemployment, zero growth and 19% interest rates.

I dread the thought of this reoccurring but at least I will have no blood on my hands I can tell you.

With respect you do think of Australian Workplace Agreements surely.
Other workplace agreements remain such as enterprise bargaining and common law contracts.
Even awards remain, the world you speak of is a past world, those unskilled lucky to have a job have options they never had once.
Men and Women hold those lolly pops controlling traffic for $21.80 an hour now.
Unskilled farm breed lads are being trained on construction sites an receiving up to $9 an hour more.
Yes it has been thought out, can you think it would not be?
By 2010 a new nation wide system will be in place, a fairness returned to the system.
It was workchoices nothing else that gave birth to the need for a better fairer way.
Rehctub do you think under skilled workers should fuel the economy by being paid lower wages?
Do you think we should follow America, a great country but one that pays a minimum wage to so many who must take food handouts to live?
Is humanity one or can a worker who has only his time and efforts to sell ask for a living wage?

Belly
Unskilled workers are just that. Unskilled!

Of cause I don't think these people should be kept below the poverty line, BUT, nor should the employers have to shoulder the burden.

Let's face it, it is either a low paid job or nothing for many of these people.

What I feel should happen is that the government should subsidise these unskilled workers so that employers can afford to employ them. After all, it is either this or the dole.

In any case they get hand out after hand out. Rent assistance, free medical, family assistance, health care cards, wow what I wouldn't give for one of those babies.

$21.50/hr for lollypop holders. Now there's your problem in a nutshell.

A trade within the food industry pays much less than this and this is where the employee has completed an apprenticeship in many cases.

I bet a lollypop holder in the US gets stuff all, and so they should. More on the Us later.

Now as for the US. Wait staff are a prime example. They get paid very little because they are ‘unskilled’; yet, good wait staff makes very good money from tips, why, because they are good at their job. Now what is wrong with that?

You see in the US if you have a trade you will be well off. If you are a lawyer or a doctor you will be loaded. If you are unskilled you will struggle.

I don't see a problem with this.

Also in the US I believe you only get so much in welfare within your lifetime and THATS IT!

Butcher (how's that?); you are really obsessed with the 'unskilled'. They seem to be lower than vermin to you!

The matter under discussion has nothing whatsoever to do with skilled or unskilled.

It has EVERYTHING to do with: 'a fair day's work for a fair day's pay'.

The so-called unskilled worker, still WORKS the hours of his contract of employ. He/she is entitled to be paid fairly for that.

You appear to be equating unskilled with undeserved. Those with a lack of skills DO work. You seem to see them as lazy, or certainly 'less than'.

You have asserted that you pay your workers fairly..?; I fail to see what you are concerned about if that is the case..

Perhaps you should leave it to other employers to decide for themselves how they treat their workers;-particularly if those employers DO see workers as WORKERS;-skilled or unskilled.

rehctub,

What on earth are you on about? The scrapping of Work Place Agreements will affect only unskilled workers? If that is your honest conclusion then it seems it's you who are out of touch. And I fully agree with Ginx in that you seem to regard unskilled workers in any case as "other".

All of your posts seem to suggest that you have no - or very little - idea of who the Agreements affected and how they affected them. I therefore find it somewhat ironic that you cast a blanket aspersion of those who fought so hard against Work Place Agreements as being those not affected by them or knowing little about them. Geez, some of those who spoke out against them were fighting for their very lives.

I think the best kinds of employers are those who are in touch with their workers and are familiar with the lives that they lead. As for that wild statement about how many other benefits those on the lowest strata receive and how you would love to be in receipt of a medical card? I'm sure any time you wanted to walk in the moccasins of anyone living the kind of life that necessitated such measures they would be only too happy to change places with you.

And, just a tip: equating unskilled workers with morons is not likely to help you win friends and influence people.