These extremist prophecies of major disasters and collapse of the universe are absurd. The fact of the matter is that Australia is facing an unprecendented labour supply shortage, and this problem is only going to worsen as the population ages, and birth rate remains stagnant.

It would be ignorant to compare Australia to nations such as the US and those within the EU, as the economic conditions are vastly different. Australia has a much smaller population, a much greater emphasis on the service sector, and differing economic and social indicators/dynamics.

A movement away from a union based economy, has and will continue to provide greater financial gain, flexibility and opportunity, not only to the working population, but the economy itself; a competitive economy develops a strong economy. The market dictates wages and conditions..

Rhian
Can we clarify this discussion? Ok lets for the sake of the point say that only 25% of workers will be on a lower rate. I can only add anecdotal evidence to support this as I am a manager in a large construction company and I personally Know of workers how have had to start a new job on lower rates of pay. Yes skilled workers will demand higher rates of pay and will get them, but as different industries contract, the pay rates will contract with it.
Can I please bring this back to where it started? Can some one explain to me how this will work not motherhood statements and left and right wing propaganda.

nationalist conservative,

why do you think that comparing Australia to the U.S and other places is ignorant? Sure we have a much smaller population and different economic conditions to the U.S. So did New Zealand, a country with only a fifth of our poulation and a workplace culture similar to our own. When workchoice-style legislation was introduced there wages fell by around 30% on average over eight years, poverty soared and a woking poor was spawned. Unemployment was unafected(until large numbers of them came here looking for a fair go).

Open slather is open slather in any language.

Don't get too excited about service industry jobs, as Quantas and the major banks will confirm. Watch them go marching out to India and China. Who will be next?

When the free market can truly dictate wages and conditions without bothersome things like unions and government regulations getting in the way, we will have the sickest, saddest society since the industrial revolution.

Ok Batman, I'll add my 5c worth :) Try and look at the big
picture. At the end of the day, business is there to make
a profit, if it doesent, it shuts up shop and moves elsewhere
or invests that capital elsewhere. Even workers want business
to do that. If their super fund, which invests in business,
does not show a healthy return, they go elsewhere. Given
that there is about 1 trillion in super, workers own most
of business in real terms !

Every $ spent on wages costs somebody in the end. It costs
the consumer, it costs the owners, waste is where alot
of money goes. So all those people looking out the window,
counting the cars going by whilst at work, cost somebody.

Consumers want cheaper products and vote with their wallets.
Owners want more profits, that includes super fund owners.
So efficient use of labour, with minimal waste, or productivity,
is the key, to keep both owners and consumers happy.

Companies strive for that, as thats the way CEOs keep their
jobs. If not, then super funds, who represent workers, will
soon see that they don't have a job. Don't forget that
CEOs are simply very highly paid workers.

If workers are efficient, then their companies might be competitive
and survive. If they are innovative (like umm Microsoft) then
some workers can make huge money, as consumers will be prepared
to pay for the products and efficiency means that they can be
mass produced cheaply. In that case it pays business to pay those
workers huge amounts, as they are generating huge profits for
companies.

Ok, thats 6c worth :)

Fozz,

Not entirely sure where you've gained your information from, however the effect of the Employment Contract Act 1991 yielded much more positive results for both the economy and the population than you've communicated:

- Unemployment rates fell from 11 to 6%, and continues to remain steady despite the introduction of the Employment Relations Act 2000 (by a Labour government) which reverted some of the previous changes (was at 3.6% in 2004)
n.b. maori unemployment has fallen from 25% in early 90's, to 8.9%.

- The workforce participation rate is at around 76% which is much higher than the OECD average (70%)

- Industrial Disputation fell to the lowest levels in 64 years

- In the five years to 1996, employment growth was the highest in the OECD

- Real wages are rising on average over the last 15 years (between 1 and 3% p.a.), which is much more than what can be attributed to the accord in Australia in the 1980's

- Modest productivity increases

New Zealand has experienced benefits from the reforms and faces economic challenges that stem from inaction over supply shortages and the like, combined with the revoking of aspects of the ECA 1991..

We will never get a situation whereby the market dictates labour movements, however minimising government regulation is a must given the conditions that will arise over the next 15 years (with the maintenence of the key conditions as stipulated by workchoices)

I don't know whether the government thinks workers on less money stimulates the economy, however it does consider that work offers more than just income. That is, it considers that work results in social inclusion,improved self worth etc. Unfortunately, the government does have the perception that people should take any work, no matter how low paid it is. Witness the recent changes to people on Newstart who have to keep a more detailed diary of looking for work. This is to weed out "job snobs", or people who do not want to work long hours for a pittance. Of course the government is not interested in the effective marginal tax rates that affect low income people resulting from the interaction of tax with the loss of welfare benefits even though arguably, this has a significant bearing on people choosing to work.