NSW has announced it is to give its power to the new federal System.
Not government workers but every one else will be covered by the new system.
Frankly while not happy with all of it I always thought one System country wide made for a better economy.
Complex and with traps the thing that is now our IR law is hiding traps for both sides.
In no way can it be seen as work choices or can the idea it is a return to the so called bad old days.
Yes some of those day can honestly be called bad, just as some on the other side acted very badly during work choices.
However government plans to Harmonize?
Strange word for an act than intends to murder, NSW occupational health and safety will be a battle Field few will forget.
We live in interesting times.

OH&S Belly is way over the top.It is being used as a tool of oppression rather than reasonable objectivity to make work places safe.The employee also has to take some responsibility,otherwise your members won't have any jobs.

I think it is impossible to condense so many awards.

What usually works best is for employers and employees to get together and decide what they want and, if they can't decide, or, if there is a complaint, then, there should be a mediator in place.

I had dinner with a mate last night who is turning 60 and is an electrician. He has more 'hands on' experience than any newly qualified tradesman, yet, he pointed out that he is working with a guy who only one week ago finnished his time and is being paid the same rate of pay. Now how is that fair? 45 years experience verses 45 hours!

Retail is another area where many may exit.

Are you aware that while you are enjoying your traditional 'boxing day rest' that many retail workers will be working, all in the name of more shopping hours. Change every award so everyone has to work.

If an employee works every sunday, as part of their normal shift, they are to be given a three day weekend, including sat & sun each month. WITHOUT PAY!

Nobody working sundays wanted this!

The fact is that the people who make these changes are not effected by them.

Another flaw is the fact that there is nobody there to check if an agreement between parties passes the 'fair work test'. But, if the areement is challanged years latter, the employer may be found 'in breach' and have to pay thousands. Multiply this by 20 staff and they may go broke.

Then, if an employee is unhappy with their deal,(from the commission) they have no avenue for appeal other than to take legal action.



We will have industries full of full time apprentices being 'under trained' as there will be insufficient trades people left to train them as many work casual to fit in with workloads and employers simply won't stand for an increase in the loading.

Put me on the record as saying,the whole thing is a mess and will simply cut jobs.

Your right rehctub.I refuse to take on apprentices.I would rather keep my business small and controlable.Just pick and choose the better jobs.Far less stress and positive outcomes.They are making it almost impossible to employ people.

If the Unions want to make a difference they should be looking at how our Govts and the banking system steal money by creating too much of it.Look at the fractional reserve system of banking that allows banks to create 9 times the amount of money for loans as thy have in deposits on their books.

This inflation is what diminishes people's saving and wages.Remember that inflation like interest is compounding and with just 3.4% inflation over 10 yrs can mean a 40% increase in the money supply above pop increases and GDP.This means that your currency gets depreciated by 40%.It is the ordinary folk with few assets who lose out becasue they have no hedge against this currency depreciation.

So become aware Belly and start tackling the real issues.

First a confession.

I have never fully understood the twentyfirst century rationale for IR Law.

Sure, it was relevant when workers were being exploited by greedy capitalists who cared nothing for their welfare or safety. But that was pretty much sorted out by the middle of the last century.

We have an entirely different economy today. There are no more dark satanic mills. Very few mindless, repetitive piecework jobs standing in front of a machine tool of some kind. The justification for imposing a seemingly infinite number of "rules" as to how we are permitted to employ people is itself, I would suggest, history.

I would appreciate being enlightened on this. I can certainly see how an employer should be responsible for enabling the worker to operate in a safe and healthy manner. But that's not what IR is all about, is it.

If we turn rehctub's example around:

>>he is working with a guy who only one week ago finnished his time and is being paid the same rate of pay. Now how is that fair? 45 years experience verses 45 hours!<<

From an employer's point of view, if they do the same work, they should get the same pay.

But if there is value in the additional experience, I, for one, would be very happy to pay it. But is this permitted by IR legislation? (That is not a rhetorical question, by the way).

So perhaps we could usefully discuss the objectives of IR law, raher than pick over a couple of examples that on their own, are meaningless.

>>while you are enjoying your traditional 'boxing day rest' that many retail workers will be working, all in the name of more shopping hours<<

Maybe they are happy to earn the money that the retailer is happy to pay them. Where's the crime?

>>The fact is that the people who make these changes are not effected by them.<<

You see, that's the problem. If you left it to the employer and employee to work out between themselves, you wouldn't have all this grief.

The only 2 days of the year there is no retail is christmas day and good friday. All other days are optional. Optional being the word.
So if you open on boxing day or any other day, it is your decision, it is not the law.