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 > General Discussion > Double Dissolution election

Double Dissolution election

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. All
Belly >>>rechtub I have shown you before how annualized wages works.
You did not under stand it, but it is in use today and both sides like it.

I think they work well, at least it gives some certainty to the business owner about costs.

I was also of the opinion that they were outlawed with the new award.

Are they still being used within the hospitality and retail industries?

If so, why the new penalty rates?

I also agree with SM. Rudd has been presented with a few opportunities to go to the poles, it's just that voters have found out that he is no longer the 'golden boy' he portayed himself to be and, with each passing day, another S-fight that he has resided over rares its ugly head.

Let's face it, there are many stuff ups to choose from, solar, insulation, health, education, fuel watch, grocery watch and boat people and, who can forget Copenhagen. In fact, Rudd and Gilard will be so busy dodging bullets that they won't have time to plan an early election, don't you recon?

Has anyone got any idea just how much this fool has pissed away on failed schemes? Most failures of this magnitude take decades, even generations, this guy has managed to achieve these milestones in little more than two years. And you think he is a legend!

He is S-scared, just hoping for TA to present him with another life line, like the maternity leave proposal, although I doubt that will happen.

I say again, Rudd is a dud! What a pitty he will still be very rich when he is finnished playing PM.
Posted by rehctub, Monday, 29 March 2010 8:45:22 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
Actually Belly,

The senators standing for re election are those voted in in 2004. The ones voted in in 2007 are safe. (ie the labor majority). A double dissolution will not do labor any favours.
Posted by Shadow Minister, Tuesday, 30 March 2010 6:35:45 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
Belly, due to the fact that I have diverted this thread somewhat, unintentionally I must add, I have started a thread on wage rates, as it is something I would like to discuss with you, and others, but not here.
Posted by rehctub, Wednesday, 31 March 2010 6:53:27 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
Funny how these conversations always seem to wonder on to personal opinion. The next election does not have to happen till early next year. It could possibly be called early but with what reason, the government would surely be better to wait while they fix a few issues and develop a policy run that would build momentum.

The vote in the senate as well as a possible vote on health will have a big effect on the future direction. We will not need a double dissolution to effect change in the senate. Family first will certainly not return and the most likely outcome will be a greens balance. this will be more workable for all.

the vote on the health issue has a much more profound effect as it could well undermine the powers of the state governments which with few exceptions over the years have proven to be problematic at best. Are we really ready for such change or is health more important.

Either way lets hope both the government and the opposition start to suppl some clear policy and future direction for their prospective administrations for the next term so we can make an informed choise and not a guess.
Posted by nairbe, Thursday, 1 April 2010 4:36:41 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
Sorry nairbe, you got that wrong, very wrong, the election has to take place this year.
In truth most Australians, challenge it if you can, would be unhappy with a greens balance of power.
Shadow minister you did not get my point, others will know why we will have a DD election, Rudd has no other path.
Rechtub, yet again you did not truly under stand annualized salary's.
Those who get such are paid based on average income of past few years.
To do one take all overtime worked in those years, average it out.
Put those hours as future out of hours expected to be worked, same average.
Work out a true average pay rate that is all hours worked rate, if it is not less than they earn now.
FWA Fair Work Australian should pass it and you have a workplace agreement in place one rate of pay.
Protection is needed, some to will find are working 26 weekends now, some bosses would then want 36 or even 52 weekends a year.
Those extra to the average? if you want to pay the agreed rate then pay extra day of as well for every extra day worked.
A boss would need protection too, his workers who constantly do not work extra hours would be paid a lower rate, remember the new rate is to compensate for out of hours work.
FWA is flexible if workers are no worse of most things are possible.
Posted by Belly, Thursday, 1 April 2010 11:17:52 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
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. All

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