Rudd has done away with unfair work conditions for everyone but his own staff.

http://www.smh.com.au/national/pms-office-turnover-rudd-says-his-staff-work-dog-years-20100415-sf0p.html?autostart=1

Rudd and Gillard continually blast the liberals on work choices, but their staff work 100+ hour weeks on a notional 38hr contract. While standard working hours are not normal for political staff, this would appear to be the worst abuse of staff on record.

Do as I say, not as I do.

Dear Shadow Minister,

You're talking about the staff of the
Prime Minister of Australia and his Deputy - right?
I imagine that these people were told what was
expected of them in their job interviews. Theirs
are not the run-of-the-mill
9-5 type of jobs. I'm sure that their salaries would
also reflect this, as well as other perks
that go with these high-profile positions.

I'm sure that there would be many young people who'd
be lining up for the chance to work for the PM and his
Deputy. Some people might even consider it an honour
and a privilege.

Quite right,Foxy.

I hope that none of our elected representatives only work standard office hours and I wouldn't expect that support staff would be on a "standard 38 hour" arrangement.

This is just a rehash of an old story from last year but they don't mention that between February and October last year 11 media advisers working for 32 Opposition members quit their jobs too.

In a country that charges our politicians will doing nothing.
Being lazy, useless, unproductive, the opposition entrenched in a no policy's zone, just say no to every thing.
Complain about anything, cry real wet check stuff.
This is evidence why Rudd will remain Prime Minister.
And why he must call a DD election and will.
To find evidence in working himself too hard, and his public service too hard ,that he is unfit to govern shows a lost opposition.
Look just how far from truth honesty and wasp work ethic Abbott and his team wander to insult voters ability to think and see.
Understand, put your self in the incoming governments shoes, Liberals along with the living but near death nationals, have used the senate as more of a barrier to good government than anyone from the blocking of suplie till now.
No party with the opportunity would face the electorate without the chance to remove at least one senator the child like family first fool.
Look past the foolishness of those who let total dislike of Rudd/Labor blind them.
Where Are the conservative counter policy's,is it their intention to lengthen lunch breaks and install banana chairs in the forecourt for their public servants.
Do I and a million others need to stop 2 to 4 unexpected hours worked for free each day because it is a sin?
Are you sure you aren't Wilson Tucky SM?

Has anyone else posting here actually worked a 100hr week for an extended period? I would bet that all the labor supporters here don't have a clue.

I worked as an ex pat constructing and commissioning a large plant for 6 months working 90+ hours per week. In the time I dropped to 63kg (considering I am 6ft that was a lot), two colleagues died in car accidents going home, and our social / home life was zero.

My rational for doing it was that I earned a pile of money, that was mostly tax free in those days, and was able to buy a house almost debt free. Even though I notionally knew what I was getting into, the reality was very different, and there is no way I would put myself in that situation for an extended period again.

As OH&S now considers the travel to and from work to be under its ambit, and is looking to general health of employees, this soon actually might be illegal.

The final point about those sort of working conditions, other than being physically harmful to employees, it is also counter productive. It is well known in industry, that after 50hrs/wk that productivity starts to drop off, and at 70+ hrs/wk decision making becomes questionable. This is probably the root of why there are so many stuff ups.

Hiring a few extra people is both better for the employer and employee. The long hours that Rudd demands is not producing any more, it is just to show "how hard we are working".

In reality, what counts is not how hard Rudd works, but what he achieves, and on that score, he could have been playing golf for the past 2 years.

Dear Shadow Minister,

My husband is self employed (architect) and yes he
works the hours it takes to get the job done, and
then some. I've always done the same as a librarian.
Doing whatever was necessary to complete the job.
Whether it was at the Parliamentary Library for MPs,
or a University Library for faculty members, or
a Special Library (CSIRO) for scientists or a School
Library for teachers, or now at a large Regional Library,
running the necessary programs for the public.
If you want to keep your job you do whatever it takes,
and try to pace yourself so that you don't burn out.
However I wouldn't change a thing - and love what I do.
As does my husband.

Parliamentary staff as you must know
are on rather limited tenure.
Usually 3 years - so they don't have long-term careers.
The staff tends to change frequently as the parliamentarians
come and go.

You concern for them is commendable, however, it's really
unwarranted. It's their choice - and they can always leave.
You don't study medicine unless you're prepared to put
in the hours. There are plenty of 9 to 5 jobs available.
Working for the Prime Minister and his Deputy however, isn't
one of them, and you're well aware of that when you sign up.

Both sides of politics ensured that the appointment and promotion policies of state and federal services were made 'flexible' enough to provide homes for loyal advisors.

@Shadow Minister: Has anyone else posting here actually worked a 100hr week for an extended period? I would bet that all the labor supporters here don't have a clue.

I bet ya wrong. People working really long hours tend to come from two groups. One is business owners, which may well be non-labour. The other is professionals - doctors, engineers, lawyers and the like. Professionals cover all points on the political compass.

Both groups are self motived and drive themselves pretty hard. There is a third group who are also self motivated and put in unbelievable hours, but it depends on how you define work. They are mothers with several young children.

But your central point stands. A 60% turnover rate is very high, particularly in salaried staff. It is a worry, mostly because I doubt it is just the long work hours.

I suspect that as rstuart already wrote that there is much more to this than long hours.

Ministerial staffers have always worked long hours this is nothing new.

It is sad that the rhetoric about work-life balance, healthy and flexible workplaces, ensuring adequate resources to get the job done without risk or OH&S concerns, and IR spin about fair workplaces is not matched in practice.

Surely the PM's office should be funded to ensure that whoever is PM is adequately resourced to be able to get the job done properly. Anything less is bad for workers and bad for the Australian people.

The same for public service programs which we have already seen the disastrous results of lack of planning and personnel.

Clearly what I said went straight over everyone's heads.

Considering the majority work about 40 hrs/week, 60 hrs is 12hrs/day 5 days a week. 100hrs/ week is 14 hrs / day 7 days a week.

Considering that most people sleep 7 hrs a day, this leaves no time for any thing but work.

Foxy, I really doubt that either you or your husband work 100 hrs weeks for extended periods.

Once someone has started in the job it is difficult because of the "opportunity" to walk away, in spite of this there is nearly a 60% turnover, which goes to show what a turgid place it is to work.

Irrespective of what the employees signed up for this is sheer incompetence in management. If the average experience of the staff is less than a year, the constant stuff ups that Labor provides is no surprise.

Life must be hard for Ministerial Staff... well between, coffee, the paper, The footy, what's on TV, who's screwing who, & (for the women)running down the other female staff, they would have to work out how to say in 3 pages what could be said in two lines. Make up excuses for the Minister not knowing what's going on. How to keep it from the Minister then taking the blame for the Ministers stuff ups.
I suppose it's like war. lots of time sitting around doing nothing, then all hell breakes loose for a day or two, then back to doing nothing. If they can't handle the heat then they should get out of the fire.
& they get great pay, prestige & perks for that.

SM you jest, never had a job I did not give my best effort to.
And just wish I could convince one bloke how much effort and time I do put in.
RDO today, well except the 6 hours on phone and short dash to return to work, no one around and it had to be done.
Every week, no exceptions, a 4am or even 3 start to get to a pre work start meeting maybe 3 hours away.
Wednesday, 4am left home, all day in Sydney drive home arrive 8.30 pm.
Out and gone early next day.
Once spent 20 hours a day in large trucks sleeping in them driving in them every day.
your view about labor voters is wrong and silly too.
CONSTRUCTION WORKERS work 12 hours six days and can be 7 and even more hours each day.
I am in my office ,car average of 9 hours each day and have not had a weekend free of work in 8 years, home life has to run second to my phone with me even in bed.

JayB
What you have said is just utter rot - I am not sure if you are just being funny. Having been in that position, there is no room in a ministerial office for slackers, never has been, they don't last. The pressures don't just stop between parliamentary sitting periods, there is the electorate responsibilities, meetings (with organisations, community groups, constituents and other politicians), speeches, interaction with media and Cabinet duties.

The perks are only an allowance in lieu of overtime, on top of a basic bureacratic pay packet it pales in comparison to those with similar pressures in the business sector.

The pay is not the issue, the issue is lack of staff and issues of turnover as in this thread.

In my experience staffers usually last a long time given they are usually committed to their jobs. There may be some interchange of staff between ministerial offices at times but never have I seen a 60% turnover.

There is obviously something else going on but given the reluctance of staffers and public servants to speak out we won't know probably the whole truth until a tell-all book comes out years after the events.

My years of advising senior management, in particular CEO’s have left me with key ideas that we can use to compare leaders in terms of their management style.
;Leaders, when their work has been done properly, know that they have succeeded when the workers say, we did this ourselves. (Chinese Proverb).
;Data is important, not speculation.
;Improvement is important, not looking for someone to blame or someone to punish.
;Learning is important, to understand what is necessary for success.
; Long term thinking beats short term thinking every time.

;Looking for someone to blame or hold accountable belongs to the 1840’s train crash investigations. Blaming prevents the examination of complex management system failures.
;In hierarchies’ information goes up through filters and directions go down through megaphones.
;In a world without data, opinion prevails. Where opinion prevails, whoever has power is king.
;It is dangerous to rely on data that are contaminated by fear.
;In fear-based management cultures, people tend to focus on eliminating the threat to them instead of working to achieve desired leadership outcomes.
;The boss is often the last to know what is happening down the line.
For example, at the senate committee on insulation, the public servants said they did not provide information to Minister Garrett because he did not ask for it. Were they afraid because of shoot the messenger stories? Or is this part of their culture?
;Most importantly the management needs to stand back and work ‘on the system’ and not ‘in the system’. Therefore systems with many feed back loops need to be established so all involve know what is going on.
; Cooperation beats competition every time. In fact competition promotes individual interest over the interests of the organisation.
;Great leaders are drawn to, and care about people. They encourage cooperation, they look outwards. Poor leaders perceive people as expendable commodities and unions as a threat. They pit employees against each other, they look inwards.
;The command and control model is not appropriate and barely ever worked even in the Prussian Military.

Shadow Minister,

As far as I'm aware, being covered by Workers' Comp while travelling to-and-from work was one of the things removed under Workchoices and I don't think it's been restored. Some Unions are offering to provide individual coverage via Insurance Companies.

I also empathise with working long hours and the toll it takes over a period. A result of Howard's policies had me driving for 7 hours per day plus working for eight. Take away two hours pay to cover fuel and I was working 15 hours and earning six.

For me the thread is evidence of the lost nature of Tony Abbott and those who support him.
Jayb was it ?went for the extremely uninformed forgetting that only the letter T separates a Wit From a Twit.
Post WWII we woke from our slumber, migrants working two jobs showed us how to achieve home ownership and much more.
Often we put life style on hold till after we have established home ownership and other rewards hard work offers, who can hold such acts in contempt?
And in every walk of life people want to succeed, to be the best, surely the extreme hours our PM works are a reason for supporting him?
Or do we drop into the childlike mold of the jayb,s and taunt hard efforts.
I have worked shoulder to shoulder with one of Rudd's Queensland days staff, yes he is demanding, wants the best, but no chains hold people to the job.
Many having won their spurs move on to another challenge .
Would we want anything but the best efforts from him and them?
Is ranting RABBOTT saying he will not let his staff give their best, that he will be out peddling his pushy instead of in his office?
RABBOTT like that remember you heard it here.

I'm with Shadow Minister on this one.

Rudd's staff work dogyears because he's a dog.

The track record of long hours is there to be seen by everyone.

If 'long hours' produced good and considered policies there would be no 'insulation scam', no 'green loans scam', no BER builders scam', no 'reworking of Howard's immingration scam' would there?

And we'd all be well aware of how pinching our GST money and rebadging it as 'Commonwealth' money was really funding health better because all those doghours would have been translated into a clear information campaign that had the electors pleading with state premiers to sign-on.

But... I have not noticed any such thing going on at all, for all those doghours.

Foxy, as always, is trying to gloss over matters and sound like the court appointed 'reasonable man'.

How about demanding airline pilots work these hours Foxy?

Or truckies? I used to work with a fellow carting wine and cement up from Adelaide to Brisbane, via Broken Hill... he did two trips a week, with 40 tons a time, over loaded and over driving.

One a week is safe, and legal.

Should this behaviour be tolerated, 'in the national interest'?

Anyway, the nonsense spoken about work-life issues is a complete whitewash.

Anyone seriously interested in the 'balance' would start by calling it 'life work'.

Until that happens, it should be seen as just another catch-phrase, just another empty fashion accessory for a 'responsible' employer to point to.

Perhaps a modest look into the building industry, where subbies work very long hours and maintain themselves on speed and other drugs, and get killed in the process...might be worthwhile?

As for the wages these dogeared advisors earn... look in the Oz job ads. They are very modest pays indeed, with an overtime allowance, not regular penalty rates.

The Blue Cross is that the only name you ever posted here under?
Rarely is it the name we post under that drive comment away, more often it is content such as yours in that post.
RABBOTT would be proud of you.
He is safe as leader of the opposition and will be next election and if he wants it the one after.

Belly... I saw no RABBOTT posting here, so have no idea what you are rabbiting on about.

But I did reread your gleeful expose of working for the sake of work earlier in the post.

There is only The Blue Cross, but I might become a cross red one if you start accusing me of having a rogue avatar somewhere else in this OLO system.

Just which part/s of my post do you object to?

Is it that I regard the old union formula of 8,8,8 a pretty reasonable one, to which should be added at least two days off as a weekend?

I can see you revel in your life of 'busywork', but do you achieve anything at all?

Here, f'rinstance:

"I have worked shoulder to shoulder with one of Rudd's Queensland days staff, yes he is demanding, wants the best, but no chains hold people to the job"...jeez... 'shoulder to shoulder' eh?

What was that, breaking the AEU picket line for Rudd?

Fighting off the Boche in the trenches?

Or attacking the building workers for Gillard's anti-union SAS crew?

Clearly, the long hours no unionist should support have failed miserably to deliver the widebrownland anything useful in the time Rudd has been here, other than to rid us of Howard.

Maybe you liked Howard, Belly?

With your small-business mentality towards working hours it sounds like you might have been at least a secret admirer, like Rudd himself clearly was all the time he was in the ALP.

I like this one though...."Once spent 20 hours a day in large trucks sleeping in them driving in them every day"...you must have been picking up the empty containers at the ACL dock and driving ten miles to the pickup before returning and waiting in line for another 10 hours to drop off the full one... hard work indeed!

But this nonsense, "home life has to run second to my phone with me even in bed" is just that.

What are you... a heart transplant doctor?

Or an errand boy on a string?

I don't really know how hard politicians or their staffers work. I just know that anyone who works as hard as most of the people that I know don't have the time or energy to compete in triathlons as Tony Abbott recently did. It did nothing to break the perception that politicians are a bunch of bludgers.

Back in the day, I had it on good authority that the late Russ Hinze was great to work for.

Just sayin'.

And Sir Terence, CJM.

Come TBC surely you have heart of Tony RABBOTT?
He in an attempt to discredit Rudd says he works him self and his staff too much.
Not much impressed by your mud throwing and do not share your view of unions.
But I spent two months ,bit more working with a ex Rudd staffer getting a person in to the NSW Parliament, turned out to be an air waster but the ex staffer, great bloke loves Rudd

Ah, Tony Abbott I have heard of.

A thoroughly loathsome character, on a par with Rudd.

However, if he did say Rudd forces too long hours onto staff, then he is absolutely correct....presumably Coalition staff do not work such foolish hours?

Both enjoy pretending to be holy Christians, and while Abbott pretends to be liberal, Rudd pretends to be a 'social democrat'.

Both are screaming neo-liberals, and dangerous religious fanatics.

I'm not sure I offered a 'view' on unions, but I certainly commented on your inability to organise your time to work reasonable hours.

Now, that is really your concern, not mine (so long as you do not crash your car/truck into me as you return fatigued and weary from whatever nonsensical 'mission' you had been on), but when you seem to be promoting this as a beneficial practice, and supporting Rudd's hazardous approach towards other peoples lives, it becomes OK for me to offer a view too, so I believe anyway.

TBC you and I are never going to agree.
I find the very left lost and uninformed, thankfully there are very few of them.
A union in my view exists for workers and a fair go at work.
Country workers can work three shifts or very early starts.
Union offices do not exist behind gum trees, if service is your task early starts later finishes are just normal.
Frankly your contributions to the thread are helping prove Rudd is ok.
And in my view you are out of touch with workers.
Some thrive on 12 hour days 4 days a week.
unions that forget why we exist are bound to die.
Please explain to me how I visit a crew 2 hours drive away at 6.30 am without an early start.
Or another same day, who start a night shift at PM and want a 6.30 pm visit?

Well Belly, I didn't realise you are a union organiser...if that is what you are... sounds like it anyway.

But is also sounds like you are working the old model, a service model, doing all the work for the members instead of training them up to look after themselves.

Servicing members is a no-win job.

(You wouldn't be with Australia's Worst Union would you? Or worse, the SDA?)

It never is enough, and you cannot be everywhere at once.

Sounds like you need a dose of job redesign, to me.

And to trust your members more to look after themselves better...having first provided the where-with-all of course.

I'll be glad when Rudd goes, but I fear his replacement might be just as bad, be it Abbott or Gillard.

They both hate workers and love bosses.

I imagine if you were working for Russ Hinze or Terence Lewis, the heaviest thing you'd have to lift would be a brown paper bag and then not have to remember where it came from eh?

TBC no not in the CFMEU, and gave up that communist rot with my second teeth.
Service is owed to every member they do not pay to be able to look after them selves.
I am content to be judged by those who matter most, my members.AN increasing number came from unions that think service is old fashioned.
Leave you to play in your sandbox bloke I have a trip to take mates/members to see.

Belly.... Australia's Worst Union is the AWU.... that's what the letters stand for old boy.

The other one, the CFMEU, is almost as bad.

Voted for Howard, has ratbags at the top who do 'run throughs' and bring all 'workers' into disrepute, which is why they are known as Can't F..k Much Else Up, the real meaning behind CFMEU.

Your old style unionism shows through here:

"I have a trip to take mates/members to see".... too bad about 'the sheilas' I suppose, ... how can they be seen as 'mates' when there were none to be seen in the trenches at Gallipoli?

"Service is owed to every member they do not pay to be able to look after them selves"... oh dear, you miss the point entirely don't you?

If you act as a 'father' and control all the solutions to the members problems then they never get a chance to grow up and become mature employees capable of dealing with their supervisors/employers in an intelligent manner.

Providing a 'service' does not mean traipsing around the countryside like a blue-arsed fly, achieving very little in the long term, and almost nothing in the short term...or at least, not much beyond once you are back in your flying-office and gone to 'solve' the next problem your members have no idea how to handle, because you hold all the solutions.

Time to give up your 'arcane priestly power', and start to teach members how to do it for themselves.

Let's face it, you'll still be working hard whilst ever our schools keep churning out compliant unquestioning worker-drones who have no idea how to question anything in front of their eyes.

TBC

Unions are far from perfect. However, when I suffered a workplace injury had I not been in the CPSU I would've faired far worse than I did.

Now the Union Official who represented my claim didn't even like me very much (it was one of those instant personality clashes - I am the type who asks questions, he was the type who expected to not explain anything), but after complaining to the CPSU leader, he finally did the minimal to help me - even that was better than nothing. Due to the long time spent litigating my health worsened and I no longer work full-time. However, even minimal help from a worker's union is better than nothing at all.

Suffice to say that my experience has made me very discerning regarding how bosses treat workers.

I imagine Rudd is hard - but I also think he works even harder than his staff - I don't think he's an actual bully just impatient. He simply doesn't have the time to waste bullying his staff. If you are doing your job properly, you shouldn't be actively abusing people. I have worked in tough situations dealing with everyone from ex crims, to police, to druggies, refugees - I was always inspired by leaders who lead by example and worked hard. It took a lot to break me, but a combination of events including continual harassment finally brought me down.

I could name names of pollies who really did harass their staff - I know from speaking directly with ex-staff, but on top of all my problems I really don't need to be accused of slander.

In conclusion, there are far worse bosses than Rudd and we still need unions to protect workers from them.

Severin

I agree with you on the need for unions, after all, the bosses all have their own, so why would employees not have them and be in them?

I spent many years as a union organiser and industrial officer, and remain supportive of the concept.

However, I also noted a very 'small business' mentality amongst some of them that prevented open discussion within, and imaginative responses to issues without.

From what I can tell of the Belly union members he 'services', they could do with a 'hand over' of power from the union to them.

As in our 'other thread', where the church structure holds on to all power and treats its membership as fools, to a greater or lesser degree, so too do some unions.

In most workplaces there is someone capable of understanding how to create a strategy, once a few basic pointers have been given, and they know there is a full back-up system at union GHQ to call on if/when needed.

The Rudd experience in Qld during his Goss years was not a happy one at all. I was working in it as a union organiser at the time, and the public sector, albeit a very passive and National Party dominated one, was deserving of a shake up, but Rudd's efforts marked the end of 'public service' and the beginning of 'corporate identity' where the public servants role become one of hiding information from clients and protecting the governments they served.

We was dudded... in short, as we are being now.

Frankly, I have little sympathy for his staff if they feel bullied, and keep hanging around and doing nothing about the situation, but mostly they would be career hopping, all too frequently into a green or red seat, so they remain mute in the hope of 'things to come'.

Maybe Rudd is like Belly, and refuses to delegate? Or doesn't trust enough to delegate?

Or maybe Rudd is just very poor at explaining what he wants done

TBC

I really appreciate your insight on Rudd and the 'bad boss' syndrome. I think you understand I can differentiate between someone who is hard and someone who is an abuser. Thank you.

I spent many years not being believed about anything I said - this furthered the damage.

The experience also has made me very sceptical of any power structure, particularly religious institutions as you have noted. Until 9/11 I was quietly atheist, but not any more. I loathe any type of manipulation and exploitation. In Rudd's case I imagine the salary levels his staff are on compensate a lot - and they would find it easy just to transfer if the 'kitchen' became too hot. It is the lower ranked workers, who are under just as much (if not more) stress, receive far less renumeration and less respect. Frankly, I consider Shadow Minister, the originator of this topic, merely wishing to denigrate Rudd than constructively look at workplace inequities and issues.

TBC
You describe exactly what it is like in the Commonwealth Public Service. It is too easy to heap it at Rudd's door alone, the problem is rife and across various levels with bullying and intimidation, scapegoating and whitewashing de rigeur.

Staffing cuts exacerbate the problem - not enough people to do the work, mistakes being covered up, bullying increases while career bureaucrats navigate to protect their patch and their careers. It is not a pretty sight.

Severin
It is awful you had to endure that experience. I can only add, I know the frustration and sometimes despair that can go with being up against the dead end brick wall of bureaucracy. Like most people, I have little time for bullies and control freaks.

My once only dealing with the CPSU was disappointing - they failed to investigage 'behind' what was told them. In the end I went it alone. It wasn't until intervention from an external agency and an FOI request (initially denied) that the information supplied by the department in question was found to be bogus.

I left that department (the perpetrators nearly always stay or are protected by the hierarchy that by association are also culpable). At least the complaint led to some positive changes in terms of accountablility.

The fact is the complainant is always perceived with scepticism regardless of the veracity of the complaint. I can understand why some might breach the Codes of Conduct or a security clearance to leak information to the press - the repercussions are too great so most don't take that step.

Thankfully now I have left the Commonwealth Public Service with no plans to ever return unless poverty drives me to it ...nah not even for that. :)

Like TBC, I have great respect for unions and the rights for employees to be represented in the same way that Business Councils and Chambers of Commerce support employer groups - they just need to be a bit more tenacious and member oriented.

Pelican

<< Staffing cuts exacerbate the problem - not enough people to do the work, mistakes being covered up, bullying increases while career bureaucrats navigate to protect their patch and their careers. It is not a pretty sight. >>

I was in the Victorian Public Service when Kennett took over and implemented his 'corporatisation' of the Public Service. Many good managers were lost and the ones remaining virtually created work to justify their positions (many wheels were reinvented) - sometimes I would think of piranha feeding frenzies. Also the level of sycophants rose considerably; too few staff, no-one to take over if you went on leave, Kennett banned all pay raises for people who were union members - for three years my salary did not change. And people who were retrenched were rehired on massive contracts earning far more than when they were permanent. People who tried to support me had their own careers stymied and had to seek transfers. I still keep in contact with some colleagues, two of whom have managed to remain and others who also resigned.

I am poor and I will never return. At least I can still string a couple of words together (they haven't taken that away from me), but my ability to cope with stress, which used to be excellent, is virtually zero now. I simply grind to a halt - my mind goes blank.

There are too many people whose lives and contributions to the workforce have been literally wasted.

Do I talk rot? I don't think so. Every time I had to work in the office It was one big bludge. Other people around me were stressing out big time & I had my work done. The union even chastised me for working that fast. The Office Manager was always going through my work looking for mistakes & never finding any. The office was one big gossip pool. No one took responsibility for anything in case they could get called upon to explain. Everything they did took so long. It took days to get anything signed, even if the person who had to sign it was on the desk. The biggest bitch was the paper in the photocopier. What's so hard about just putting some paper in the damm thing if it's empty. Even the male clerks were like little girls, always crying about something.
Any time anyone from the floor was rostered to do a month in the office they celebrated. Extra money for nothing & 36.5 hours instead of 40. It was like winning Lotto.
Office workers produce nothing tangible, only problems.

TBC I had no intention of feeding you, of coming back to this thread.
But your offensive lack of understanding must not go unchallenged.
I am union ,till death, I must be many things, the one who says to a boss the words his members must not.
You are unaware of country workers, they will welcome you, drink with you after work, ring you, but not take up the role of delegates.
Refuse to delegate?
I am faced with a 3 day lock up, to save if I can 70 jobs, maybe 90,few members want that job.
But none do not trust me to do my best.
I run my own news letters for each industry I cover.
Ask two things of my members tell me the truth not what they think I want to hear.
And understand they know their jobs better than I ever can.
TBC no doubt you believe your extremist stuff, I have served My union and others for a very long time, claim no halo for me or most but if my members trust me?
I am happy.
Leave you too it bloke, not walking away but have no time for any extremism.
The worst ever AWU official is a better man than you.

We have spoken about your experience with that union before pelican.
I never claimed every union or every official is Worth while, frankly that would be a dreadful lie.
And no one not inside the movement can truly understand the difference between unions.
No pat myself on the back, I would not have let you down.
Right now I am facing TBC on one side saying leave it to members to fix, and your case hurts even more.
See I believe you.
Every word.
And a unionist hardest fight is to win back a member who feels/was betrayed.
A union official can be many things, the bantam rooster, he/she jumps on the lunch room table crows and gos, to be seen in a few years.
The clean shirt comes presses hands promises the world and has forgot your name as he/she gets out the door.
Me, look for the bloke sitting with them drinking coffee and chatting.
Soon the information comes and we leave as mates.
TBC if you insist in being unaware country road workers and such are rarely female, those who are swear more than me and are good value.
TBC has me not wanting to contribute to this thread reality calls.

Dear oh dear Belly.... "I am facing TBC on one side saying leave it to members to fix"... is not what I said at all.

Help your members to get to a higher level of skills, so they can deal with far more than you seem to allow/encourage them to at the moment, back them up with genuine resources, and assist more directly when required... like in a job loss situation, for instance.

Sound advice to your members, to explain the situation to you truthfully, there is no other workable way.

The members I served were all country people, possibly over a far larger area than you, although I have no idea where you are based... but it was a staggering area, and not functionally possible, although I did every site once, and naturally, many far more frequently.

By working with the members in country towns, we created a loose network of delegates who kept in touch with each other, resolved issues by discussing problems in one place with a delegate in another, and together they formed a formidable force of clear thinking and direct action, even gaining a spot on the metro industry meeting via telephone conferences.

Most were either supporters of or members of the National Party too Belly... and many were still supporting (in theory at least) the DLP so not much chance of being 'extremist' with them old chap... but they responded to the view I offered that they were not just 'helpless workers' but, within the scheme of any workplace, in control of their own destiny...or they could be, if they took charge of it.

part 2

Still, each to their own but I'd start backing the 'educated-supported' union model. It allows a form of workplace freedom to develop, and allows union staff to be more imaginative on higher level planning... which should give members better returns in the longer term.

I once did a recruiting course with an AWU bloke who looked after shearers.

We all gave a quick run down of how we went about recruiting from scratch.

And some places were old style closed shop factories, but still delegates had a patter and a request to join up, rather than a blunt instrument that was resented ever after.

Not our chum from the AWU.

He sat and listened while 30 or so people described their actions.

Then it was time for the AWU.

"I just ask 'em for their ticket, and if they don't have one I tell 'em to roll their swag and f..k off".

Such finesse, so effective for the 'movement'.

Severin,

I have never pretended to be a fan of Rudd, but in this instance, he is known for his abusive behaviour towards his staff. And other (multiple complaints by air force stewardesses)

http://www.knowfirst.info/forums/showthread.php?t=27839
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/opinion/kevin-rudds-outburst-was-an-abuse-of-power/story-e6frfhqf-1225777801835

The labor party is run as by a dictator, media briefs and other public communication is vetted by his office, he tolerates no dissent, and is explosively profane in his criticism.

The issue as mentioned before is that where is the line between high expectations and abuse. From what I read, Rudd has crossed that line.

Shadow Minister echoes the talk from Rudd's time as the Goss factotum. He was simply hated, as Goss came to be too. Both were union haters, neither tolerated anything beyond 'my way or the highway'.

Good for issuing diktats, bad for democratic processes, fatal for 'the electorate', as can be seen with numerous Rudd 'initiatives' to date.

God alone (yes, not even the Godly Rudd actually knows what will happen) knows what level of farce the health situation will spiral into.

It could be better, that is still possible, but the odds are on it becoming even worse.

And then the Coalition will take over, privatise the whole shooting match (Rudd's next step anyway)and we will all be blessed with a US style of un-health.

ALP history will record Rudd as a 'strong leader' who took the nation nowhere but 'backwoods'.

Thanks Belly I am sure you would have fought. I should add that the two union reps I dealt with were great people and very caring (it was a very upsetting time). It was not a case of them not believing, it came down to a legal interpretation and it was found later the department concerned provided evidence from the wrong agreement (to cover up the mistake from the actual AWA at the time).

Most of the complaint was not about workplace or IR matters that was only part of it - too long a story to go into here