Enterprise Bargaining Agreement,EBA, Trade off in the workplace.
Complex but stay with me.
No two work places are unlike, for this idea we talk of one with twenty employees working an average of 25 hours a week over time.
Explanation of penalty rates, an extra payment paid at a higher rate to compensate for more time spent away from home and family some over time is restricted by the boss because of costs.
Please note some workers require it and select jobs that include it to work there.
A LIMITED AMOUNT IS CONSIDERED AS A fair AMOUNT no further definition has been able to be found.
Workers fear too much.
For this plan the boss wants to have a single rate of pay all hours worked.
I as negotiator put this on table [that is how it works] for discussion.
One firm promise no over time above last 5 five years annual gross average will be included in any scheme, that will be negotiated about if contemplated, as old over time rates at all double time.
2 workers who work the overtime in the past to be paid an annualized salary based on past hours.
Those who reject over time not to be asked to work it.
After firm says no way I introduce another idea you tell me what it is.
remember the union thuggery is myth no boss sitting opposite me will say ok I am Santa Belly take my car too.

no control over the country's future, in part due to incompetence, and a total lack of vision,
Shaggy Dog,
Yes & not only the politicians but the whole education system & the media & last but not least the Judiciary.

Dear Individual,

I was watching "Insight," the other evening and listening
to many young people expressing their views on politics.
One young Liberal supporter stated that he was from
Queensland and he found it very frustrating that many
Liberal supporters in that state and within the party
were so anti education, especially tertiary edication
and anything to do with academia and academics. He found
it extremely puzzling and as a young educated person,
frustrating - why all this anti-feeling and mistrust.
He found it quite frankly off-putting - and discouraging.
They were losing many young competent people as a result of
these attitudes. I thought of you as I listened to this
young man. I wonder why. Interesting.

Lexi,

When I was young I cannot say I knew many people with a tertiary education. They just weren't about. Many occupations that now require a degree did not have that requirement.

Whilst a great percentage of the population now has a tertiary education it cannot be said that the country has progressed in many areas. The violence that exists today was not apparent back then nor was the selfishness of many Australians that is very obvious today.

Maybe this is where the distrust of education comes from. I am not making any cause for or against but our now relatively well educated and affluent society may have lost some of its humanity along the way.

The civilisation that supposedly comes with education obviously covers us with a very thin veneer.

Just some thoughts in response to your post.

Take it easy.

SD

Dear Shaggy Dog,

Education gets blamed for a multitude of sins.
I'm not sure though that it's always valid.
As we know any advancement involves taking risks
and hard work - but it's usually worth it.
Values and norms usually come from our parents, family,
and the social context to which we are exposed.

Violence in our society could result from various
causes - involving broken families, drug abuse,
alcohol abuse, poor education, and unemployment.
Often much of this appears random, mindless,and the
reasons offered by the perpetrators often run along
the lines of "He started it," "Or he bashed me first."

Moreover, many of these people see no reason to adopt
to society's values, for society offers them nothing:
they get no nearer to affluence or success than what
they see on their TV set; whose repressed rage and even
self-hate erupts against those around them.

The young man I was referring to in my previous post
genuinely wanted to make a positive contribution to
the political party of his choice - but was being
prevented from doing so by narrow minded people
within the ranks. Which to him was discouraging.

Belly, you seem to miss the point entirely.

Its not about 1 in 5 workers, its about attitude and power.
If you were an overseas investor, thinking of investing in
Australian manufacturing, and you hear the top union officials
make it clear that they are out for all that they can get,
those same people are involved with the top of Govt, what
would you think?

Not what is fair and reasonable, but what can we screw out
of the system. At the same time we see union power thrown
around, right now. No cattle loaded yesterday, wharfies
on strike in the north. Flights cancelled in Perth, more
militant unions throwing their weight around.

I spoke to a truckie the other day, who does the NW run.
He tells me the boys in the North now want 90 bucks an
hour, because the rig workers managed to screw the system,
so they can too. In the end it affects the whole economy.

You should read the business pages more often, to see
what business thinks of the present situation.

Short term unions will get away with it. Long term its going
to cost heaps of jobs. It won't be me that is affected, but other
peoples children. They will be complaining about jobs and
why they arn't there. So be it, they clearly need more pain
to understand how the world works.

At the end of the day, things work best when business and the
workforce combine for mutual benefit. With union leaders
calling for all that they can get, business will react
accordingly. But it will happen quietly, they will simply
go elsewhere and they will have good reason to have done so.

Keep digging minerals, the rest is a waste of time in Aus.