Paul surely your not suggesting productivitynhas risen under labor's watch.

Furthermore, if it has, why hold an equiry into the decline in productivity.

Now, on the other point, are you also suggesting the 200% increase in employer funded contributions are in lue of pay increases?

rehctub, Do you have evidence that productivity has dropped under Labor?
"200% increase in employer funded contributions" how do you come up with the figure of 200%?
Labors super deal where by employer contributions increases by a very modest 0.25% from 9 to 9.25% come 1st July 2013 then a slow progression to 12% by the year 2019, seems very fair on employers,as well as responsible and affordable.
Even the Coalition have a similar plan in mind, which later could cost employers more than Labor's deal. See the SMH this morning, that is their opinion not mine.

Paul, open your eyes and ears, as it is common knowledge productivity has taken a dive.

As for the 200% increase, I was referring to the increase from the initial 3 to the current 9% as that's a 200% increase, and just another cost that business has had to bare.

As for the proposed increase, to you, it's just a small amount, but to business, it's another increase, on top of the increases have had to deal with due to the likes of energy costs.

But hey, by all means, go right ahead, as the result will mean ome of two things.

1. More under employment.

2. Fewer jobs and more casualization.

It's not rocket science, justbtake a good hard look at where employment has gone from since labor first played with IR in the 90's.

So many now on casual, and the work underemployment hadn't been invested back then.

Just remember, and you can take this as a warning, or you can laugh it off, but at the end of the day, for every action, there is a reaction.

BTW, labor simply wants to pass the law, and take credit for something that business has to fund.

Rehctub, The perceived notion of "common knowledge" is not evidence. The Labor Party, can produce figures to counter your argument, figures showing jobs growth, export growth etc. Like you, I am not a Labor supporter, but unlike you, at times I find them a little more palatable than the alternative.
"but to business, it's another increase, on top of the increases have had to deal with due to the likes of energy costs." True, however business in general does very well in Australia, profitability is good compared to other OECD countries. There is nothing new when it comes to business decrying any advancement in worker benefits.
I am a firm believer in collective social responsibility. If we are going to live in the society that we do presently exist in, a balanced capitalistic one, then all sections, business, workers, government, judiciary, etc have to play their part in supporting that society, for the benefit of all. If we remove the notion of collective responsibility and replace it totally with individual responsibility then the powerful will advance at the expense of the weak, and history is littered with the consequences of that system.
I agree, we all have individual responsibility to ourselves, but we also have responsibility to the collective. This broad superannuation benefit is an example of one group, employers, passing a benefit to another group, workers, through the intervention of government for the collective good.

Paul! if you know any thing, at all, about politics know Rechtub is producing Terminological inexactitudes from his own head, and seems unaware of it!

Dear Paul,

You may find the following two links of some
interest:

http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/editorial/abbott-focuses-on-profit-not-people-20130517-2js2r.html

And:

http://www.independentaustralia.net/2013/politics/tony-abbotts-budget-reply-porkie-pies/