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 > Thats no Hoax, it,s an AWA!

Thats no Hoax, it,s an AWA!

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. All
I even as a unionist had never seen an AWA, I was aware of the contents of hundreds of them but had never held one in my hands.
I even knew they are a far different thing for the highly skilled and needed employee than the lower skilled but still this was a shock.
A bloke walked into an office and I got to see this AWA, drawn up for casual labour in building construction and such in suburban NSW.
IT HAD TO BE A hoax! JUST HAD TO BE! but a group including me rang the number and as we read each clause the person on the other end of the phone got more heated!
We can ask what we want of our workers they do not have to work for us he said.
Just maybe they have to eat and have to work mate!
23 clauses, of these 19 ended with a threat, if you break this clause we reserve the right to inform your employment agency and request you be barred from benefits for up to 16 weeks!
One clause if you are five minutes late for work you will be docked 4 hours pay.
Another if you miss a days work without informing us of a good reason you will be fined all the hours you have worked so far that week.
It is endless but under Howard's new safety net unlawful, however what about those who have already signed one prior to that ?
Sorry it is the lowest thing I ever saw and some who can not even read or write work in this industry.
Only a minority of bosses think like this but is that 5% or could it be 15%?
Are that many fellow Australia's to be caste out?
Fair go mate still has meaning for me.
Another clause if you take on work for a client of XXXX labour hire we reserve the right to fine you $3.000 and may take legal action for loss of trade!
Posted by Belly, Friday, 11 May 2007 6:01:36 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
It might be unlawful but who is going to police it.
The dept. in charge is hopelessly underfunded and in a few months will have years backlog, so your chances of redress under the law will be practically nil.
Posted by alanpoi, Friday, 11 May 2007 10:27:57 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
We hear so many conflicting stories about AWA's that I, for one, don't know what to believe. Fortunately I'm retired and am not affected by the IR changes introduced by the Coalition.

Nevertheless, I was a worker, and do not like to see workers done down, despite being a 'right-winger'.

If the AWA's are bad, surely Rudd has the answer for the workers? Won't the Coalition get the flick? It would make sense to me.

But, of course, only 15% of the privately-employed work force are members of a union these days. And, what did ALP governments under Hawke and Keating do for workers? I can remember, and it was diddly sqat.

The very worst employer I had was my own father. He was a member of the Labor Party, despite being a business man and Rotarian.

Nothing proves anything, does it?
Posted by Leigh, Friday, 11 May 2007 11:50:15 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
Leigh while I understand you no longer work, and that you are a right winger, your words, we should never get far away from fairness.
One day I may be free to post my full views on unionism, but not yet.
However even if Rudd has a landslide unions can never go back to the 1950,s I would not wish then too do so.
I am from the center or right if you wish of both the union movement and the ALP.
That statement will find me as many enemy's within those movements as outside them.
The future however is that path, some who are unable to adjust will suffer.
This AWA, it is the very reason Rudd holds his view, and so unfair I am breath less.
I must inform posters some movement has taken place, the CEO of this firm has invited us to sit down and work on a possible fair agreement.
A step that had to be taken but I assure every one that meeting will be in no way different than any business one, no threats, no stand over no evil union vs halo wearing boss.
While that is the future of trade unionism it is also the past and present of my proud union, nothing to fear if you have nothing to hide.
However in the next month at least 5 firms must explain why no super has been paid for up to a year.
No travel as per agreement.
No work given to workers who ask the questions why is it so?
Unions do have honest work to do and are not good bosses enemy's.
Posted by Belly, Friday, 11 May 2007 4:50:45 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. Page 1
  3. All

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