Trades hall union rednecks... | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.

Trades hall union rednecks...

RemoteTiger

Woof!
Jul 29, 2004
4,646
98
Liverpool said:
RemoteTiger said:
Many employees do not understand what the contract says - they nod their head to the boss and say yes sir - so they can get an income - many are not as lucid as you or I to negotiate better deals for themselves........and if they were - the smarty bosses say pissoff I got another bloke behind you standing in line who wants the job on these conditions.
This is all about wealth distribution and if you leave it too the market to regulate itself - the rich get richer and the poor can go please themselves - take a long hard look at the USA - do we want a bigger class divide here than what we have now? Or do we want this to be the land of the "fair go"?
Markets regulating themselves and trickle down economics went out with Margaret Thatcher - because the trickle down never happens and the market is controlled by the bosses who line their own pockets first and *smile* the rest....................
And lastly its always the workers family that goes to war - to protect the country and in so doing protecting the bosses fortune - ya rarely see the board of directors families on the front line - so give the workers a break - be fair dinkum - be true blue - for *smile* sake be a real dinky dye and give the battler a go!..........  :harp :guitar

RemoteTiger,
I can see where you're coming from mate, and while I don't like to see the poor getting poorer and rich getting richer, I also don't want to live in an environment where everyone is the same, like a communist country.
There needs to be different 'statuses', so people have a motivation to do as much as they can to improve, to strive, and to better themselves professionally.
Overtaxing rich people to prop up the people who just plod along in life, should not be the direction this country takes....it would be a cop out for people who can't be bothered in life.

If people are not lucid enough, or don't have the education or balls to be able to read a contract before signing it, then I don't know what we can do for these people....meaning, as an employer, I am under no obligation to place someone on higher wages or better conditions, simply because they are not lucid enough, or that I feel compassion for their personal circumstances.

Businesses are businesses.....who exist to make a profit and to look after the shareholders who invest their money into the business.
Businesses are not charities for 'battlers', I'm afraid.

I agree with your argument - and - would like to add that there should be some sort of safety net to protect employees from ruthless employers - of which there a few - very much a minority but there are a few........
 

Liverpool

How did that Julia and Kevin thing work out? :)
Jan 24, 2005
9,054
1
Melbourne
RemoteTiger said:
I agree with your argument - and - would like to add that there should be some sort of safety net to protect employees from ruthless employers - of which there a few - very much a minority but there are a few........

RemoteTiger,
Yeah, its a tough one that.
I think the previous laws were too much in favour of the employee....while the new IR laws are more in favour of the employer.
Both have their good points and their bad points, and both have been taken to the extreme by the minority.

In one of my early jobs, I had a leading-hand refuse to work, as he felt he should have been promoted.
He got a chair from the tea-room and sat in the middle of the factory, refusing to work, as well as ridiculing and goading the other workers around him who were trying to do what they were paid to do.
The law at the time did not give the authority to sack this bloke....I had to go through the process of mediation, discussing what we could do for him, asking him what job in the factory he wanted, did he need extra training in something, what was the main problem he had, etc, etc....then we had to go through the 3 'verbal warnings'...and eventually, the '3 written warnings'....and keeping everything written down in a diary for future reference, if need be.
Of course, this dragged out for 1-2 weeks, not only causing problems because we couldn't replace him due to him still being employed...but the problems he caused and friction he caused between the rest of the employees....as here he was, getting paid more than them, for sitting there doing nothing!
I had many workers coming into my office, telling me to 'sack him'....'why are you letting him sit there'...but my hands were tied.
If I sent him home, I had to pay him too...so either way, the company had to pay someone on leading-hand wages, for doing nothing.
It was a joke!

After his 3rd written warning and subsequent termination of employment, we had an unfair dismissal claim filed against us....so therefore we had to hire lawyers and go to court.

He lost, of course, because we followed the correct process and gave him ample opportunities to speak about his problem, and he continued to refuse any help or to go back to work.

But this highlighted to me at the time, the favourtism the employee was receiving under this law.
Protecting employees is fine, but it also has to protect the employer, who is trying to run a business as well.

The new IR laws now, for companies who are Australian-owned and have less than 100 employees, are more on the employers side.

I agree with you mate that there will be ruthless employers out there who will now take advantage of these new laws....whereas previously, there were certain employees taking advantage of the way the laws were skewed in their favour.

All I can advise anyone who does fall foul to a ruthless employer, is that they are better off out of this company, if that is the way they wish to treat their staff, especially their good workers.
There are many companies out there, and many managers out there, who are more than happy to keep things the way they are....and if more 'good workers' get sacked, it will be easier for the good managers to find good workers in future, as they are hard to find.