RemoteTiger said:
I do not know the real figures today of full time work employment and whether they are better than they were 3 decades ago but I do know I have a neighbour who as a garbo works 20 hours a week as that is all the shift they can give him and he is considered by this Government s employed - as he said to me try paying off a mortgage and sending the kids to school on 20 hours a week.
Lastly why was there a poor turnout at the rallies today - because a majority of workers are now on permanent casual which means they could easily be removed from the job if they rock the boat.
Liverpool - these new IR laws are against everything our forefathers fought for - they are taking the worker back to the days of industrial revolution when workers were considered expendible and seen as a cost rather than an asset to the business. By making the employers gods in their own realm the power will go to the bosses head - and when there is the inevitable downturn in the economy lets see who suffers - I'll have a lazy green cabbage ($100 note) with you that it won't be the bosses suffering loss of wages.
RemoteTiger,
Many of your posts are pretty good, but I'm sorry, I have to disagree with you on this one.
Under the law, I have to offer a casual worker who has been employed with us for a set period the choice of going on as a casual, or to become full-time.
Some are happy to become full-time, but many casuals I have dealt with are happy to stay casual...yes, they miss out on holidays, etc...but they get a loading on their wage which gives them more $$$ per hour.
As far as I know, this law hasn't changed under the new system.
I am quite happy if they stay casual or become full-time...a I have always stated to my workers that if they are doing a good job, I will have no intention of getting rid of anyone.
The rallies weren't a poor turnout because of permanent-casuals...you know that, and I know that.
I could get rid of a casual anytime I please, and don't need the excuse of an IR rally to say see you later to them.....but the casuals I have are happy with the arrangement we have, and have no reason to attend such a rally.
Any casuals out there who feel threatened should start looking for another job, or show their employer that they are worthy to become full-time.
Casuals ARE expendable, hence the title of "casual"....as an employer has no obligation to give them hours for the sake of giving them hours, and they are under no obligation to go to work and can quit anytime they like.
Workers have always been expendable, even before these IR changes....look at all the moves off shore, redundancy packages, etc that have been happening for years now, well before Howard even popped up as the PM.
It is only the naive who think that all workers are assets. They are not.
The only workers who are assets are the ones who show initiative, reliability, and a bit of old-fashioned "ooomf".
Lazy, couldn't give a stuff, workers are no asset...and all the IR laws have done is make things a little easier for employers to weed these people out of the business, without having to go through constant bogus unfair dismissal claims clogging up the courts.
Yes, there will be bosses out there who will take advantage of this situation....no doubt...but what about the previous laws where it was the employee trying to take the employers to the cleaners?
Anyone, who honestly thinks they have done nothing wrong, and is sacked for no reason, shouldn't be angry with the new IR laws....they should be glad they have gotten the hell out of the place they had a poor manager, and get themselves a better position.
I'm sorry mate...but the new IR laws, which have NOT taken away leave entitlements or anything like that....are the biggest beat-up and scare-mongering campaign for years.
The crowd at the MCG today showed that the public is smarter than what the Unions/ALP give them credit for.
poppa x said:
Most people are employed by small business. The relationship between the boss and the workers in most small businesses is vastly superior to the relationship the worker may have with a union.
I employ 13 people. Not one of them asked for today off. Not one. And there was zero discussion at my workplace about todays rally. Why? Because my staff value their job and the relationship with me. They know if I go broke they are out of a job. So they all came to work today without a moments thought. Two of the women brought their primary school kids with them 'cos the kids state primary school was effectively shut. That's ok. We set the kids up with a computer each with an internet connection and kept them entertained for most of the day.
IR laws? What IR laws? They don't effect me or my staff.
PoppaX,
I'm at the other end of the spectrum where we are a large business, and therefore we can't sack anyone due to the "over 100 employees" bit (plus our head-office is overseas, and so we aren't an Australian company anyway)......but still, not one person mentioned the rally.
If anything, my workers are very anti-union....they like the arrangement we have, where even though they have an EBA, we are flexible with it...its give and take. They do not want me to follow the EBA strictly, and therefore don't want the unions involved either.
We can't allow kids on our premises due to the dangerous equipment...however, many times one of my workers has said they have had to leave early to pick their kids up from school, etc....and we work around that. Its no problem.
They are good workers, and I am happy to be flexible....sacking them because of something like that would be the furthest thing from my mind, even if I did have the rights to do it.
Only moronic bosses will sack good workers, but this isn't the fault of the new IR laws, but the fault of the moronic bosses...it'll be their loss in the end.