SkyscraperCity Forum banner

Workchoices

725 Views 12 Replies 8 Participants Last post by  Citystyle
I'v decided to get this stuff out of the drought thread and start a new one.


Funny how those who always talk about free enterprise and individual choice are usually those least effected by it's workings.
Funny how I am affected by its workings. Workchoices has given my kids, my wife and me so many choices as to when and where and for how many hours a week and on what days we'd like, to work.
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Work choices effects so little of the work force.

Most full time positions are now under common law contracts.

ALP would have easily won this election if they didn't attack Work choices.

Funny how Ms Gillard has ruined the ALP's chance of winning the election twice in a row now: Medicare Gold and now her IR policy.

She is a liability for the ALP
See less See more
Most people dont have the CHOICE about how many hours or on which days they work. It comes down to the bottom line of ''can I pay my bills this month?''. The choice most people have is that of either sinking or keeping one's head above water.
My largest gripe with workchoices is that it was not chosen by the Australian people per say. There was not a peep on IR during the last election but when the Gov won majority in the senate suddenly we have this reform that we 'needed' to have. If so why didn't they argure for it instead of just imposing it?

Finally Australian voters have the chance to decide for themselves wether they want WC or not. And about time too.
See less See more
^ Oh please the Government had tried to put this legislation at least 6 times before gaining the senate majority.

Should the government call an election for every piece of policy announced? Or just major policy (then we have the problem of defining major or minor policy)
^^^
You know that the workchoices legislation is about much much more than just the unfair dissmisal laws, Laws that the coalition tried to get through the senate before the 2004 election.
It only consulted business about a wish list on IR, and workchoices was the result. It did not tell the people at the election, it did not ask employees or unions (both legitimate groups within the IR debate). Then they used the new senate majority to pass this brand new IR legislation.
This would be like Labor asking the nurses, unions, hospitals and patients about a policy on health. But excluding the AMA (the doctors union), because you dont like what they have to say.
This coalition government is so caught up in outdated right wing ideals. That it makes bad legislation in spite of itself.
See less See more
Most people dont have the CHOICE about how many hours or on which days they work. It comes down to the bottom line of ''can I pay my bills this month?''. The choice most people have is that of either sinking or keeping one's head above water.
But what does Workchoices change?
State Awards --> Notionally Applying Agreements Preserving State Awards (an enterprise agreement)
Federal Awards --> Federal Awards (yes they stay without change, but if you want a pay rise you need an Enterprise Agreement, AWA or common law contract)
Enterprise Agreements --> Enterprise Agreements
AWA --> AWA
Common Law Contract --> Common Law Contract

The most significant change of WorkChoices is the abolition of the 'No Disadvantage' test. The No Disadvantage test is in fact impossible to implement in a system which doesn't have arbitrated Awards (and this stands despite the Government's announcement today).

In a large organisation which a large union presence Workchoices means nothing.

In a small organisation with a correspondingly small union presence, unions have a more important role because the small bands of employees can be more easily mis-treated by employers. On the other hand legal industrial action by employees will have bigger impacts on the employer. Theoretically bringing them back to the negotiating table.

However, theory is not practice; small groups of employees are vulnerable under Workchoices. They remain so despite the Prime Minister's announcement today.

Nothing in Workchoices advocates the use of AWAs more than what has existed from 1996. No large corporation with any sense will use AWAs for their main labour force because the overheads of using them is enormous (heck, imagine if every employee brought a separate bargaining agent with them, demanded to see a copy of the AWA, required the employer to wait in front of them while they and their agent read the agreement then demanded reasonable time to request alterations all for which they are reasonably entitled to. Impossible) - they will continue to use Enterprise Agreements. In fact the sheer bulk of the Workchoices provisions means that common law contracts are more appealing in many instances than AWAs.

And lastly, nothing in Workchoices changes the regulation of unions (other than to facilitate the transition of state unions to federal unions because almost all of their members became federally-regulated employees). That all happened in 2002.
See less See more
Workchoices is all about increasing the bottom line for the Liberal Parties big business mates and screwing the most vulnerable in the community to achieve it.

Wages as a percentage of GDP have fallen quite dramtically over the last 12 months whilst business profits and the sharemarket are soaring. You dont have to be a rocket scientist to work out what is going on here. A huge shift in money from employees to shareholders. Just what Howard intended to do in his usual sneaky underhanded way.

Employees in the hospitality and retail sector are really hurting over this. Even me after 8 interest rate rises since 2002 am no longer laughing at my capital gains or massive interest bill each month. And I think most aussies who beleive in a fair go think Howard has dudded them just one too many times.
See less See more
Wages as a percentage of GDP have fallen quite dramtically over the last 12 months whilst business profits and the sharemarket are soaring.
VERY misleading concept or maybe you are unfamiliar with the entire concept.

Wages are hardly declining - as a proportion maybe - but with wage growth at 3-4% (very high) and profit growth of around 20% for each of the past 5 years (strong corporate earnings and mining boom) its not as if employees are worse off.

Corporate growth will always be higher than wage growth in boom times!! Imagine if wages were rising 20% a year but corporate profits were only growing at 5% (we would have massively high levels of inflation and our companies would be bankrupt).

3-4% wage growth is phenomenal
See less See more
business profits and the share market are soaring. .
ummmmmmm and who owns most of the share market - the Australian people!!!!

Market cap of Australian stock market is approx $900 billion dollars - Australian super is worth $1 trillion - with around 40% of that in the Australian stock market - so our super accounts own half of that!

Then there are direct share holdings
And then foreigners who own less than 20%

So Australians own approximately 80% of the market cap of the entire stock market and all these profits come back to us buddy!
See less See more
^^
Define us.
Those already well off or those who can't afford a stock portfolio?
^^
Define us.
Those already well off or those who can't afford a stock portfolio?
If you work, you have a superannuation account (9% employer contribution by law). If you have a superannuation account you are a player in the share market as Zach said. You are one of millions (as indirect shareholders) who are raking in the dividends. Do we hear you whinging when you check you super statement each year to see 10% pa growth? No, I didn't think so.
See less See more
Work choices effects so little of the work force.

Most full time positions are now under common law contracts.

ALP would have easily won this election if they didn't attack Work choices.

Funny how Ms Gillard has ruined the ALP's chance of winning the election twice in a row now: Medicare Gold and now her IR policy.

She is a liability for the ALP
Thats probably why i was like WTF? The argument was rediculas.
It was the image fact, she fucks up. Rudd did'nt give a shit about AWA's till she opened her mouth months ago. Probably fucked there whole policy up.

AWA's might as well be restricted to industries under a Labor "Government".

AWA's so called tradeoff for conditions has been a farce, for people who dont know read hornetfig's post.
See less See more
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top