Spotlight: WorkChoices is fucked

[Goreripper]

It's been at least a week since anything political was posted, what with the excitement over Maiden coming Downunder at last. So here's this:

http://blogs.news.com.au/news/blogocracy/index.php/news/comments/spotlight

 

[TinMan666]

lol pwnd.

they're the ones who tried to shaft their workers by removing all their penalty rates and other conditions, and giving them a 2c pay raise to keep it all "fair", right?

 

[Dän]

While I would be skeptical over the source of that information, given it's bais slant, I was under the impression that you can't be forced to give up your rights, such as overtime and such, for a compensated wage increase. Is the story here that she would have lost her job if she said I'm not going to accept the 2c an hr increase in pay for giving up my other entitlements? Because thats illegal if that is the case.

And people who have signed AWA's are better off.

 

[Goreripper]

The sources are highlighted links in the article. It is an opinion piece, but it does cite where the information came from. If you follow them, you will see that the woman in question was offered her job back (I seem to recall she and several others were made redundant at the store she worked at) on those terms. So in effect, if she wanted to work there, she had to accept those terms. No, she wouldn't have lost her job, as she had already lost it. The company offered to rehire her if she agreed to those terms. The crux of the issue is that Howard said that Spotlight had set to perfect example of his policy, except for the fact that his own spin doctors reckon that WorkChoices encourages employees and bosses to negotiate deals. This clearly did not happen here. Spotlight offered her a job, but only if she was willing to trade off all of her entitlements for a 2c pay rise. There was no other choice, except unemployment. Yes, as you point out, that's illegal. But when it all first came to light, Howard said that it was OK! So either he didn't understand his own policy, or he did but he didn't want to admit that it was fucked.

 

[Stonewall]

Howard has also said of the fairness test that he won't guarantee that any worker won't be worse off.

 

[Goreripper]

The fairness test is bogus, just like the entire policy. There are recorded cases (I can't be arsed searching for them now) where workers have gone into AWA "negotiations" with bosses only to find out the negotiations have already been done -- between the company's legal firm and its Board of Directors.

 

[Dän]

The sources are highlighted links in the article. It is an opinion piece, but it does cite where the information came from. If you follow them, you will see that the woman in question was offered her job back (I seem to recall she and several others were made redundant at the store she worked at) on those terms. So in effect, if she wanted to work there, she had to accept those terms. No, she wouldn't have lost her job, as she had already lost it. The company offered to rehire her if she agreed to those terms. The crux of the issue is that Howard said that Spotlight had set to perfect example of his policy, except for the fact that his own spin doctors reckon that WorkChoices encourages employees and bosses to negotiate deals. This clearly did not happen here. Spotlight offered her a job, but only if she was willing to trade off all of her entitlements for a 2c pay rise. There was no other choice, except unemployment. Yes, as you point out, that's illegal. But when it all first came to light, Howard said that it was OK! So either he didn't understand his own policy, or he did but he didn't want to admit that it was fucked.

So it is illegal and Spotlight had no right to take away her benefits and offer her a job back without those entitlements at 2c hr extra. So then what is the argument? Howard's laws dont allow that.

Coalition is closing in on the polls as well, come on you conservatives

 

[Goreripper]

So then what is the argument? Howard's laws dont allow that.

If you read the article, the argument was that when it first happened, HOWARD SAID IT WAS OK for them to do what they did. He even said it in Parliament! You haven't been paying attention again, have you?

 

[Goreripper]

Regardless of all that, Spotlight has decided that collective bargaining with unions is easier, which is precisely the opposite of what Howard and the BCA has been telling us for months.

 

[Shannow]

Dan,
you don't seriously beleive that propaganda on the idiot box do you ?

If your pin-up boy was telling the truth, the adds would be about all of the unscrupulous employers that the fairness commission had belted for being arseholes. To rub our noses in how well these laws work, and demonstrate the powers and vigilance of the ombudsman.

By not having any examples of employers taken to task, ot means that all of the cases that have been in the media are legit.

When the Mean Fiddler gathered their staff on ANZAC day, told them "here's your new AWA, you are now on single time. Don't go to the press, or you'll lose your job !" must have been legal, or Howard would be making damned well sure that they were made an example to prove how the new laws protect people.

No examples made means everything to date has been legit.

 

[Goreripper]

This just about sums it up for me:

Spotlight, a wealthy family business owned by brothers Ruben Fried and Morry Fraid, was now prepared to abandon the Howard Government’s Australian Workplace Agreements and reach a collective union bargain. Mr Carter said he had held an “extremely successful” meeting a week ago with Joe de Bruyn, national chief of the giant shop assistants’ union, about negotiating a collective agreement to replace AWAs.

He said the discussions with Mr de Bruyn had been brokered by Australian Workers Union national secretary and Labor Party candidate Bill Shorten, whom he described as a pragmatic person willing to consider commercial interests. He said the Government’s Work Choices laws were too complex and involved too much red tape.

 

[Spiff]

Shut up commies, you should be glad you have any rights at all.

Hail Aussie John Howard! He'll save you!

 

[Shannow]

Anyway, people who choose to work for people who turn out to be bastards have got it coming.

Personal choice you know.

 

[Southy]

too lazy to read this, bet Dan said something stupid already though

 

[Shannow]

come on you conservatives

so what's happening with that other hand ????

 

[Dän]

eh, it's in my pants?

 

[Dän]

Retard Rudd doesnt even know the tax system and kicks is own inadequcies off the front page by saying the Libs starting dishing shit on his heart; what a complete tool.

I hope you enjoy your future fucked up leader pinko fuckers

 

[Shannow]

And Alexander Bumfuck only knew the details because he had a cheat sheet in his hand.

 

[Winmar]

Dan, you could kick your inadequacies off this page by learning how to spell.

 

[Shannow]

It's hard to type one handed I guess