What is Wrong with John Howard's IR Laws?

[bmwofoz]

No-one else knows, only I know. Maybe bosses should be more professional and promote efficiency and good work in the workplace. Might be an idea.

Did him or the boss tell you.

 

[Richo83]

Did him or the boss tell you.

The boss asked me if I liked these movies. I said yes, he then gave me a pay rise. I then asked other workers had he asked the same question to them, all said yes, but answered no. Obviously the boss had done it to everyone. Only I received a pay rise.

 

[bmwofoz]

The boss asked me if I liked these movies. I said yes, he then gave me a pay rise. I then asked other workers had he asked the same question to them, all said yes, but answered no. Obviously the boss had done it to everyone. Only I received a pay rise.

All I can say is well done,

My boss is a lefty so I might tell him I love Rudd I wonder if that will work

 

[medusala]

Heres the thing, no sector is safe now.

The public service is pretty well immune. Odd that.

Not evens services has the rights it used to have.

If only those coopers and blacksmiths werent forced out of their professions, would be so much more of a "socially just" society.

 

[medusala]

In fact many jobs have been de-skilled. Hence the rise of the service industries as a major employer in Australia.

Services has risen due to cost competition in manufacturing. Its a natural consequence of globalisation.

As for deskilling further education and training is required for more jobs than in the past.

 

[plugger47]

Services has risen due to cost competition in manufacturing. Its a natural consequence of globalisation.

As for deskilling further education and training is required for more jobs than in the past.

There is nothing "natural" in economics and public policy. Deindustrialization has been driven by massive cororate profit drives and compliant governments. I live in a region with a real unemployment rate of 30%. Most of the former industrial sector workers who made things in the past are into their second or third TAFE course. The re-training myth doesn't wash. If you don't work digging something out of the ground you will be holding a tray and asking some rich complacent clown "And sir what would you like now". Just watch the next election for the how the scoreboard is ticking on "natural globalization". As for your kind suggestion to bend over and take it for capitalism, please take it back and shove it where the sun don't shine sunny jim

 

[medusala]

There is nothing "natural" in economics and public policy.

Yes there is. Its why communism was such a comprehensive failure.

Deindustrialization has been driven by massive cororate profit drives and compliant governments.

Nonsense its driven by competition from Asia and overseas. How can TCF possibly compete?

I live in a region with a real unemployment rate of 30%. Most of the former industrial sector workers who made things in the past are into their second or third TAFE course. The re-training myth doesn't wash.

So what of the 1m manufacturing workers who lost their jobs in the UK in the last 10 years? Where did they all disappear to? Ditto the coal workers.

Just watch the next election for the how the scoreboard is ticking on "natural globalization". As for your kind suggestion to bend over and take it for capitalism, please take it back and shove it where the sun don't shine sunny jim

Yeh sure, why doesnt my kind just foot the bill and let you sit back and let you have the lifestyle you so obviously deserve.

 

[1jasonoz]

Services has risen due to cost competition in manufacturing. Its a natural consequence of globalisation.

As for deskilling further education and training is required for more jobs than in the past.

Education and traning hey, is that the same education and training that you have continually argued does not have any effect upon economic growth or productivity?

 

[stompie]

There is nothing "natural" in economics and public policy. Deindustrialization has been driven by massive cororate profit drives and compliant governments. I live in a region with a real unemployment rate of 30%. Most of the former industrial sector workers who made things in the past are into their second or third TAFE course. The re-training myth doesn't wash. If you don't work digging something out of the ground you will be holding a tray and asking some rich complacent clown "And sir what would you like now". Just watch the next election for the how the scoreboard is ticking on "natural globalization". As for your kind suggestion to bend over and take it for capitalism, please take it back and shove it where the sun don't shine sunny jim

In Canberra at the moment, unemployment is around 2 per cent. Anyone in the building trade is also making a fair bit. For example, the carbon blobs that just stand next to the cement mixer are getting $22 to $25 an hour, while the brikies are charging $4 in labour to lay each bessa brick. (That is on top of material's costs). Perhaps the unemployed people in your city might like to consider moving.

Another solution to your unemployment problems might be to reduce the labour costs of building houses. As I’m sure you are aware, there is a shortage of rental properties, which has been caused by people being able to afford a house, or defaulting on their mortgage. If we could reduce the labour costs in the building sector, more houses could be built ,overall more people could be employed, - thus reducing unemployment -and more people could afford a property.

One way we could reduce costs would be to give bosses more ability to reward the productive workers. That's what Howard is trying to do. Another way would be to allow migrant workers. The later option also has the added benefit of helping the poor, and disadvantaged from other countries.

 

[Richo83]

The public service is pretty well immune. Odd that.

No it's not.

If only those coopers and blacksmiths werent forced out of their professions, would be so much more of a "socially just" society.

Because the manufacturing and service industries is just made of coopers and blacksmiths, aren't they? Hyperbole, again.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/natio...ies-study-finds/2007/02/13/1171128974111.html

Work laws cut wages, strip penalties, study finds

NEW workplace laws have cut wages, stripped overtime penalties and removed award protections for workers, according to an academic study.

Griffith Business School's David Peetz found that real wages for full-time working adults fell by 1.1 per cent in the six months to August, which he described as a "remarkable occurrence during the tightest labour market in 30 years … Normally real wages should be booming in such circumstances." How about those falling wages med?

Professor Peetz, who has links to the labour movement, analysed workplace data from the first 10 months of operation of the Federal Government's WorkChoices laws.

He found the impact was particularly harsh for women, whose real ordinary-time earnings fell by 2 per cent in the private sector in the first six months.

Professor Peetz said retailing and hospitality, areas in which women comprise about 60 per cent of workers, were the hardest hit, with hourly earnings growth rates cut in half.

"Workers in both industries are reliant on penalty rates for night and weekend work, and these are susceptible to change under WorkChoices," he said.

The study showed nearly 20,000 workers a month had permanently lost their award coverage after signing Australian Workplace Agreements and other non-union agreements, which can remove formerly protected conditions such as overtime, penalty rates and rest breaks.

The rate at which such conditions had been removed had increased substantially since the introduction of WorkChoices, with overtime pay lost at double the rate of the past.

While employment had increased, Professor Peetz found this was unrelated to the abolition of unfair-dismissal laws under WorkChoices. He said trend employment growth of 2.4 per cent during the first 10 months of WorkChoices was noticeably weaker than the 3.4 per cent growth after the Keating government introduced unfair-dismissal laws in 1994.

He also said it was doubtful there had been any positive impact on labour productivity.

Workplace Minister Joe Hockey said Professor Peetz, who has been a witness for the ACTU in an industrial test case and previously worked for Gough Whitlam, was "not credible".

"(Professor) Peetz makes some wild claims based on selective and shifting assumptions," he said.

Mr Hockey's office denied real wages had fallen, with yesterday's National Australia Bank survey showing wages increasing by 5.25 per cent — the highest growth rate since 1998. His office said the gender pay gap was closing and it was too early to assess the productivity impacts of the changes.

ACTU president Sharan Burrow said the professor's research "torpedoed the Howard Government's credibility", showing that the new laws had no economic benefit while disadvantaging women and the low paid.

Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry chief Peter Hendy slammed the report as "selective and unreliable".

Can't really call the ACC who have a vested interest in this law (good for business, pity about workers) credible either. As for Hockey, of course he's going to defend this legislation, especially so close to election time, even though it is a lead weight to the Liberals election chances.

 

[whythelongface]

:

Can't really call the ACC who have a vested interest in this law (good for business, pity about workers) credible either. As for Hockey, of course he's going to defend this legislation, especially so close to election time, even though it is a lead weight to the Liberals election chances.

Read this article today as well. David Peetz writes some excellent pieces in journals - well worth taking a look.

Interesting how the Libs continually sprout how productive our economy will be with these new "flexible" work place laws - of course the Libs are going to suggest that it is too early to call re: productivity, as history has shown in comparisons between Australia and NZ that a collective environment overall is more productive than a labour market that is based on individual agreements.

Let's hope that Howard ends up the same way as what happened to Stanley Melbourne Bruce when he tried to dismantle the arbitration system in the roaring 20's.

 

[Alvin Teal]

Or the opposite is working hard knowing your doing great work and watching some snivelling little weed leapfrog you because he drinks down the same pub as the boss

No. Stompie's got the right idea on this one.

 

[plugger47]

Yeh sure, why doesnt my kind just foot the bill and let you sit back and let you have the lifestyle you so obviously deserve.

So you finally agree with me then there is no natural phenomena in economics and public policy - just an issue of who is screwing who? Pity for the elites that the majority who work damn hard will demand progressive taxation policy and an economy where everyone can have work and dignity. Lets put that to an election and see who wins.

 

[stompie]

So you finally agree with me then there is no natural phenomena in economics and public policy - just an issue of who is screwing who? Pity for the elites that the majority who work damn hard will demand progressive taxation policy and an economy where everyone can have work and dignity. Lets put that to an election and see who wins.

The problem is that hard workers are being held back by bludgers protected by laws that allow them to continue to bludge. Eventually the majority will stop feeling sorry for the 'victims' that are making their life more difficult for them. When they do, they will support any moves that will help give employers give the bludgers the boot.

 

[plugger47]

The problem is that hard workers are being held back by bludgers protected by laws that allow them to continue to bludge. Eventually the majority will stop feeling sorry for the 'victims' that are making their life more difficult for them. When they do, they will support any moves that will help give employers give the bludgers the boot.

The majority will be the victims of Howard's IR laws. No doubt you know how easy it is on a blast furnace or mining underground tiger?

 

[medusala]

Education and traning hey, is that the same education and training that you have continually argued does not have any effect upon economic growth or productivity?

Increased spending by ALP state govts has seen a decrease in education standards.

Unfortunately there is still a large reservoir of people who equate increased govt spending with better outcomes (and coincidentally particularly where union members get big wage rises).

 

[medusala]

Read this article today as well. David Peetz writes some excellent pieces in journals - well worth taking a look.

Peetz is a goose. He makes Des Moore look like a centrist.

 

[1jasonoz]

Increased spending by ALP state govts has seen a decrease in education standards.

Unfortunately there is still a large reservoir of people who equate increased govt spending with better outcomes (and coincidentally particularly where union members get big wage rises).

Shock horror you blame the states for Australia suffering a 7% fall in real education spending against the average OECD increase of 40% of the same period.

What % of spending on education goes into wages, and how does this compare to the OECD average; you must no since its a line you continually run whenever the conservatives are attacked over their reducations in education spending since 1996?

Oh and is this the education and training that you have continually argued does not in any way contribute to economic growth or productivity?

 

[1jasonoz]

Peetz is a goose. He makes Des Moore look like a centrist.

Shooting the messenger, add him to your list of unreliables, OECD, ABS, IMF, Australia senate, etc etc?

 

[medusala]

Shock horror you blame the states for Australia suffering a 7% fall in real education spending against the average OECD increase of 40% of the same period.

Expenditure per primary, secondary and post-secondary non-tertiary student increased in every country between 1995 and 2003. In 16 out of the 26 OECD and partner countries for which data are available, changes exceed 20%, and are 30% or more in Australia, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Mexico, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, the SlovakRepublic, Turkey and Chile

What % of spending on education goes into wages, and how does this compare to the OECD average; you must no since its a line you continually run whenever the conservatives are attacked over their reducations in education spending since 1996?

Why compare it to OECD av? You are trying to argue against the case higher salaries do nothing for outcomes.

Oh and is this the education and training that you have continually argued does not in any way contribute to economic growth or productivity?

Absolutely. not in the way its been spent recently. One wonders how higher salaries for teachers and the churning out of thousands of humanities students does anything for productivity. Even the smaller class sizes argument has been shown to be extremely dubious.

From your mates at the OECD: Education at a glance 2006

Note that lower unit expenditure does not necessarily lead to lower achievement. For example, expenditures for Korea and the Netherlands are below the OECD average for yet both were among the best-performing countries inthe PISA 2003 survey.

there is great variation among countries in the proportion of the compulsory curriculum devoted to reading and writing: from 13% or less in Australia, Chile and Israel to 30% in France, Mexico and the Netherlands. There is considerablevariation in time devoted to modern foreign languages too, ranging from 1% or less inAustralia, England, Japan and Mexico to 21% in Luxembourg.

The results show no simple correlation between student/teacher ratio andperformance.

 

[medusala]

Shooting the messenger, add him to your list of unreliables, OECD, ABS, IMF, Australia senate, etc etc?

OECD support me (see below) just as they have on Workchoices.

As do the IMF.

Australian Senate is a good one, given they showed children had been threatend, thrown overboard etc and that the unions were in opposition to super choice.

keep trying to defend your union brethren making up fantasy arguments in order to rort Australian taxpayers.

Its laughable that you have the audacity to attack farmers.

 

[1jasonoz]

OECD support me (see below) just as they have on Workchoices.

As do the IMF.

Australian Senate is a good one, given they showed children had been threatend, thrown overboard etc and that the unions were in opposition to super choice.

keep trying to defend your union brethren making up fantasy arguments in order to rort Australian taxpayers.

Its laughable that you have the audacity to attack farmers.

OECD support me (see below) just as they have on Workchoices.

Of course they do, the OECD supports your uneducated claim that spending on education and training does not leed to increased economic growth or increased productivity!!

Youd better tell them that and Julie Bishop aswello!!

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21228752-601,00.html

The OECD, the Paris-based economic think tank, said Australia's productivity was well below that of the leading nations (productivity has collapsed under the conservatives actualy Med) , and its employment rates for low-skilled and older workers were relatively poor.

As well as improving the education system, its annual review of the strategies countries should adopt to stimulate economic growth said the Government should do more to tighten its disability pension scheme and lower the high effective tax rates levied on many low-income people (you remember argueing that low income earners didn't face high EMTR'S?). It also urged dismantling the award wage-setting system and improving competition policy.

Training and productivity
Research suggests that investment in training appears to be associated with higher levels of worker productivity in many industries.

Speech – Hon Julie Bishop MP, Minister for Education, Science & Training

ADDRESS TO THE COMMITTEE FOR THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OF AUSTRALIA, BRISBANE 1 FEBRUARY 2007

There is no doubt that education plays a key role in the economic and social fabric of any society. [/COLOR](youve denied their is a link between education training and productivity and economic growth remember, except for you argueing in defence of your government sponserd course!!)

As do the IMF.

Oh the IMF are back on your reliable list are they??

Australian Senate is a good one

Yes you stated their data from the ABS was biased and unrelaible when it showed the correlation between economic growth, productivity and increased income earning potential for the country!!

given they showed children had been threatend, thrown overboard etc and that the unions were in opposition to super choice.

Yes i'm still waiting, what about 3 months for you read the full Industry super fund submission, that supoorted super choice (something that doesn't occur in the government run defined benefit scheme YOU support).

Oh and are you saying that children where thrown overboard as Howard lied during the Tampa affair that got Howard re-elected(remember those Newspolls you say you seen but can't produce!! http://au.acnielsen.com/reports/LatestACNielsenPoll-October2005.shtml, see the 2001 results and enjoy).

Its laughable that you have the audacity to attack farmers

No i'm actually have a laugh at you!!! You continued rants that the free market system with no government intervention/assitance at all, then argueing in defence of handouts and socialist systems that force certain farmers to subsidies less productive farmers!!

Thats why i raise the issue to laugh at your double standards!!

Oh and how are those contracts in the UK going, you no the ones, the ones that you claim don't contain any terms or conditions and aren't contracts with anyone, just yourself!!

 

[- PC -]

No. Stompie's got the right idea on this one.

So you agree hard work and integrity and devotion to the firm will see more people promoted than brown nosing?

 

[1jasonoz]

Expenditure per primary, secondary and post-secondary non-tertiary student increased in every country between 1995 and 2003. In 16 out of the 26 OECD and partner countries for which data are available, changes exceed 20%, and are 30% or more in Australia, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Mexico, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, the SlovakRepublic, Turkey and Chile




Why compare it to OECD av? You are trying to argue against the case higher salaries do nothing for outcomes.




Absolutely. not in the way its been spent recently. One wonders how higher salaries for teachers and the churning out of thousands of humanities students does anything for productivity. Even the smaller class sizes argument has been shown to be extremely dubious.

From your mates at the OECD: Education at a glance 2006

Note that lower unit expenditure does not necessarily lead to lower achievement. For example, expenditures for Korea and the Netherlands are below the OECD average for yet both were among the best-performing countries inthe PISA 2003 survey.

there is great variation among countries in the proportion of the compulsory curriculum devoted to reading and writing: from 13% or less in Australia, Chile and Israel to 30% in France, Mexico and the Netherlands. There is considerablevariation in time devoted to modern foreign languages too, ranging from 1% or less inAustralia, England, Japan and Mexico to 21% in Luxembourg.

The results show no simple correlation between student/teacher ratio andperformance.

Why compare it to OECD av? You are trying to argue against the case higher salaries do nothing for outcomes.

Ive asked you a very simple question; you have continually started that increased spending on educations cimply goes into increased wages for union members, i have asked you supply the information that you have used to make this claim, that shows the break down of the % of spending that actually goes into wages verses spending on education and training?

Very simple for you to provide since you must have the figures since you keep stating that spending on education, simply means increased wages??

Also how does the spending on wages as a % of education spending compare in relation to other countries; you must nop this as you keep attacking the wages paid to the providers of education and training?

Expenditure per primary, secondary and post-secondary non-tertiary student increased in every country between 1995 and 2003. In 16 out of the 26 OECD and partner countries for which data are available, changes exceed 20%, and are 30% or more in Australia, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Mexico, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, the SlovakRepublic, Turkey and Chile

Nice try in using education spending that are in the main state government spending responibilties and trying to pass this off as Commonwealth government spending(typical from you though).

Absolutely. not in the way its been spent recently. One wonders how higher salaries for teachers and the churning out of thousands of humanities students does anything for productivity. Even the smaller class sizes argument has been shown to be extremely dubious.

From your mates at the OECD: Education at a glance 2006

Note that lower unit expenditure does not necessarily lead to lower achievement. For example, expenditures for Korea and the Netherlands are below the OECD average for yet both were among the best-performing countries inthe PISA 2003 survey.

there is great variation among countries in the proportion of the compulsory curriculum devoted to reading and writing: from 13% or less in Australia, Chile and Israel to 30% in France, Mexico and the Netherlands. There is considerablevariation in time devoted to modern foreign languages too, ranging from 1% or less inAustralia, England, Japan and Mexico to 21% in Luxembourg.

The results show no simple correlation between student/teacher ratio andperformance.

Your continued arguement that education, training and investing in R&D doesn't equal increased productivity and increased economic growth just shows you failure once again to have even a basic understanding of simple economic principals (thats why you support the howard governments $22+ billion baby bonus, government run super funds, etc etc).

Oh and what does class sizes have to do with somehow supporting your argument that spending on education, training and R&D doesn't help economic growth and productivity?

And im still waiting for the figures you have used to make the claim that investors are better off ov er 30+ years earning cpi increases verses full market interest rates tax free at retirement?

From your mates at the OECD

Unreliable list again?

 

[medusala]

Of course they do, the OECD supports your uneducated claim that spending on education and training does not leed to increased economic growth or increased productivity!!

The OECD clearly states there is a poor correlation between spending and outcomes. Spending is only productive if made in the right way. ALP govts havent done this.

A simple notion to follow but clearly beyond your grasp


Youd better tell them that and Julie Bishop aswello!!

Oh the IMF are back on your reliable list are they??

Well the head of the IMF did talk of firing constraints hurting employment.

Yes you stated their data from the ABS was biased and unrelaible when it showed the correlation between economic growth, productivity and increased income earning potential for the country!!

What nonsense, you are clutching at straws. You can't even see an obvious correlation between unfair dismissal, high min wages and unemployment.

Yes i'm still waiting, what about 3 months for you read the full Industry super fund submission, that supoorted super choice (something that doesn't occur in the government run defined benefit scheme YOU support).

I provided the link to the senate hearings where it showed they were clearly against choice. That should be no surprise, unions have always been pro compulsion even if it means a baseball bat and balaclava to achieve it.

Oh and are you saying that children where thrown overboard as Howard lied during the Tampa affair that got Howard re-elected

Children were threatened and thrown of SIEVS. Its in the senate hearings, which once again I posted.

(remember those Newspolls you say you seen but can't produce!!

I have repeatedly shown that Newspoll showed the libs in front before Tampa.

No i'm actually have a laugh at you!!! You continued rants that the free market system with no government intervention/assitance at all, then argueing in defence of handouts and socialist systems that force certain farmers to subsidies less productive farmers!!

Happy for all subsidies (not that they get much) to end to farmers as long as hopelessly uncompetitive manufacturers get theirs cut and a knife is taken to the PS. Australias most efficient industry.

You stick to defending an unproductive union monopoly on the docks etc.

Oh and how are those contracts in the UK going, you no the ones, the ones that you claim don't contain any terms or conditions and aren't contracts with anyone, just yourself!!

You were made to look like a complete nonce with your efforts at claimining EU regulations were mandatory in the UK and couldnt be opted out of .