IR Rallies Claimed a "Flop"

Danny · 30-11-2006, 06:59 PM

Today was the day that the unions did their thing against the new IR laws. They advertised and advertised (and even urged parents to bring children.. To a unruly protest :WTF?), and managed to achieve less than 50% of their expected turnout.

Greg Combet claimed workers were "afraid" of losing their jobs, while Kevin Andrews claimed that the reason for the lower turnout was that people simply were fine with the new laws.

I'm going to be blunt, I come from a Construction management point of view, so I will sway to one side of the argument. Commercial Construction Sites are so safe, you have more chance of hurting yourself in the site office. The workers finish at three and get two breaks per day. They are provided toilet amenities, facilities for heating food, refrigeration facilities, tea/coffee, and air-conditioned lunch rooms. Everytime it gets a bit wet, they can go home should the rain continue, if it gets to a certain degree heat (around 30 please correct me if I'm wrong), they can go, and as soon as anything on site poses a risk, the site rep has the right to ring worksafe and have them inspect the site with a union rep (24 hours notice must be provided). They start at 7am and finish at 3pm. THAT includes thier 2 breaks during the day.

Really, in the site office its not unusual to work from 7 until 6 with NO breaks. WOking in the office is hard work, these are bloody long hours, and usually there is so much to do (including putting up with unions harping on). Admin work, design meetings etc become exhausting to the point where you become stressed out of your brain.

The new laws in my eyes are fine, and mean that the unions can no longer put a gun to the collective heads of construction companies. But really, are they really THAT hard to live with? I hear that Unemployment is at a low. This is far in contrary to what the Co-alitions and unions have broadcasted.

Will it really mean Unemployment and hard conditions for the working families, or is it another excuse for unions to take a day off and create havoc for those that they so begrudgingly work for? I know my knowledge of it all is flawed. I'm only 21. I DON'T profess to know it all, I just want to hear some views from both sides of the fence.

Outbackjack · 30-11-2006, 07:18 PM

Its good to see that you are taking an interest in these issues at a fairly young age. These issues have been regurgitated on this forum a few times. The only opinion poll that will ever count is the next election. The IR laws will be the most prominent issue that the government will be taking to the public. IR phase two will not be discussed.

I think that most are quite happy to have their say at that time.

Kryton · 30-11-2006, 07:32 PM

really, what is a protest going to achieve?
Jonny isnt going to get up out of bed and go "people are protesting against the IR laws.....ill go change it back then to make them happy".

seriously, what a waste of time. its common knowledge that alot of people arent happy about the laws so its not like the pollies dont already know.
its good to know where my Union dollars are getting wasted.

CongoAU2 · 30-11-2006, 07:38 PM

It seems to me that alot of people are saying they don't like it because of all the publicity the unions and the coalition are putting out. Most of these hard working families they are talking about don't really understand what the IR laws are actually doing.

The unions are really only complaining about it cause unions basically will not need to be there.

**Falcon Coupe** · 30-11-2006, 07:42 PM

It was over 30 degrees in Melboune today, the union members all went home due to heat

Danny · 30-11-2006, 07:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Falcon Coupe

It was over 30 degrees in Melboune today, the union members all went home due to heat

LOL Thanks for your views guys, It interests me on what everyone else is thinking on this matter.

Sapper · 30-11-2006, 07:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by davway

really, what is a protest going to achieve?
Jonny isnt going to get up out of bed and go "people are protesting against the IR laws.....ill go change it back then to make them happy".

seriously, what a waste of time. its common knowledge that alot of people arent happy about the laws so its not like the pollies dont already know.
its good to know where my Union dollars are getting wasted.

Agreed. I get sick of seeing protests. 90% of the time, if not more, the only people inconvenienced by them are people who have nothing to do with the issue being protested. Explain to me why the innocent cafe owner deserved to have his cafe trashed by a passing violent mob of protesters. Its worse in other parts of the world but it still gets our of hand here. Here's something for thought, imagine glancing at the TV at work to see a protest group attacking and trashing your car because they've turned violent.

I used to work at a retail store where my department manager couldn't fire the bludgers at work. I was one of the people that had to fix up what they didn't do on a regular basis.

We live in a democratic society. We have a mechanism in place so you can have your say. Its called a polling booth. If your party loses, it means that most people see the issue differently to you.

**Mechan1k** · 30-11-2006, 08:02 PM

Good thing I wasn't doing delivery work in the city this morning ... no listens anyway ... I would told them to get back to work and eanr their money instead of waste time.

As I said ... good thing I wasn't driving through Sydney this morning ... otherwise it would have been a crap day.

XD 351 Ute · 30-11-2006, 08:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danny

Really, in the site office its not unusual to work from 7 until 6 with NO breaks. WOking in the office is hard work, these are bloody long hours, and usually there is so much to do (including putting up with unions harping on). Admin work, design meetings etc become exhausting to the point where you become stressed out of your brain.

You're dead right about this office work, conditions are usually quite rough. There are exceptions to this rule though.
The quote I've extracted from your post shown above is typical of the comments we hear at work from the company staff.

We're in the second-last year of our EBA, and there's probably a good chance that the company wants us (maintenance & production workers) to go the same way.
So, would I give up on the conditons of our EBA to adopt a work at all costs mentality, especially when I am reasonably compensated with wages and conditions that have been worked out over the years?

Ah, NOPE!

Some people are happy to do the opposite to what I want, and that is their choice. It is also my choice to work with a proven system as we have now.

That is what the whole rally is about. Forget about the politics or union stance, it is simply all about choice.

The government is/has taken that choice away for a lot of people unfairly.

Ed

Green X · 30-11-2006, 08:05 PM

Over 30 you can go home can I have a Job with you, Mate I am a mechanical Fitter and it could be 45 degrees and we would still be working sweating owe **** off, then getting a hard time from management cause you put your tools down 2 minutes before Lunch so you can go and wash ya hands.

I got to get on Union site I think, I am missing out!!!

XRQTR · 30-11-2006, 08:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danny

The new laws in my eyes are fine, and mean that the unions can no longer put a gun to the collective heads of construction companies. But really, are they really THAT hard to live with? I hear that Unemployment is at a low. This is far in contrary to what the Co-alitions and unions have broadcasted.

I'm guessing you have been on a contract for quite some time before this whole thing began, so of course you would not see the difference.

As for holding a gun the companies well I think we all saw just how much that helped with the Ajax debacle. Australian companies again outsourcing work/supplies manufacturers in order to increase margins at the cost of the local markets and economies. Not to mention the workforce that will now not be able to buy the product they produce, what is the point of getting hundreds of people made redundant, even the car plant workers aren't safe at the moment. The next step is to stop all production here and take it off shore, although this might make them cheaper it will be difficult for people to buy them with no jobs to source any income.

As for the rest of you how many more 'guest workers' being abused do we have to watch before we realise that it won't be long before the people in the reports will be us. Oh hang on it has happened plenty of times already, the abbatoirs in the bush where most of the regular workers were sacked only to be re-hired under new IR contracts, there have been others, we have all seen or heard of them.

I do believe that unemloyment is down, technically not a lie, but it's down because so many trades people that were on wages before have had to become self employed contractors. Often going back to work for the same companies they left but now at a much lower final rate of pay, once you remove sick leave and holiday pay that can be as much as $5000 a year, more in some cases if performance based bonuses had been a part of there system.

The new IR laws are like communism and socialism, great on paper.

congo3sr · 30-11-2006, 08:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danny

Today was the day that the unions did their thing against the new IR laws. They advertised and advertised (and even urged parents to bring children.. To a unruly protest :WTF?), and managed to achieve less than 50% of their expected turnout.

Greg Combet claimed workers were "afraid" of losing their jobs, while Kevin Andrews claimed that the reason for the lower turnout was that people simply were fine with the new laws.

I'm going to be blunt, I come from a Construction management point of view, so I will sway to one side of the argument. Commercial Construction Sites are so safe, you have more chance of hurting yourself in the site office. The workers finish at three and get two breaks per day. They are provided toilet amenities, facilities for heating food, refrigeration facilities, tea/coffee, and air-conditioned lunch rooms. Everytime it gets a bit wet, they can go home should the rain continue, if it gets to a certain degree heat (around 30 please correct me if I'm wrong), they can go, and as soon as anything on site poses a risk, the site rep has the right to ring worksafe and have them inspect the site with a union rep (24 hours notice must be provided). They start at 7am and finish at 3pm. THAT includes thier 2 breaks during the day.

Really, in the site office its not unusual to work from 7 until 6 with NO breaks. WOking in the office is hard work, these are bloody long hours, and usually there is so much to do (including putting up with unions harping on). Admin work, design meetings etc become exhausting to the point where you become stressed out of your brain.

The new laws in my eyes are fine, and mean that the unions can no longer put a gun to the collective heads of construction companies. But really, are they really THAT hard to live with? I hear that Unemployment is at a low. This is far in contrary to what the Co-alitions and unions have broadcasted.

Will it really mean Unemployment and hard conditions for the working families, or is it another excuse for unions to take a day off and create havoc for those that they so begrudgingly work for? I know my knowledge of it all is flawed. I'm only 21. I DON'T profess to know it all, I just want to hear some views from both sides of the fence.

Hi ,Danny.
you seem to be upset that the people that protested today for what they believe is an unfair situation,should dare to do so,because where you work,as you say,they have toilet facilities,tea and coffee ,ect.....Danny not all work places are the same,some are very sad and degrading places,you might say that people that work there should quit and get a better job,sadly some cant for reasons of there own,language difficulties,education,ect.these people make very little money,with the small incentives that they may have in there jobs,EG,overtime when its offered,could under the new laws be taken away from them,they wouldnt have been in the crowd today,because they could not have afforded to take the time off,and the threat of reprisals under the new laws already in place,that could see them sacked.The people that could make it today,were there for all working people not just themselves,and they were trying to protect future employees,maybe your kids Danny.
One question Danny,In your office,do you have toilet facilities?air conditioning?tea and coffee facilities?...............years ago Danny,someone fought for those conditions that you enjoy and take for granted today

smiley · 30-11-2006, 08:38 PM

well, i know people first hand who have had hours cut down since the IR laws. Now I was working at the eureka building today and most of the tradies there (and there was alot of them) said they 'should' have gone to the rally and then shrugged their shoulders. Theres a lot of potential for cut down hours over periods to suit employers and once it starts may turn out to be a roller coaster. Reason for low attendance? Well think, the bosses have the power to cut hours/sack you. If your gonna skip work to protest against the laws and the power it gives your boss (and not get paid for the day) what might the boss think about it?? Most people can't afford to risk attending a rally as touchy as this.

Danny · 30-11-2006, 09:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hotwelder

Hi ,Danny.
you seem to be upset that the people that protested today for what they believe is an unfair situation,should dare to do so,because where you work,as you say,they have toilet facilities,tea and coffee ,ect.....Danny not all work places are the same,some are very sad and degrading places,

I agree that there are some degrading workplaces around.

BUT what you have missed here is that I am talking about comercial and UNIONISED workplaces, that's workplaces that are run in accordance with EBA agreements (and which I thought I made clear). There is a BIG difference.

And as for my office? I don't work in one, I DID work in a site office as a Project Co-Ordinator. Now I'm doing residential construction work, building houses.

EDIT: and no I dont have Tea/Coffee, airconditioning, etc etc as residential sites generally are not unionised as commercial sites are. And Yes, I am happy.

TE50pilot · 30-11-2006, 11:21 PM

These type of threads burn me up and I usually don't get into them but......
I work in an industry that supplies the building industry. The company I work for is in the top 50 companies in Australia and is an Australian company.
Now this is how good the new IR laws are. We have an EBA that has 18 months to run and in this EBA the word Union is used a number of times. Somehow the Government thinks that they can now make it hard to tender for jobs because of this type of EBA.
The company I work for has been apparently told they can tender for 2 projects worth up to $90million dollars but because of the EBA that is in place and it's wording the rules put in place by the government means the tender will not be accepted even it is the lowest. The company and the union have got together to try and rectify this by going to the Industrial commision to remove some of the offending words and I assume conditions. If the commision says no you cannot ammend it theres $90mil job we can't win the tender for.
Therefore the product we make will be imported in from most likely China. What a great result for aussie jobs.
At the moment the country is riding high but when times get tough thats when you will find these IR laws will really bite.
Yes families will be hit. I will put a theory to you guys. A person has bought a house say 2yrs ago on wages that are not bad. The new IR laws come into play and start to force them to take wage cuts and at the same time house prices start to fall and now the property you bought for say $400thou is now worth only $350thou and you wages are falling the OT has stopped or I should say you are doing the OT but not getting paid for it like you use to. Meanwhile interest rates are going up and now a loan that was easy to pay is getting harder. Now I hear you say well you should not have relied on your OT etc but through no fault of your own your base wage is being eroded and your family and yourself have bought a world of pain.
The government relies on the "I am alright Jack syndrome" in cases like this and sorry Danny at 21 you have whole lot of living to do and you haven't seen unemployment problems yet and your in the right industry along with myself to see it first hand WHEN it happens. Mate it is good your interested and I assume you will learn more as you ask more questions and make your own mind up.
No I did not protest for the same reasons most people didn't and it wasn't because of fear of losing a job. It is because of apathy. At least I own up to it.
Sorry for the rant. Been a long day.

Auslandau · 30-11-2006, 11:35 PM

I love the comment "overtime will be taken away from them" as an argument agaisnt the IR laws. For an owner of a buissnes (10 staff only) overtime is there because the work is there. Because of 'legislation' this CANNOT be taken away? Please make me understand? Overtime is not a god given right, it is used only when and if required to get things done and completed on time. The attitude of....."ITs coming up to xmas so I need more money so I will take my time and get overtime" is crap!

And talking about comunisim, NOT having the legistlation in place is letting the damn unions run companies to the ground. So an owner of a company is dictated to unsrupilous union delegates? Unioins do not have the right to interfere with my business and my staff if they do not want them.

I have been in involved in management and business dealings with unions on and off for 25 years. If they want to come into my work place fine! I would lower the wages to award, and work by the rules if they want to start to dictate. Anyone worth keeping for the betterment and growth to the comapny can stay for as long as they want and I would never ever 'sack' or get rid of someone who is doing their job!. The bludgers who want to hide behind the coats of unions can walk if they dont like it. In the same breath, If the staff wanted the union to be involved I would feel I have done something wrong and would be greatly dissappointed and would try and sack myself!

I dont know everything about IR and I can bet you 'what ever' that 90% of those that attented today would know 90% less than me. Would love to have been there to ask!

| [/url] |

XRQTR · 30-11-2006, 11:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danny

I agree that there are some degrading workplaces around.

BUT what you have missed here is that I am talking about comercial and UNIONISED workplaces, that's workplaces that are run in accordance with EBA agreements (and which I thought I made clear). There is a BIG difference.

I think you have actually answered your question as to why we need unions with this response, the people that work in the crappy jobs are mostly non-unionised labor. They cannot argue or fight for better conditions and therefore get treated like dirt, this is the whole point behind unionism.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danny

And as for my office? I don't work in one, I DID work in a site office as a Project Co-Ordinator. Now I'm doing residential construction work, building houses.

EDIT: and no I dont have Tea/Coffee, airconditioning, etc etc as residential sites generally are not unionised as commercial sites are. And Yes, I am happy.

So you are a builder or a tradesman??

If you're a builder I really have even less concern for your thoughts.

If you've gone into trade work then you will soon see why it is that big building sites need outside supervision in matters of H&S, try getting all the safety gear you need and then convince the owner/builder that it's there responsibility to pay for it.

As was said you are still young and have many falls, bumps, broken bones, sprained arms and legs, filthy bad backs to wake up to, and that's just the stuff that won't kill you.

I was a carpenter for 12 years, housing - framing, lock up and fix, wait till you have been going along on your knees doing fixes for even 5 years, and even with knee pads. Get up on the roof to pitch the trusses in 35C + days and try to have it finished so you can get a progress payment before the weekend, or for that matter try to put up walls in high wind areas without falling off the second level. Rush on every job because the next job is ready to go and you have a lot of bad rainy days coming up where you might not be able to work, and remember now not working means no money either. I could go on and the guys that have worked as long as or longer than I have will tell you the same thing.

When you have done all this in the next few years come and tell me then that big union sites are a waste and that they make too much money and have too many rights.

RIPGMH · 30-11-2006, 11:57 PM

Maybe if the spine of Australian Unions hadn't withered away to the extent it has, there would be more support for rallies of this nature. The fact is unions,at least in the mining industry through lack of action/support have put themselves in this position. I am 25 years of age, earn in excess of 90k a year and work 48 hours dayshift a week. I have never been screwed by my employer and of the 5 or so co-workers I have seen "screwed" in my seven years of employment not once was union representation fourthcoming.

TE50pilot · 01-12-2006, 12:06 AM

auslandau I will assume you are commenting on my last post so I must correct you I never said "overtime will be taken away from them" and I haven't read it in any of the posts but I could be mistaken and if so I apologise. My concern is that the base wage your on could be eroded when it comes time to negotiate a wage in future and you may still work the hours but not be paid like you did before. I know this because I went from wages to staff and still work long hours and I basically took a $15,000 pay cut. I am not complaining as it was my choice and I knew what I was getting into. But with these laws you may lose that choice.
The main point I was trying to make was the first about a company being ruled out because of an EBA thrashed out by the company and union before any thought of the new IR laws had been made.
I don't run my own company and I agree with some of the laws that give the right to dismiss people as long as it is done correctly for the right reasons. I work at management level and have had experience on both sides of the union.
What I can't get my head around is my daughter works for Maccas and she is in the old system so when they hired new staff her hours dropped while they employed people at a lower rate and with no shift allowances etc. I would assume other companies will do the same in time as it is good business sense but I don't see the price of the product dropping so I would assume then that the extra money is now going to the owner.
Like I said this is early times for these laws and as times get tougher these laws will bite harder. As a business owner if your circumstances change and you hit harder times you would be silly not to take advantage of the laws.

pauljh74 · 01-12-2006, 12:07 AM

An important point is that just because people weren't at the rallies, doesn't mean they don't support the union's cause. In the past, some employers have screwed over their workers and got away with it, and the new laws have given the green light to more employers to do so.

Another point is the public didn't vote for these new laws - the policy was changed significantly from what was initially proposed before the last election and now further detrimental changes are planned. The government has control of both houses of parliament, so they can effectively rubber stamp whatever laws they want unless one of their own party members votes against it in the senate.

Auslandau · 01-12-2006, 12:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RIPGMH

The fact is unions,at least in the mining industry through lack of action/support have put themselves in this position. I am 25 years of age, earn in excess of 90k a year and work 48 hours dayshift a week. I have never been screwed by my employer and of the 5 or so co-workers I have seen "screwed" in my seven years of employment not once was union representation fourthcoming.

Key word there is support! That went out the window 30 years ago. Problem is way too many unions only want to make a noise and 'action' without supporting the members and loose focus why they are there!

and good on you too! Great work to get and damn good money, especially for a 25 year old! but its also bloody hard work!

| [/url] |

OXR60W · 01-12-2006, 12:17 AM

Its simple for me. Good business doesn't rid good employees. I'll live with that, as i will treat my near 100 employees.

I had one guy , a delegate, that was sneaky, disruptive and has cost the business over 900k "units" per year.

We could do nothing about him, UNTIL NOW.

svo347 · 01-12-2006, 12:21 AM

touchy subject.... im a member of the CFMEU, theres alot of good to be had being a union member, if it wasnt for the ways they fought years ago, there would be alot of unfortunate people out there. the union is there for YOUR rights.... agreed the "Blue Flu" day imho was a waste of time, did it really help....
To go out on strike because there wasnt enuff helmet hooks on the crib hut wall or the hooks were too close together is just plain nonsense.... I believe the union is a good thing. but IMHO inwhich im entitled to have, we need new, fresh people leading the way. sorry Kev but listening to your meeting last week was abit too far.

Auslandau · 01-12-2006, 12:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TE50pilot

What I can't get my head around is my daughter works for Maccas and she is in the old system so when they hired new staff her hours dropped while they employed people at a lower rate and with no shift allowances etc. I would assume other companies will do the same in time as it is good business sense but I don't see the price of the product dropping so I would assume then that the extra money is now going to the owner.
Like I said this is early times for these laws and as times get tougher these laws will bite harder. As a business owner if your circumstances change and you hit harder times you would be silly not to take advantage of the laws.

With your first section on EBA, it is an area that I do not have an understanding on enough to make any comment on. But on this point with MACCA's and the'rest of the slave labour camps (This is a differnet arguement I beleive) they have always been a law onto themselves regarding IR and is an area I am upset the g'ment didnt take more into consideration when they had the opportunity to really fix things up right across the board. My son has also just joined the work force and tryed to get partime work (at 16-17 at 'these places') and was told he was too old for gods sake! He has now left school and working full time at Kmart and getting a very good wage at 18! I have ( if I am too old fasioned, dont know!) faith enough in the system, even with a company such as this, if he works well and puts in, he should do well. If he doesnt he could be shown the door! If he gets the **** for 'no reason' then I might have a different view.

As far as, if the busines falls on hardtimes, I wouldnt and can confidently say, do anything different from the past. I may have to let people go so I can keep the doors open and still employ someone, but will always, as any good employer do (busines wise) keep on those that I beleive will benefit the company as a whole. I want to survive so I can make money.....and in return, happy staff will make me money......and in turn they will make money.

Boy I think this is the most I have ever babbled on a thread for!!!!!!

| [/url] |

RIPGMH · 01-12-2006, 12:22 AM

That's right, why should reletively small business shoudler the burden of inefficient employees. You end up with a situation where instead of one or two people rightfully losing their jobs, an entire organisation goes under because it can't compete. Or employers are reluctant to hire personnel for a position in fear the work may only be tempoary and have to deal with unfair dismissal laws down the track.

OLDFORDNUT · 01-12-2006, 12:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hotwelder

Hi ,Danny.
you seem to be upset that the people that protested today for what they believe is an unfair situation,should dare to do so,because where you work,as you say,they have toilet facilities,tea and coffee ,ect.....Danny not all work places are the same,some are very sad and degrading places,you might say that people that work there should quit and get a better job,sadly some cant for reasons of there own,language difficulties,education,ect.these people make very little money,with the small incentives that they may have in there jobs,EG,overtime when its offered,could under the new laws be taken away from them,they wouldnt have been in the crowd today,because they could not have afforded to take the time off,and the threat of reprisals under the new laws already in place,that could see them sacked.The people that could make it today,were there for all working people not just themselves,and they were trying to protect future employees,maybe your kids Danny.
One question Danny,In your office,do you have toilet facilities?air conditioning?tea and coffee facilities?...............years ago Danny,someone fought for those conditions that you enjoy and take for granted today

you just explained what i was thinking better than i could write.
the trouble is all the public see is the old BLF(builders labourers federation) stories of a union gone mad ,used as an excuse by the anti union movement for the last twenty years, most unions have been very fair to employers and workers alike just trying to let us get a fair days pay for a fair days work.
if not for Unions we would not enjoy the conditions we do today, little Johny just wants us (the average Joe) back in our holes accepting his shite. and his new IR Laws are the first big step in achieving this in the future.

xurbanx · 01-12-2006, 12:22 AM

I really don't know what these IR laws contain, but I'm keen to watch this thread and see both sides of the argument. It'll give me insight into what my mum (who works in a clothing manufacturing factory from 8am till 4pm) faces and how she can overcome it.

Work Horse · 01-12-2006, 12:24 AM

Hey Danny
Good on you if you are interested enough to be asking questions.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danny

Today was the day that the unions did their thing against the new IR laws. They advertised and advertised (and even urged parents to bring children.. To a unruly protest :WTF?), and managed to achieve less than 50% of their expected turnout.

Greg Combet claimed workers were "afraid" of losing their jobs, while Kevin Andrews claimed that the reason for the lower turnout was that people simply were fine with the new laws.

Although it does appear you have little time for the unions

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danny

I'm going to be blunt, I come from a Construction management point of view, so I will sway to one side of the argument. Commercial Construction Sites are so safe, you have more chance of hurting yourself in the site office. The workers finish at three and get two breaks per day. They are provided toilet amenities, facilities for heating food, refrigeration facilities, tea/coffee, and air-conditioned lunch rooms. Everytime it gets a bit wet, they can go home should the rain continue, if it gets to a certain degree heat (around 30 please correct me if I'm wrong), they can go, and as soon as anything on site poses a risk, the site rep has the right to ring worksafe and have them inspect the site with a union rep (24 hours notice must be provided). They start at 7am and finish at 3pm. THAT includes thier 2 breaks during the day.

I'm unsure what your point is here. You must be aware all the of the conditions building workers enjoy have been won by unions fighting for them over many years.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danny

Really, in the site office its not unusual to work from 7 until 6 with NO breaks. WOking in the office is hard work, these are bloody long hours, and usually there is so much to do (including putting up with unions harping on). Admin work, design meetings etc become exhausting to the point where you become stressed out of your brain.

So you are looking at other people in the same work place as yourself (the building workers), and not happy they have better conditions that you?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danny

The new laws in my eyes are fine, and mean that the unions can no longer put a gun to the collective heads of construction companies. But really, are they really THAT hard to live with? I hear that Unemployment is at a low. This is far in contrary to what the Co-alitions and unions have broadcasted

Not sure what you mean here, the coalition is in government and never agrees with the unions. Yes unemployment is at a historic low. We are told we need these new IR laws to stop massive unemployment. How can that be when we have historically low unemployment before their introduction?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danny

Will it really mean Unemployment and hard conditions for the working families, or is it another excuse for unions to take a day off and create havoc for those that they so begrudgingly work for? I know my knowledge of it all is flawed. I'm only 21. I DON'T profess to know it all, I just want to hear some views from both sides of the fence.

Well good on you for asking the question Danny. I'm over twice your age, I don't think that means I know more. When I was 21 I was sure I didn't know everything, but what I did know I believed 100%.
These days things are not so black and white.
I have run a successful small business for over 10 years and employ staff. I should be over the moon with the new IR laws because I know they give me much more power over future employees.
And I've had more than one run in with unions over the years, I am no friend to them.
Unions are vital to Australias democarcy. They are one of the power bases of the federal opposition. A strong democarcy requires a strong vocal opposition. Weaken the opposition and our democracy is weakened. I'm sure some would welcome the end of unions, be careful what you wish for!

Auslandau · 01-12-2006, 12:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by svo347

touchy subject....

Yes it is, but interesting and hasnt turned into a bum fight either! Have to do something about that!!!!!!!

:

| [/url] |

brenx · 01-12-2006, 12:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by auslandau

Key word there is support! That went out the window 30 years ago. Problem is way too many unions only want to make a noise and 'action' without supporting the members and loose focus why they are there!

and good on you too! Great work to get and damn good money, especially for a 25 year old! but its also bloody hard work!

That's it. I've been in situations where I need the union for example my employer closed down my workplace. It was 10 mins from my houses and suited my physical requirements. If it didn't I wouldn't have taken the position in the 1st place. My employer saw it as a perfect opportunity to treat me like crap and move me around every few months. They even put me into a workplace that I physically couldn't sustain due to prior workplace injury. At that workplace I injured myself twice quite severly as I wasn't physically able to do the work load in the time frame required. The union did nothing. I cancelled my membership subsequently. The irony? Worksafe came in shortly after and close the workplace down for 4mths till it was deemed safe for employees. Pitty it took me to get injured twice before they did anything. The faults had been known for over 10 years.

Now I'm in a workplace that I have no chance of being able to physically work the day shift. I work night shift due to the lighter load.

As for IR laws. We already know very few like them. It will be interesting to see what ammendments are made to further bury the humble employee (sh*tkicker).