Talking Politics

[eight ace]

Liverpool, you really don't get it. But I'll take your misunderstanding on board. As I have told you twice now, the provisions relating to unfair dismissal are a small part of this legislation. Your claim that companies have a choice as to whether they apply the legislation or not is simply wrong. They may have a choice as to whether they termiante people or not, but the legislation applies whether they like it or not. That means the whole legislation. There is a transitional period in place, but your company is going to have to consider what workplace arrangements it puts into place under the new system.

Thanks for your generosity regarding my "misunderstanding", but it was totally down to your poor use of language. Or your own misunderstanding as to how the system worked.

 

[tigersnake]

Liverpool doesn't get much at all. I reckon he'd be the David Brent of his workplace.

I'm still staggered at your level of knowledge of this beast 8. The bastard is 800 pages odd? Some expert analyst was saying on ABC radio this morning that they hadn't really digested it yet and wouldn't for another week or so. Amazing what you find on PRE.

 

[eight ace]

I can assure you I haven't digested it yet either. The devil is in the detail.

 

[RemoteTiger]

I can assure you I haven't digested it yet either. The devil is in the detail.

Incorrect - the devil is seated in his office at Parliament House Canberra...................

 

[Liverpool]

Your claim that companies have a choice as to whether they apply the legislation or not is simply wrong.They may have a choice as to whether they termiante people or not, but the legislation applies whether they like it or not. That means the whole legislation.

Regarding unfair-dismissal/terminating employees:
Yes, the legislation is the law, you are correct...but it is still up to the company/manager as to whether they use the power they are now given, or more conservative means, when terminating workers.
Its my choice I choose a more conservative way when disciplining workers....just as its another managers choice to sack people straight away, and give no reason.
Like I have said, workers who are good at their job, and of value to the company, will be under no threat (thats what I have personally told my workers)....and only workers who have bludged on the backs of others are feeling nervous at present.

Like tigersnake has said....Eightace, you seem to have a general grasp of the new IR laws...but even you admit you still have not digested it all yet either.
Does that mean you are a bad manager (assuming you are one?)...no...of course of not.
Any half-decent manager would be waiting to see what happens, and give themselves time to work through the new laws, read, and learn them before rushing out to take action, unlike the hasty managers who have just brought a whole lot of unwanted negative publicity upon their company by sacking people so quickly after the new laws came into effect.
Like I have said, that is poor management.

Also, unions with their scare-campaigns should give these new laws time to see whether they are of any benefit before just jumping up and down, or just make your vote count on election day.

 

[eight ace]

As I live and breath. Liverpool, I do understand your point - it ain't that hard. My point to you, which you appear to have singularly failed to grasp, is that these changes are about much more than the unfair dismissal provisions. The reason I have a grasp of the changes is because I am an industrial lawyer and it is my job to do so. It is my job to advise members of the managerial classes, that is why I know many of them are useless hacks. There is not a lawyer in the country who is thoroughly familiar with the changes, and I am sure that the managerial classes will be struggling, in their blank-faced ways, to grasp them.

I am not suggesting you should know these laws thoroughly - that is what you use professional advisers for. But clearly you don't even have a basic grasp on them, and I recommend to you that you should do so as soon as possible. You can take that recommendation in whatever way you wish, it is of no consequence to me either way.

 

[RemoteTiger]

Australia has a new coat of arms -

John Howard and Peter Costello today announced that they are changing our emblem from the Emu and Kangaroo to a CONDOM because it more accurately reflects the government's political stance. A condom allows for inflation, halts production, destroys the next generation, protects a bunch of pricks, and gives you a sense of security while you're actually being screwed.

Damn, it just doesn't get more accurate than that!

 

[Liverpool]

As I live and breath. Liverpool, I do understand your point - it ain't that hard. My point to you, which you appear to have singularly failed to grasp, is that these changes are about much more than the unfair dismissal provisions. The reason I have a grasp of the changes is because I am an industrial lawyer and it is my job to do so. It is my job to advise members of the managerial classes, that is why I know many of them are useless hacks. There is not a lawyer in the country who is thoroughly familiar with the changes, and I am sure that the managerial classes will be struggling, in their blank-faced ways, to grasp them.

I am not suggesting you should know these laws thoroughly - that is what you use professional advisers for. But clearly you don't even have a basic grasp on them, and I recommend to you that you should do so as soon as possible. You can take that recommendation in whatever way you wish, it is of no consequence to me either way.

eight-ace,
Woohoo!!!!
Someone understood what I'm on about after bloody 10 posts! :clap :hihi
Yes...I DO KNOW that termination/dismissal is only a part of the new legislation, but it is the main part that the media and unions focus on the most, so thats why my main focus has been on that part also.
Now I have a question...with the new IR laws, can we sack some of the Richmond players after tonight's performance cause we have a lost under 100? or does that count all employees, and subsidiary companies? :hihi
Oh...and better not say you're an industrial-lawyer...when I mentioned my profession, I was labelled "arrogant"! :
;D

 

[eight ace]

I didn't call you arrogant because of your profession, I said it because of the content of your post. The new laws can only be used to sack workers, and none of those *smile* on the park for Richmond tonight did any work.

 

[Legends of 2017]

So now it's the bosses fault for using the legislation that he created. umm something wrong here :

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=93222

 

[sabretooth]

so now that we have the IR bill out of the way, what's next? what has Little johnny Bonsai got in store for us?

Oh, sell off Medi Private? ok that's a goodun, why not? still got a way to go before we sink to America's level. then I spose it will be Medicare itself. yeah well a government shouldn't be involved in medical coverage, should it?

oh that's not my idea - just that he's used that angle for every other thing he's sold off.

and how about this for dessert - timed ph0necalls, now that's a doosy ain't it. oh what'sd that, other countries already do it? so what, that's the criteria we should apply to this lucky country, do as others do?

was a time we stood a little apart from the rest of the crowd, it was great to be an Aussie, now we just follow along behind the carrot dangled before our blinkered eyes. what's that, how can you see a carrot if your blinkered? just follow the sound of johnny's voice.

 

[The_General]

Talking Politics this is my opinion on the state of play.

Bracks - biggest imbecile in politics is a puppet and run by his wife. The man has no leadership qualities for mine. Yeah Nah ( we are looking into it or we will have an enquiry) Rivals Spuds Yeah Nahs and Cherry Ripes.

Doyle  - Equal imbecile to Bracks no idea and a tool. No personality. DUD

well looks like ive got no one to vote for cos i have no respect for either of these buffoons.

Bloody hell, I'm agreeing with Craig. (sort of).
Bracks is the third biggest imbecile in politics. Second is doyle, and leading the race we have Mary Delahunty.

Seriously, is there a government portfolio Delahunty hasn't stuffed up yet.

 

[Liverpool]

Talking Politics this is my opinion on the state of play.

Bracks - biggest imbecile in politics is a puppet and run by his wife. The man has no leadership qualities for mine. Yeah Nah ( we are looking into it or we will have an enquiry) Rivals Spuds Yeah Nahs and Cherry Ripes.

Doyle  - Equal imbecile to Bracks no idea and a tool. No personality. DUD

well looks like ive got no one to vote for cos i have no respect for either of these buffoons.

Bloody hell, I'm agreeing with Craig.  (sort of).
Bracks is the third biggest imbecile in politics. Second is doyle, and leading the race we have Mary Delahunty.

Seriously, is there a government portfolio Delahunty hasn't stuffed up yet.

Well...got rid of imbecile number-2 mate.
Maybe if we get Kennett back, we might be able to get rid of imbeciles 1 & 3 also!

 

[mgreen]

Hey Liverpool, would you sack Nathan Brown for busting his leg?

 

[Liverpool]

Hey Liverpool, would you sack Nathan Brown for busting his leg?

???

 

[tigersnake]

See the Fed government gave a $50M handout to Ford Mo Co to develop the new falcon.

2 comments, first, I'm against government money going to huge fro profit corporations.

second, putting that aside, wouldn't it be better for the money to be tied to developing fuel efficient technology?

 

[Anduril]

Can't see the problem. What's $50 M when you have a lazy $17.5 Billion to splash around?
After all one wouldn't want to spend it on Education or Health or Aged Care would one?

 

[eight ace]

Ford must be one of Howard's battlers.

 

[Liverpool]

Can I play devil's-advocate for a minute?  

$50m to Ford might seem shocking, but to a city, like Geelong for example, then Ford is a major contributor to the local economy as well as employing thousands of workers at their Geelong and Campbellfield plants.

If the government didn't give a handout to encourage Ford's commitment to manufacturing in Victoria, who's to say they wouldn't move offshore to Asia where employment is cheaper.
The Government and Victorian manufacturing/automotive industries would be losing a lot more than $50m then.

 

[tigersnake]

Can I play devil's-advocate for a minute?  

$50m to Ford might seem shocking, but to a city, like Geelong for example, then Ford is a major contributor to the local economy as well as employing thousands of workers at their Geelong and Campbellfield plants.

If the government didn't give a handout to encourage Ford's commitment to manufacturing in Victoria, who's to say they wouldn't move offshore to Asia where employment is cheaper.
The Government and Victorian manufacturing/automotive industries would be losing a lot more than $50m then.

I can understand that argument and it has legs, I might not agree with it, but I can understand it.  BUT as I said earlier, with petrol through the roof and the grrenhouse effect all but proven beyond doubt, why not tie the subsidy to innovative energy-efficient research and development?

Australia should be aiming to be a leader in the area, it would create far more jobs, and look to the long term.. But no, we'll use government money subsidise the good ol' outdated, inefficient falcon.

This government is backward looking and incapable of innovative thinking.