Talking Politics

[eight ace]

Liverpool, if you are a manager and know nothing about these changes I suggest it may be you who is looking for a new job soon. You are clearly not putting in enough effort. If your employer is a company, then it is covered by this new system. Someone in your organisation should start getting some advice. Also, if you were giving 3 verbal and 3 written warnings to bad workers then you clearly didn't know your stuff. No wonder some of your former employees were successful in unfair dismissal claims. Still, the management profession is chock full of useless hacks.

Interesting to note that you claim the scare campaigns are rubbish when you know nothing about the changes. And the changes to the unfair dismissal regime are only one element to the changes in any event.

As a general rule it will be a little harder to dismiss registered apprentices , as an apprenticeship can only be cancelled with the approval of the appropriate training authority.

 

[RemoteTiger]

I'm a manager in a global company.

For years I have put-up with bludging/thieving workers, workers who worked hard when they were 'casual' and then when made 'full time' became the biggest pain in the arse cause they could get away with it, workers who knew that I had to give 3 verbal warnings and then 3 written warnings before getting the sack...and even then they had a chance at putting an unfair-dismissal claim through.....all the way causing unrest and morale problems with other staff. Just troublemakers! 

This 'scare' campaign about the new legislations are rubbish!

Managers do not want to lose their 'good' workers....its simple as that.

These new laws won't be an issue to the good workers out there.....it will only be an issue to the ones that have been riding on the backs of the good workers, and getting away with it.
Their time is up!  8)

Being a large company, I haven't sat down and really read whether these 'workchoices' are available to us, as a company,  and to what extent.
But if they are, not only can I then get rid of certain individuals, but the other workers who are excellent at what they do, will be more than happy with the new laws also.
So that to me can't be all bad...

PS: Just had a quick read...the official site says this:
"Under WorkChoices, employers who employ up to and including 100 employees* will be exempt from unfair dismissal laws"
Bummer! 

You are right - there are bludges on the system! And no matter what system you put in - the smarties will find a way around it - it has been like that since one man employed another on a time basis.

I have found that to weed the bludges out I give them the worst tasks - the real *smile* jobs - the good employees enjoy the better and more interesting tasks while those whinging lazy mongrels get more to whinge about. They eventually leave. Plus I instituted a system where Key Performance Indicators which are met by employees are rewarded with bonuses - either money which has to be taxed or nights out for the family or a romantic holiday weekend for the employee and his partner with their kids slipped into a kids camp - which they love.

I found years ago big stick management just does not work - whereas asking each employee how they can tackle a certain project or task and then telling them it is theirs to prove their theory gives them ownership and they like to prove they are right - plus they know they will get a bonus! IMO it is not rocket science

I deal with the union rep in a respectable fashion and I am grateful that he sees my way of doing things has merit.

I am floating the idea wth my HR Manager and the union rep at the moment to have a company private school (fully paid for by the company) in partnership with one of the private schools up here exclusive for the children of employees.  Why? Because I have a reasonably high turnover of female employees who work and learn particularly well then go off to have a family - I need something to entice those ladies back to my company - so if I can arrange their shifts to be at the same time as school hours and have the school close by I am hoping it will work!

My company is not the products we make nor is it the building we are in nor is it my wife and I - it is the people who work here that make my company competitive Look after them and encourage them and my company profits go up.

 

[Legends of 2017]

I'm a manager in a global company.

For years I have put-up with bludging/thieving workers, workers who worked hard when they were 'casual' and then when made 'full time' became the biggest pain in the arse cause they could get away with it, workers who knew that I had to give 3 verbal warnings and then 3 written warnings before getting the sack...and even then they had a chance at putting an unfair-dismissal claim through.....all the way causing unrest and morale problems with other staff. Just troublemakers!

This 'scare' campaign about the new legislations are rubbish!

Managers do not want to lose their 'good' workers....its simple as that.

These new laws won't be an issue to the good workers out there.....it will only be an issue to the ones that have been riding on the backs of the good workers, and getting away with it.
Their time is up! 8)

Being a large company, I haven't sat down and really read whether these 'workchoices' are available to us, as a company, and to what extent.
But if they are, not only can I then get rid of certain individuals, but the other workers who are excellent at what they do, will be more than happy with the new laws also.
So that to me can't be all bad...

PS: Just had a quick read...the official site says this:
"Under WorkChoices, employers who employ up to and including 100 employees* will be exempt from unfair dismissal laws"
Bummer!

You are right - there are bludges on the system! And no matter what system you put in - the smarties will find a way around it - it has been like that since one man employed another on a time basis.

I have found that to weed the bludges out I give them the worst tasks - the real sh!t jobs - the good employees enjoy the better and more interesting tasks while those whinging lazy mongrels get more to whinge about. They eventually leave. Plus I instituted a system where Key Performance Indicators which are met by employees are rewarded with bonuses - either money which has to be taxed or nights out for the family or a romantic holiday weekend for the employee and his partner with their kids slipped into a kids camp - which they love.

I found years ago big stick management just does not work - whereas asking each employee how they can tackle a certain project or task and then telling them it is theirs to prove their theory gives them ownership and they like to prove they are right - plus they know they will get a bonus! IMO it is not rocket science

I deal with the union rep in a respectable fashion and I am grateful that he sees my way of doing things has merit.

I am floating the idea wth my HR Manager and the union rep at the moment to have a company private school (fully paid for by the company) in partnership with one of the private schools up here exclusive for the children of employees. Why? Because I have a reasonably high turnover of female employees who work and learn particularly well then go off to have a family - I need something to entice those ladies back to my company - so if I can arrange their shifts to be at the same time as school hours and have the school close by I am hoping it will work!

My company is not the products we make nor is it the building we are in nor is it my wife and I - it is the people who work here that make my company competitive Look after them and encourage them and my company profits go up.

Any positions available there ? ;D

 

[Ready]

But you have to live in Canberra. :-X

;D

 

[RemoteTiger]

But you have to live in Canberra.  :-X

;D

The best kept secret in Australia - Good roads - no peak hour bootlenecks, good education systems, great health system - new city so work buildings are state of the art, great parks and sports grounds, highest  average wage earnings in Australia, Foxtel beaming all the Footy, Cricket, Races into my lounge room. half hour flight to Sydney for internation artists' performance (or 3 hour drive).

The ony negative - the women are as warm as the July weather......... :hihi :hihi :hihi

 

[tigersnake]

Liverpool, can you pm me with the name of your company so I'm able to avoid buying shares, hiring its services or buying its good etc?

Eight ace, your life can't be too idle to know your way around that bill already, good stuff.

Just spent a week in Canberra, have to admit, I enjoyed it.

 

[RemoteTiger]

Just spent a week in Canberra, have to admit, I enjoyed it.

Mate - why didn't you PM me - I could have shown you the sights of Canberra and the where  the good places to go are - and discussed the mighty Tigers over a feed. Not to worry - catch you next time....RT

 

[Herewegotigers]

I'm a manager in a global company.

For years I have put-up with bludging/thieving workers, workers who worked hard when they were 'casual' and then when made 'full time' became the biggest pain in the arse cause they could get away with it, workers who knew that I had to give 3 verbal warnings and then 3 written warnings before getting the sack...and even then they had a chance at putting an unfair-dismissal claim through.....all the way causing unrest and morale problems with other staff. Just troublemakers! 

This 'scare' campaign about the new legislations are rubbish!

Managers do not want to lose their 'good' workers....its simple as that.

These new laws won't be an issue to the good workers out there.....it will only be an issue to the ones that have been riding on the backs of the good workers, and getting away with it.
Their time is up!  8)

Being a large company, I haven't sat down and really read whether these 'workchoices' are available to us, as a company,  and to what extent.
But if they are, not only can I then get rid of certain individuals, but the other workers who are excellent at what they do, will be more than happy with the new laws also.
So that to me can't be all bad...

PS: Just had a quick read...the official site says this:
"Under WorkChoices, employers who employ up to and including 100 employees* will be exempt from unfair dismissal laws"
Bummer! 

Great lib - party Employers bulldust you just spewed up there liverpool, suggest you go and rinse your mouth out with some chardy before spewing that crapola up in your next statement. This will all come down to money , nothing more and nothing less. If a company can payless to its employees it will , this might not happen overnight but it will happen.

Go to page 25 of your Lib hand book to find your reply.

 

[Liverpool]

Also, if you were giving 3 verbal and 3 written warnings to bad workers then you clearly didn't know your stuff. No wonder some of your former employees were successful in unfair dismissal claims. Still, the management profession is chock full of useless hacks.

eightace,
Please get your facts right, or at least read my post correctly.
Firstly, I didn't say I didn't know ANYTHING about the new laws, but I think only bad managers who want to sack people straight away would know everything about the new IR laws at this moment.
Sacking people, even if it is a pain in the arse worker, isn't something I look forward to with glee....these people still have families and financial commitments.
But the new laws will make it 'easier' for me, lets say that.
The "3 verbal, 3 written" warnings might not be needed anymore, maybe you're right, but I like to give the workers every chance to improve their performance, and I think sitting down talking to them, letting them have a big whinge/sook...and then continuing with the 'warning' process (if need be) the best method. That way, if things get to the stage that their performance cannot be tolerated anymore, then everyone knows, including them, that they have been given many chances.
Finally, again you read my post wrong....I said "they had a chance at putting an unfair-dismissal claim through"...and you have assumed that they were successful?
Sorry, but in my department, I have NOT LOST ONE unfair-dismissal claim, as I have documented all counselling sessions, had witnesses present when verbal warnings have been given, and have kept signed letters of written warnings handed out....thats why I stick with the "3 verbal, 3 written" method...not only protecting myself, but the company I work for....which is what a good manager is all about!
Not bad for...what was it...a "useless hack", eh?!?! ;D

RemoteTiger,
Top post mate....seems like your workers would be happy with you as their boss! :clap
I had a woman come back to work after being away for 4 years raising her child....I was more than happy to have her back, even though my boss wasn't too happy about having a 'part time' worker...but her 20 hours per week, were better than some who worked their full 38 hours...so more than happy to help her out, as the bit of money she got paid for nappies and childcare.
Also had a woman who wanted 2 months away, to make sure her daughter was going to classes at school (she was playing truant)....and again, the boss in my area wasn't happy, but she was a good worker...explained to her that she could use all her holidays and sick days up...and the rest she would have to take as leave-without-pay, but I would hold her position for her when she came back...and she was over the moon with that.
Like I said in my other post...good managers are more than happy to keep their good workers, and the only people 'nervous' about the new IR laws are the ones who bludge/steal/troublemake.
And only bad managers/companies will be sacking people left, right and centre....and who would want to work for them anyways?
Its just a scare campaign by unions, and I still haven't heard Beazley come out and say he will get rid of them either if he got into power.....ah, the poor Labour voters, what will they do? :hihi

tigersnake,
No need to PM you the company, as you could be using it every day for all I know...and I'm happy for you to help keep paying my perks, cars, phones, laptops, free fuel, etc! :hihi
Keep up the good work! :clap
;D

 

[Rosy]

....Not bad for...what was it...a "useless hack", eh?!?!  ;D

....I'm happy for you to help keep paying my perks, cars, phones, laptops, free fuel, etc!  :hihi
Keep up the good work!   :clap
;D

Does your arrogance know no bounds Liverpool?  You're blowing your trumpet loudly but it's way out of tune.

I'm a manager in a global company.

....This 'scare' campaign about the new legislations are rubbish!


These new laws won't be an issue to the good workers out there.....it will only be an issue to the ones that have been riding on the backs of the good workers, and getting away with it.
Their time is up!  8)

Being a large company, I haven't sat down and really read whether these 'workchoices' are available to us, as a company,  and to what extent.
But if they are, not only can I then get rid of certain individuals, but the other workers who are excellent at what they do, will be more than happy with the new laws also.

How can you more or less say people's fears are baseless and at the same time admit your'e not overly familiar with the new laws anyway. :

You seem to be the only one here who doesn't realise you've been checkmated ! Game, set. match.  Holding the ball!  Gone!

Don't pour Pepsi down our backs and tell us it's raining. :blah

 

[Liverpool]

....Not bad for...what was it...a "useless hack", eh?!?!  ;D

....I'm happy for you to help keep paying my perks, cars, phones, laptops, free fuel, etc!  :hihi
Keep up the good work!   :clap
;D

Does your arrogance know no bounds Liverpool?  You're blowing your trumpet loudly but it's way out of tune.

I'm a manager in a global company.

....This 'scare' campaign about the new legislations are rubbish!


These new laws won't be an issue to the good workers out there.....it will only be an issue to the ones that have been riding on the backs of the good workers, and getting away with it.
Their time is up!  8)

Being a large company, I haven't sat down and really read whether these 'workchoices' are available to us, as a company,  and to what extent.
But if they are, not only can I then get rid of certain individuals, but the other workers who are excellent at what they do, will be more than happy with the new laws also.

How can you more or less say people's fears are baseless and at the same time admit your'e not overly familiar with the new laws anyway. :

You seem to be the only one here who doesn't realise you've been checkmated ! Game, set. match.  Holding the ball!  Gone!

Don't pour Pepsi down our backs and tell us it's raining. :blah

Rosy,
Its not arrogance...its called being sarcastic.
if someone like 'tigersnake' wants to join in and be a bit of a smart-arse, then he'll cop a bit back.
Secondly, yes I did say that:
" haven't sat down and really read whether these 'workchoices' are available to us"
I'll be definitely reading them thoroughly when the time comes to use such measures....but like I said....there is no big rush for me, or the company I work for.
Managers from our company are going to the seminars they are holding Australia-wide to learn more about them, but its not something that we have to know 100% about the first day they are available.
I suggest some of the doomsdayers on here come along....they might learn something too! :hihi
Don't see how I've been checkmated yet....

 

[Rosy]

Don't see how I've been checkmated yet....

That's what I find so amusing. :rofl

 

[Liverpool]

Don't see how I've been checkmated yet....

That's what I find so amusing.   :rofl

Good for you! ;D

 

[eight ace]

My reading of your post was fine. It was clear from your post you know very little about the changes. Also most people had a legal right to make an unfair dismissal claim under the old regime - it's the way the legislation was structured. By referring to "getting a claim through", you implied you were referring to successful claims.

Your claim that only bad managers would be informed of these changes is frankly ludicrous. These are massive changes to the system - as I told you the changes to the dismissal regime are a relatively small part. No-one knows everything about these changes yet, but if you have not informed yourself as to the nature of these changes, and you hold the position you claim, you are not doing your job. And it was clear from your post that if you have informed yourself at all, it was not to a great degree.

The reason why I suggested that your previous approach to managing terminations was worrisome is because you clearly believed that a one-size-fits-all approach would get you through. Essentially, the legal requirement is for a fair procedure to be in place. What constitutes a fair procedure will vary from case to case. The procedure you outlined is a relatively thorough one, although an important aspect of the counselling process is that you make it abundantly clear to the person concerned where their problems lie, what they have to do to fix them and how long they have to do it. That is a fundamental element to establishing a fair process. If you do not do that, you will not have established a fair process.

I offer no comment on your success or otherwise in the matter. Self-serving internet claims don't hold a hell of a lot of weight. My response to you was driven primarily by your claim that the public response to the changes was "rubbish" when it was clear you know little about them. It was both arrogant and ignorant. From my experience, arrogance and ignorance in the same package makes a bad manager. Your response to Rosy above continues to suggest a fundamental lack of understanding as to what the changes are about. You said you will consider the changes when it comes time to use them. That displays a staggering lack of foresight and capacity. The changes impact on your business right now. You may be a low-level manager and not see yourself as required to think strategically. But if you want to get on at all, you should change your approach.

 

[Rosy]

Delusions of adequacy

Its not arrogance...its called being sarcastic.

I don't really think opening the post telling us you are the manager of a global company is sarcasm and, even though you may not have intended it that way, I took it as some kind of inference your position gave you some special understanding of the new laws, which reading on a bit, clearly isn't the case.

 

[Liverpool]

eight ace,
I'll take your misunderstanding on board regarding the "they had a chance at putting an unfair-dismissal claim through" comment.
I did mean, just getting a claim to court...and did not imply "successful claims" against us.
To some people, the IR laws may be 'massive changes', but each company, each manager, has the choice whether to use 'workchoices' or not, so whether they are massive will come down to each company and how the managers use this new power.
Its not something that, say myself, I have to know right now.....that doesn't mean I'm a 'bad manager' or not doing my job.
Far from it.
My job isn't about finding the best ways to get rid of people....I have my own means, methods, and ways of treating workers and people in general, and as far as I'm concerned, my people will be treated the same as before the 'Workchoices' came into effect.
Just because I may have the power to sack people cause they look at me wrong....(or support Collingwood!  :hihi)...doesn't mean I have to use that power, and my people know that they'll continue to get a fair go, and chances to prove themselves.
Thats not showing lack of foresight or capacity...but showing respect to my people, and hence I receive respect back.
In due time, and our company has us booked-in for seminars to know about the new laws, I'll know more about the new laws also....and it might be good to know for future situations, but I stand by my comments that managers out there who have been reading like crazy about the new laws, and have already sacked workers due to the new laws so soon after their introduction, are the bad managers out there.....showing no respect or people-management skills, as well as showing no foresight into the damage and bad publicity their company has received in the media due to these hasty actions.
P.S: "But if you want to get on at all, you should change your approach"
Sorry mate....I've got this far with my current approach (be natural, be yourself), and so far so good!  

 

[Curtiger]

Don't see how I've been checkmated yet....

That's what I find so amusing. :rofl

Not me. I thought it was all over, all over again and it *smile* me when he gets the last word, 'cos he thinks that means he wins it. The enjoyment of seeing 8 ace humiliating him is wearing off.

Its not arrogance...its called being sarcastic.

I don't really think opening the post telling us you are the manager of a global company is sarcasm and, even though you may not have intended it that way, I took it as some kind of inference your position gave you some special understanding of the new laws, which reading on a bit, clearly isn't the case.

I interpreted most of it as arrogance, too, Rosy. I do think it's fair that we make that assumption, though; seeing his previous posts indicate a severe lack of rhetorical skill and a perception of elitism.

and hence I receive respect back.

...poor guy.

 

[Liverpool]

Curtis,
Haven't you got school tomorrow...or do I have to give you your 1st verbal warning! :rofl

 

[an_oxford_man]

Please stop arguing, Liverpool. You are embarrasing yourself.

 

[RemoteTiger]

Liverpool,

The scare tactics by the unions as you call it has IMO some vision! Why?

The new IR laws are as everybody stated very complex and hence will be difficult to police - and whilst this is not a bad situation whilst the economy is bubbling along like it is at the moment - lets wait and see how "fair" and "good" the multinatonal and SME companies are when there is a downturn in the economy.

History shows that the workers are sacked in an effort to maintain profits - cutting of costs is usually the cry - if we don't do this then the whole company may fold. Interestingly since the unfair dismissal laws have been in place it has been a sharing of the load by both the company profits and the workers wages that has kept the compnaies in business - IMO under the new laws there will be no equity for the worker when the economy turns bad and ruthless companies will purge themselves of wages costs - which in turn will push up the unemployed whom we all have to pay for.

Will the economy turn sour? All it takes is one of any number of events to happen and the answer is yes - eg.

Oil prices double due to Middle East War
Bird flu epidemic to wipe out millions - particularly in Asia Middle East and Europe
Wall street coughs and we get pneumonia

These new IR Laws are aimed at allowing the market to dictate the future. Companies NOT workers are the only manipulators of so called free markets. The worker has to lose - mark these words.

Is it wrong to spread the wealth of this great nation - or should we have it in the hands of a few? Before you answer that - remember a strong middle-class means that there is a strong democracy. (Footnote - the Super power of America is based on its strong middle class - under George W Bush that middle class is being more and more eroded through the free market concepts that abuse workers - who happen to make up the middle class - this could leave a world vacuum for another super power to rise - China maybe? - and we all know the excellent working conditions over there!)