On 24th April 2007 - the then leader Kevin Rudd TALKED about his 10 point productivity plan launched as New Directions for Innovation, Competitiveness and Productivity

20th April 2008 at the 20/20 TALK Summit the then Industrial Relation Minister (one J Gillard)  Chaired which Working Group?

You guessed it - the Productivity Working Group

14th June 2012 - the now Prime Minister (J Gillard) TALKED behind closed doors with businesses about? You guessed it - productivity.

what exactly is your point? Productivity has been on the decline since Howards early years ... declining rapidly after workchoices ... the alp has at least managed to slow that rate of decline to levels that the libs could never reach .... they will keep working on productivity for the next 20 yrs ... you have a problem with this why exactly?

Don't you realise that when you attack labor you are essentially attacking the libs as well??

John Smith wrote on Jun 15^th, 2012 at 9:55am:

what exactly is your point? Productivity has been on the decline since Howards early years ... declining rapidly after workchoices ... the alp has at least managed to slow that rate of decline to levels that the libs could never reach .... they will keep working on productivity for the next 20 yrs ... you have a problem with this why exactly?

you've got some stats for this

The word productivity should be taken out of the vernacular, it is only ever about making workers work harder, work longer, work for less money, work for less entitlements, work for less legal protections and work for less security so the wealth can be taken and redistributed to corporate welfare and the Mafia.

Maqqa wrote on Jun 15^th, 2012 at 9:58am:

John Smith wrote on Jun 15th, 2012 at 9:55am: what exactly is your point? Productivity has been on the decline since Howards early years ... declining rapidly after workchoices ... the alp has at least managed to slow that rate of decline to levels that the libs could never reach .... they will keep working on productivity for the next 20 yrs ... you have a problem with this why exactly? you've got some stats for this

read it and weap
http://www.rba.gov.au/publications/confs/2011/eslake.pdf

There should be legislation to prevent boosting productivity through claw-back from workers, that is outright theft.

corporate_whitey wrote on Jun 15^th, 2012 at 10:07am:

There should be legislation to prevent boosting productivity through claw-back from workers, that is outright theft.

The funny thing is that workchoices, Howards big boost to the employers, actually saw the rate of decline in productivity jump ..... bosses were screwing workers so the workers screwed them back ....

corporate_whitey wrote on Jun 15^th, 2012 at 9:58am:

The word productivity should be taken out of the vernacular, it is only ever about making workers work harder, work longer, work for less money, work for less entitlements, work for less legal protections and work for less security so the wealth can be taken and redistributed to corporate welfare and the Mafia.

The whole idea with productivity is to:

(1) Reduce unemployment - which the LIBs did during the Howard years and the ALP inherited in 2007

(2) Increase the output of the current workforce.

It is the second point that I want start the discussion

Increasing output essentially means to increase the GDP - which the LIBs double during the Howard years

The workforce is where Labor loves to launch it's attack and use the old "Workchoices" war cry.

The scenario that CW has outlined would happen if unemployment was high. But unemployment is low and we have a mining sector that cries out for more labour supplies.

The miners are paying workers an obscene amount of money work. Train drivers are earning double in WA than they would in any other states. They can do this because each unit of production has a high productivity worth

So how do we equalise this?

Do we equalise this by paying everyone else who's not in the mining industry higher wages? Does that mean we will increase productivity? What will that do to costs and inflation?

Do we add another layer of costs to the miners and large companies (carbon tax and the Minerals resources tax) so they have less money to pay their workers? If they can't attract the workers then their productivity goes down. So how does that help the economy?

Maqqa wrote on Jun 15^th, 2012 at 10:17am:

corporate_whitey wrote on Jun 15th, 2012 at 9:58am: The word productivity should be taken out of the vernacular, it is only ever about making workers work harder, work longer, work for less money, work for less entitlements, work for less legal protections and work for less security so the wealth can be taken and redistributed to corporate welfare and the Mafia. The whole idea with productivity is to: (1) Reduce unemployment - which the LIBs did during the Howard years and the ALP inherited in 2007 (2) Increase the output of the current workforce. It is the second point that I want start the discussion Increasing output essentially means to increase the GDP - which the LIBs double during the Howard years The workforce is where Labor loves to launch it's attack and use the old "Workchoices" war cry. The scenario that CW has outlined would happen if unemployment was high. But unemployment is low and we have a mining sector that cries out for more labour supplies. The miners are paying workers an obscene amount of money work. Train drivers are earning double in WA than they would in any other states. They can do this because each unit of production has a high productivity worth So how do we equalise this? Do we equalise this by paying everyone else who's not in the mining industry higher wages? Does that mean we will increase productivity? What will that do to costs and inflation? Do we add another layer of costs to the miners and large companies (carbon tax and the Minerals resources tax) so they have less money to pay their workers? If they can't attract the workers then their productivity goes down. So how does that help the economy?

then you should have started there ... scrambling a little now aren't you forrest?

John Smith wrote on Jun 15^th, 2012 at 10:19am:

Maqqa wrote on Jun 15th, 2012 at 10:17am: corporate_whitey wrote on Jun 15th, 2012 at 9:58am: The word productivity should be taken out of the vernacular, it is only ever about making workers work harder, work longer, work for less money, work for less entitlements, work for less legal protections and work for less security so the wealth can be taken and redistributed to corporate welfare and the Mafia. The whole idea with productivity is to: (1) Reduce unemployment - which the LIBs did during the Howard years and the ALP inherited in 2007 (2) Increase the output of the current workforce. It is the second point that I want start the discussion Increasing output essentially means to increase the GDP - which the LIBs double during the Howard years The workforce is where Labor loves to launch it's attack and use the old "Workchoices" war cry. The scenario that CW has outlined would happen if unemployment was high. But unemployment is low and we have a mining sector that cries out for more labour supplies. The miners are paying workers an obscene amount of money work. Train drivers are earning double in WA than they would in any other states. They can do this because each unit of production has a high productivity worth So how do we equalise this? Do we equalise this by paying everyone else who's not in the mining industry higher wages? Does that mean we will increase productivity? What will that do to costs and inflation? Do we add another layer of costs to the miners and large companies (carbon tax and the Minerals resources tax) so they have less money to pay their workers? If they can't attract the workers then their productivity goes down. So how does that help the economy? then you should have started there ... scrambling a little now aren't you forrest?

It's just another dig at this incompetent Labor government. And you still don't have anything to offer JS

Maqqa wrote on Jun 15^th, 2012 at 10:21am:

John Smith wrote on Jun 15th, 2012 at 10:19am: Maqqa wrote on Jun 15th, 2012 at 10:17am: corporate_whitey wrote on Jun 15th, 2012 at 9:58am: The word productivity should be taken out of the vernacular, it is only ever about making workers work harder, work longer, work for less money, work for less entitlements, work for less legal protections and work for less security so the wealth can be taken and redistributed to corporate welfare and the Mafia. The whole idea with productivity is to: (1) Reduce unemployment - which the LIBs did during the Howard years and the ALP inherited in 2007 (2) Increase the output of the current workforce. It is the second point that I want start the discussion Increasing output essentially means to increase the GDP - which the LIBs double during the Howard years The workforce is where Labor loves to launch it's attack and use the old "Workchoices" war cry. The scenario that CW has outlined would happen if unemployment was high. But unemployment is low and we have a mining sector that cries out for more labour supplies. The miners are paying workers an obscene amount of money work. Train drivers are earning double in WA than they would in any other states. They can do this because each unit of production has a high productivity worth So how do we equalise this? Do we equalise this by paying everyone else who's not in the mining industry higher wages? Does that mean we will increase productivity? What will that do to costs and inflation? Do we add another layer of costs to the miners and large companies (carbon tax and the Minerals resources tax) so they have less money to pay their workers? If they can't attract the workers then their productivity goes down. So how does that help the economy? then you should have started there ... scrambling a little now aren't you forrest? It's just another dig at this incompetent Labor government. And you still don't have anything to offer JS

I gave you a link that shows the stats , you've ignored it because it shows that you were wrong ... I've still no idea what your aticle that you copy pasted was trying to prove ? other than to relieve your bordom ... and now your trying to twist it into something it isn't .. if you wanted to talk about equalising productivity acvross the economy, why didn't you start the thread on that instead of the crap you put up ...

run forrest run ....

yes because productivity is a sole function of John Howard and govt. ever think about unions? about state govts or other factors?

simplistic git.