Coalition IR policy hits Green wall


Coalition leader Tony Abbott's pledge to take an aggressive stance on workplace reforms if he wins September's federal election could be stymied until at least the middle of 2014 after the Greens announced they would use their balance of power in the Senate to block the Coalition's industrial relations reforms, according to The Australian.

Greens' deputy leader Adam Bandt said his party would not support four key elements of the Coalition's workplace policy, including reforms that would allow workers to more easily trade off conditions, such as penalty rates, and the Coalition's pledge to create a registered organisations commission.

In addition, the Greens have said they would support the new Road Safety Remuneration Tribunal, which the Coalition has mulled scrapping.

The Greens, with Labor support, would have the ability to block the Coalition's IR reforms until at least July 1, 2014, when senators elected at this year's election will take their seats.

“We've got very clear policies,” Mr Bandt said, according to The Australian.

“Having more Greens in parliament is the best protection against an Abbott-led assault on rights at work.”

Polls have suggested the Coalition may struggle to win sufficient votes to get control of the Senate beyond July 2014, raising the prospect that the opposition may struggle to pass their IR reforms, and any other policies blocked by the Greens even if they win September's federal election.

http://www.businessspectator.com.au/news/2013/6/8/politics/coalition-ir-policy-hits-green-wall

If he tries to reintroduce Work Choices or anything resembling it, the entire country should
go out on strike for as long as it takes to crush it.

Under NO circumstances should a return to Work Choices be tolerated.

Well said Kat, yes we know the coalition can't be trusted on industrial relations.      :(

Given that Australia will be sinking into a long and deep recession in the weeks following Abbotts election and the introduction of his crash and burn policies its doubtful that a DD will do anything but leave the Coalition devastated and thrown straight back into opposition.

adelcrow wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 7:53am:

Given that Australia will be sinking into a long and deep recession in the weeks following Abbotts election and the introduction of his crash and burn policies its doubtful that a DD will do anything but leave the Coalition devastated and thrown straight back into opposition.

Which is precisely where they deserve to be.

I can't believe the country is stupid enough to do what its contemplating re Abbott.

We've done this before with Fraser/Howard, and it was an unmitigated disaster.

IMO, Abbott and his incompetent, ex-Howardian 'ministers' will be even worse.

And all the parrots on here can come up with is 'if you're against US, then you MUST be a Labor 'leftard'. WRONG! Even if
I WAS a Coalition supporter, Id' STILL oppose these incompetent Howardian left-overs and their arrogant megalomaniac
leader.

The only 'tards' in  our political system are the Howardian conservatives, and they should be precluded from voting at all.

Their comments on here prove that they're not intelligent enough to vote based on facts, they vote solely on political bias. Indeed
they have great difficulty even recognising facts, but are very good at abusing those who produce said facts.

And remember, while being very poor losers, these ba$tards are EXTREMELY VINDICTIVE winners.

Any person or group who opposes them WILL pay once they get in.

GOD HELP AUSTRALIA, because it's electorate certainly isn't interested in doing so.

Kat wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 8:04am:

adelcrow wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 7:53am: Given that Australia will be sinking into a long and deep recession in the weeks following Abbotts election and the introduction of his crash and burn policies its doubtful that a DD will do anything but leave the Coalition devastated and thrown straight back into opposition. Which is precisely where they deserve to be. I can't believe the country is stupid enough to do what its contemplating re Abbott. We've done this before with Fraser/Howard, and it was an unmitigated disaster. IMO, Abbott and his incompetent, ex-Howardian 'ministers' will be even worse. And all the parrots on here can come up with is 'if you're against US, then you MUST be a Labor 'leftard'. WRONG! Even if I WAS a Coalition supporter, Id' STILL oppose these incompetent Howardian left-overs and their arrogant megalomaniac leader. The only 'tards' in  our political system are the Howardian conservatives, and they should be precluded from voting at all. Their comments on here prove that they're not intelligent enough to vote based on facts, they vote solely on political bias. Indeed they have great difficulty even recognising facts, but are very good at abusing those who produce said facts. And remember, while being very poor losers, these ba$tards are EXTREMELY VINDICTIVE winners. Any person or group who opposes them WILL pay once they get in. GOD HELP AUSTRALIA, because it's electorate certainly isn't interested in doing so.

Until Chinas boom Howard did sweet bugga all so with that boom fast disappearing Abbott will be more like Fraser than Howard...
Massive unemployment, record inflation, sky rocketing fuel prices, plummeting house prices and a constant war with workers who will be driven closer to the poverty line.
Good luck Australia   ;D

wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 7:47am:

Well said Kat, yes we know the coalition can't be trusted on industrial relations.      :(

Neither can the Greens or Labor be trusted to help business.

The Fair Work Australia Act is a joke.
In our entity in Australia we were told we have to hand out a sheet listing all their rights to new employees and we would be fined A$30,000 per breach per employee if we failed to do so.

In our corp office this country is looked on at times as a bunch of socialists.

Yes I know, its terrible low income workers can join unions, and get a fair go.     :)       

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 8:30am:

wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 7:47am: Well said Kat, yes we know the coalition can't be trusted on industrial relations.      :( Neither can the Greens or Labor be trusted to help business. The Fair Work Australia Act is a joke. In our entity in Australia we were told we have to hand out a sheet listing all their rights to new employees and we would be fined A$30,000 per breach per employee if we failed to do so. In our corp office this country is looked on at times as a bunch of socialists.

Andrei.Hicks

The reality is that work place reforms are required unless you really don't want a manufacturing industry which the greens oppose anyway so who gives a toss what the grrens think on this subject, they have already played there card and might be punished at the polls for it.

Just a few mths into Abbotts rule and people will realise just how good they have had it for the last 6 yrs.
While all around us countries have been stuck in recession with the accompanying civil unrest we have prospered in comparison but Abbott is determined to drag us into that recession so be prepared for the consequences.
Businesses want a collapsed economy, double digit unemployment and rising inflation?..well they're gonna get it thanks to Abbott  ;D

wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 8:42am:

Yes I know, its terrible low income workers can join unions, and get a fair go.     :)

And demand salaries far in excess of other countries and watch the work go overseas like Ford?

I am all for helping workers, I am one myself.

adelcrow wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 8:56am:

Just a few mths into Abbotts rule and people will realise just how good they have had it for the last 6 yrs. While all around us countries have been stuck in recession with the accompanying civil unrest we have prospered in comparison but Abbott is determined to drag us into that recession so be prepared for the consequences. Businesses want a collapsed economy, double digit unemployment and rising inflation?..well they're gonna get it thanks to Abbott  ;D

You do understand Australia avoided recession purely because of Chinese growth don't you?

I know you're smart enough to not think it was domestic policies but external forces which kept Australia in positive growth.

I think maybe you mean, you are all for helping high income workers.   ;D

Nope I am for helping all workers.

I have young girls in my team just starting out. They aren't high income earners.

My advice to them, would be to go join the union.     :)    

wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 9:23am:

My advice to them, would be to go join the union.     :)

They are accountants. They are paid market rate and they are solid professionals.
There is no need for a union.

They do alright. 65k base, 10% bonus. They are only 25 years old. They do fine without a union.

What.  You mean that they are at that age, where they could go off on maternity leave?.  Goodness me Andrei, we can have that, can we?.  That would really upset your company's apple cart, wouldn't it?.     :-?   

It's unlikely. Neither of the two I am thinking of have boyfriends...

But anyway, I am fine for maternity leave. We have a corp policy where we'll pay 12 weeks of that salary.

Like I said I am all for good workers being rewarded.

Very please to hear that Andrei.     :)                  

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 8:30am:

In our entity in Australia we were told we have to hand out a sheet listing all their rights to new employees and we would be fined A$30,000 per breach per employee if we failed to do so.

And?

As an employer you're required to inform your employees of their legal rights.

I'm sorry, what's the problem?   :-/

http://www.fairwork.gov.au/employment/fair-work-information-statement/pages/default.aspx

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 9:41am:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 8:30am: In our entity in Australia we were told we have to hand out a sheet listing all their rights to new employees and we would be fined A$30,000 per breach per employee if we failed to do so. And? As an employer you're required to inform your employees of their legal rights. I'm sorry, what's the problem?   :-/ http://www.fairwork.gov.au/employment/fair-work-information-statement/pages/default.aspx

Because its fricken big Government bullying of business.

One of them says they have maximum work hours and they can demand reasonable work hours on returning to work from maternity.
How does that look to a new young employee??

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 9:45am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 9:41am: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 8:30am: In our entity in Australia we were told we have to hand out a sheet listing all their rights to new employees and we would be fined A$30,000 per breach per employee if we failed to do so. And? As an employer you're required to inform your employees of their legal rights. I'm sorry, what's the problem?   :-/ http://www.fairwork.gov.au/employment/fair-work-information-statement/pages/default.aspx Because its fricken big Government bullying of business. One of them says they have maximum work hours and they can demand reasonable work hours on returning to work from maternity. How does that look to a new young employee??

It's not bullying in any shape or form.

I know exactly what the FW Information Sheet contains: it's an excellent document.

Your opposition to its contents makes me think you might not exactly be an ideal employer.

http://www.fairwork.gov.au/FWISdocs/Fair-Work-Information-Statement.pdf

It created a bit of a storm with us when the local MD brought it to our attention.

We already are suspicious of Australia with its superannuation, long annual leave, long service leave, payroll tax etc.

This created more suspicion on the Government not being pro business.

It's a terrible document.

Poor employer????

We are one of the 10 biggest companies in the world!!!

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 9:55am:

We already are suspicious of Australia with its superannuation, long annual leave, long service leave, payroll tax etc.

Seems my assessment of your company as a less than ideal employer was correct.

::)

Well said greggery.  Yes it sure looks like we need trade unions.     ;)

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 10:01am:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 9:55am: We already are suspicious of Australia with its superannuation, long annual leave, long service leave, payroll tax etc. Seems my assessment of your company as a less than ideal employer was correct. ::)

It's not actually correct at all.
But we have a headcount cost in excess of what Australian companies have as a revenue figure and as a US listed entity we need to be mindful that we are responsibly apportioning our resources where it makes most sense.

The fact we pay Australian workers 25% more than we do our North American workers hasn't escaped people's notice.

Had it not been for the natural gas deposits, I would suggest we'd have followed Ford out the door.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 9:55am:

It created a bit of a storm with us when the local MD brought it to our attention. We already are suspicious of Australia with its superannuation, long annual leave, long service leave, payroll tax etc. This created more suspicion on the Government not being pro business. It's a terrible document. Poor employer???? We are one of the 10 biggest companies in the world!!!

yes but how many of your workers in underdeveloped countries get any benefits? You only pay what you have to.

Most of my area covers developed countries, but my understanding is that our workers in India are paid 8 times their cost of living.....

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 9:51am:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 9:45am: greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 9:41am: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 8:30am: In our entity in Australia we were told we have to hand out a sheet listing all their rights to new employees and we would be fined A$30,000 per breach per employee if we failed to do so. And? As an employer you're required to inform your employees of their legal rights. I'm sorry, what's the problem?   :-/ http://www.fairwork.gov.au/employment/fair-work-information-statement/pages/default.aspx Because its fricken big Government bullying of business. One of them says they have maximum work hours and they can demand reasonable work hours on returning to work from maternity. How does that look to a new young employee?? It's not bullying in any shape or form. I know exactly what the FW Information Sheet contains: it's an excellent document. Your opposition to its contents makes me think you might not exactly be an ideal employer. http://www.fairwork.gov.au/FWISdocs/Fair-Work-Information-Statement.pdf

Hadn't read it, but just did.

You are correct, Greg. Nothing there resembling bullying. And nothing that any
reasonable employer could legitimately regard as onerous or 'bullying'.

Andrei and his attitudes are one reason I support more stringent regulation of business.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 10:11am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 10:01am: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 9:55am: We already are suspicious of Australia with its superannuation, long annual leave, long service leave, payroll tax etc. Seems my assessment of your company as a less than ideal employer was correct. ::) It's not actually correct at all. But we have a headcount cost in excess of what Australian companies have as a revenue figure and as a US listed entity we need to be mindful that we are responsibly apportioning our resources where it makes most sense. The fact we pay Australian workers 25% more than we do our North American workers hasn't escaped people's notice. Had it not been for the natural gas deposits, I would suggest we'd have followed Ford out the door.

It's ALL about the effing money with you, isn't it?

And always is.

No-one and no-thing else matters.

Not sure if you quite understand Kat but as the finance lead of a region of a listed entity, my role is to be across our forecasting and profitability of the area.

I provide support for Operatioms heads to make decisions.

If we aren't across the cost, then we go under....

This is why we need to be in unions.  Thanks Andrei, for showing us how important it is.     :)

Tell me then imcrook how come I have never needed a union as a worker?

Well there are plenty of people that do.     :)

Didn't answer.

If I didn't need one and I work for such a horrendous employer according to Greg, then how come you think others do?

Have you forgotten work choices ( no choices ) so soon?.     :-?   

I was employed during work choices.
Made no difference to me whatsoever.

So how come grown men cant do the same?

Need someone else to hide behind?  ;D

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 10:30am:

Didn't answer. If I didn't need one and I work for such a horrendous employer according to Greg, then how come you think others do?

Astounding ignorance.   ::)

http://www.australianunions.org.au/achievements

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 10:23am:

Not sure if you quite understand Kat but as the finance lead of a region of a listed entity, my role is to be across our forecasting and profitability of the area. I provide support for Operatioms heads to make decisions. If we aren't across the cost, then we go under....

Oh, of that you can be 100% certain.

But understanding something, and agreeing with it, are not the same thing.

No, with you, it is always about money, not just in a business sense.

The squeals when you didn't get the baby bonus or your Medicare levy got means-tested, for example.

And there's your attitude to the unemployed and the lowest-paid, the way you measure a man's success
and 'worth' by his 'productivity' or the size of his bank-account, not by what he does or what he is.

I was raised never to judge anyone by their monetary worth or in terms of 'what can they do for me'. I
thought it was right then, and I still do.

Unions are old news Greg.

They aren't needed.

Statutory law backed contracts between employer and employee.

Why do you think Ford left?

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 10:34am:

I was employed during work choices. Made no difference to me whatsoever. So how come grown men cant do the same? Need someone else to hide behind?  ;D

I think you'll find that as a well paid experienced Accountant that you have greater leverage as an individual than unskilled and semi skilled  factory fodder

Kat wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 10:36am:

And there's your attitude to the unemployed and the lowest-paid, the way you measure a man's success and 'worth' by his 'productivity' or the size of his bank-account, not by what he does or what he is. I was raised never to judge anyone by their monetary worth or in terms of 'what can they do for me'. I thought it was right then, and I still do.

Well said.

Well it made a lot of difference to a lot of workers.  Many of them were shafted.     :(               

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 10:36am:

Unions are old news Greg. They aren't needed. Statutory law backed contracts between employer and employee. Why do you think Ford left?

You're 100% wrong.

They're needed more than ever.

Your failure to understand this fact is really quite alarming.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 10:36am:

Unions are old news Greg. They aren't needed. Statutory law backed contracts between employer and employee. Why do you think Ford left?

Get rid of unions and see how fast the conditions and pay levels they fought for also go with them.

Nothing we get in the workplace is out of the goodness of the employers heart.

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 10:39am:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 10:36am: Unions are old news Greg. They aren't needed. Statutory law backed contracts between employer and employee. Why do you think Ford left? You're 100% wrong. They're needed more than ever. Your failure to understand this fact is really quite alarming.

Even professionals and businesses have associations to represent them so what is wrong with the working hoards have  representation through unions?

adelcrow wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 10:37am:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 10:34am: I was employed during work choices. Made no difference to me whatsoever. So how come grown men cant do the same? Need someone else to hide behind?  ;D I think you'll find that as a well paid experienced Accountant that you have greater leverage as an individual than unskilled and semi skilled  factory fodder

And whose fault is that?

adelcrow wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 10:51am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 10:39am: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 10:36am: Unions are old news Greg. They aren't needed. Statutory law backed contracts between employer and employee. Why do you think Ford left? You're 100% wrong. They're needed more than ever. Your failure to understand this fact is really quite alarming. Even professionals and businesses have associations to represent them so what is wrong with the working hoards have  representation through unions?

I'm yet to go into any meeting where my ICAEW membership is necessary.

wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 8:42am:

Yes I know, its terrible low income workers can join unions, and get a fair go.     :)

u mean so that low-income workers can pay dues to the union so that the leaders can spend it on whores and holidays?

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 9:55am:

It created a bit of a storm with us when the local MD brought it to our attention. We already are suspicious of Australia with its superannuation, long annual leave, long service leave, payroll tax etc. This created more suspicion on the Government not being pro business. It's a terrible document. Poor employer???? We are one of the 10 biggest companies in the world!!!

while we have the best economy in the world and the USA doesn't even rate in the top 10.

just perhaps there is something right in what we are doing.

wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 10:27am:

Well there are plenty of people that do.     :)

14% are members of unions and half of them do so under compulsion.

Dnarever wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 10:50am:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 10:36am: Unions are old news Greg. They aren't needed. Statutory law backed contracts between employer and employee. Why do you think Ford left? Get rid of unions and see how fast the conditions and pay levels they fought for also go with them. Nothing we get in the workplace is out of the goodness of the employers heart.

as a business owner and employer myself I get a bit annoyed at listening to this endless stereotyping of employers as all bad or rip-off merchants. Quite simeply, that isn't true and most people want to do what is right and fair. The fact that unions are down to 14% membership speaks volumes of how much they are wanted and needed. they form a place in industrial relations but they regularly overstep the mark and is part of the reason they are so marginalised in membership.

When Labor and Greens have nothing else to say

WORKCHOICES is the fallback position despite Workchoices have been dead since 2008

Maqqa wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 1:27pm:

When Labor and Greens have nothing else to say WORKCHOICES is the fallback position despite Workchoices have been dead since 2008

or the GST if you are DNA

Dnarever wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 10:50am:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 10:36am: Unions are old news Greg. They aren't needed. Statutory law backed contracts between employer and employee. Why do you think Ford left? Get rid of unions and see how fast the conditions and pay levels they fought for also go with them. Nothing we get in the workplace is out of the goodness of the employers heart.

Dnarever

They are dying a death of irrelevance and corruption, other than sponsoring the ALP what do they do for workers ?

Maqqa wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 1:27pm:

When Labor and Greens have nothing else to say WORKCHOICES is the fallback position despite Workchoices have been dead since 2008

Maqqa

They don't even have that, FWA/FWC has proven to be an abstract failure politically, its reputation was clearly destroyed over the HSU fiasco.

longweekend58

I find it very undemocratic that we have the most regulated expensive labour market yet unionism is down to 14% its time that we see market deregulation and more democracy overall.

Obviously much of this democratic mismatch will be rectified at the upcoming election.

RightSadFred wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 1:36pm:

longweekend58 I find it very undemocratic that we have the most regulated expensive labour market yet unionism is down to 14% its time that we see market deregulation and more democracy overall. Obviously much of this democratic mismatch will be rectified at the upcoming election.

When you have 80% of Labor's front bench who are former union heavy weights - then they will always scream Workchoices

RightSadFred wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 1:36pm:

longweekend58 I find it very undemocratic that we have the most regulated expensive labour market yet unionism is down to 14% its time that we see market deregulation and more democracy overall. Obviously much of this democratic mismatch will be rectified at the upcoming election.

As long as those calling for Australian wages to be cut  are prepared to take on Third world wages first as an example to the rest of us I have no problem with this.prblem is every time I bring up the subject the buggers run away and hide under their rocks. If you're already retired that's OK too, well pay you in bags of rice.

skippy. wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 2:01pm:

RightSadFred wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 1:36pm: longweekend58 I find it very undemocratic that we have the most regulated expensive labour market yet unionism is down to 14% its time that we see market deregulation and more democracy overall. Obviously much of this democratic mismatch will be rectified at the upcoming election. As long as those calling for Australian wages to be cut  are prepared to take on Third world wages first as an example to the rest of us I have no problem with this.prblem is every time I bring up the subject the buggers run away and hide under their rocks. If you're already retired that's OK too, well pay you in bags of rice.

Have the courage to give specific examples of this "third world" wages that is happening in Australia

All you've got is rhetoric designed to dupe moron - and you've been duped

Maqqa wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 2:09pm:

skippy. wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 2:01pm: RightSadFred wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 1:36pm: longweekend58 I find it very undemocratic that we have the most regulated expensive labour market yet unionism is down to 14% its time that we see market deregulation and more democracy overall. Obviously much of this democratic mismatch will be rectified at the upcoming election. As long as those calling for Australian wages to be cut  are prepared to take on Third world wages first as an example to the rest of us I have no problem with this.prblem is every time I bring up the subject the buggers run away and hide under their rocks. If you're already retired that's OK too, well pay you in bags of rice. Have the courage to give specific examples of this "third world" wages that is happening in Australia All you've got is rhetoric designed to dupe moron - and you've been duped

Comprehension not your strong point is it?  :D

Maqqa wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 2:09pm:

skippy. wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 2:01pm: RightSadFred wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 1:36pm: longweekend58 I find it very undemocratic that we have the most regulated expensive labour market yet unionism is down to 14% its time that we see market deregulation and more democracy overall. Obviously much of this democratic mismatch will be rectified at the upcoming election. As long as those calling for Australian wages to be cut  are prepared to take on Third world wages first as an example to the rest of us I have no problem with this.prblem is every time I bring up the subject the buggers run away and hide under their rocks. If you're already retired that's OK too, well pay you in bags of rice. Have the courage to give specific examples of this "third world" wages that is happening in Australia All you've got is rhetoric designed to dupe moron - and you've been duped

Wow, talk about dumb, maqqa seems to have a third world IQ.

The Greens won't have the bop, so it doesn't matter what they want/think, they will be rendered completely irrelevant. With any luck it will be Xenophon and/or Madigan (if the Coalition doesn't in our own right).

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 12:59pm:

wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 8:42am: Yes I know, its terrible low income workers can join unions, and get a fair go.     :)        u mean so that low-income workers can pay dues to the union so that the leaders can spend it on whores and holidays?

What a ridiculous statement.

How many union leaders are there in Australia, and how many of them are spending union fees on "whores and holidays"?

There are bad apples in almost every barrel: nobody would ever deny that.

And if any bad apple union leaders are found to be spending union money on "whores and holidays", they deserve to be punished to the full extent of the law.  Absolute scumbags who deserve everything they get.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjfT1D1lg-E

Most union leaders, however, are hard-working decent people.

matty wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 2:23pm:

The Greens won't have the bop, so it doesn't matter what they want/think, they will be rendered completely irrelevant. With any luck it will be Xenophon and/or Madigan (if the Coalition doesn't in our own right).

Depends if Australia required moderation from Abbott's extreme agenda.
Greens in the Senate and in the lower house seats like Batman and Melbourne.

RightSadFred wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 8:47am:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 8:30am: wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 7:47am: Well said Kat, yes we know the coalition can't be trusted on industrial relations.      :( Neither can the Greens or Labor be trusted to help business. The Fair Work Australia Act is a joke. In our entity in Australia we were told we have to hand out a sheet listing all their rights to new employees and we would be fined A$30,000 per breach per employee if we failed to do so. In our corp office this country is looked on at times as a bunch of socialists. Andrei.Hicks The reality is that work place reforms are required unless you really don't want a manufacturing industry which the greens oppose anyway so who gives a toss what the grrens think on this subject, they have already played there card and might be punished at the polls for it.

Define 'workplace reforms'....

:)

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 9:36am:

It's unlikely. Neither of the two I am thinking of have boyfriends... But anyway, I am fine for maternity leave. We have a corp policy where we'll pay 12 weeks of that salary. Like I said I am all for good workers being rewarded.

You back to being employed in Australia??

If not, FWA doesn't apply to any young ladies working in your section.

BTW....A young lady doesn't have to have a boyfriend to get pregnant, any willing potent male will suffice.

Didn't they teach you anything at that very expensive school????

;)

____ wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 2:43pm:

matty wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 2:23pm: The Greens won't have the bop, so it doesn't matter what they want/think, they will be rendered completely irrelevant. With any luck it will be Xenophon and/or Madigan (if the Coalition doesn't in our own right). Depends if Australia required moderation from Abbott's extreme agenda. Greens in the Senate and in the lower house seats like Batman and Melbourne.

Do you think the GREENS will win Batman?

andrei....

During the pilot's strike, did your old man front up to management all by himself, or did his union represent him??

Yes folks, andrei's old man was a striker....

;) ;)

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 1:08pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 9:55am: It created a bit of a storm with us when the local MD brought it to our attention. We already are suspicious of Australia with its superannuation, long annual leave, long service leave, payroll tax etc. This created more suspicion on the Government not being pro business. It's a terrible document. Poor employer???? We are one of the 10 biggest companies in the world!!! while we have the best economy in the world and the USA doesn't even rate in the top 10. just perhaps there is something right in what we are doing.

OK!! Who is the alien entity that has taken over longy's computer???

;)

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 1:10pm:

wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 10:27am: Well there are plenty of people that do.     :) 14% are members of unions and half of them do so under compulsion.

Got something to support that claim??

:)

What? When did this happen?

Abbott has a real bona fide policy?

Lobo wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 3:13pm:

andrei.... During the pilot's strike, did your old man front up to management all by himself, or did his union represent him?? Yes folks, andrei's old man was a striker.... ;) ;)

He was there at the table with 10 of his senior colleagues fronting up.

He said Hawke's man refused to even listen to their case and actually started off when they entered the room by accusing them of thinking they were better than everyone else and that they already earn 5 times the average worker.

There's a conciliatory tone.

Hawke - friend of the worker eh?

Lobo wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 2:58pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 9:36am: It's unlikely. Neither of the two I am thinking of have boyfriends... But anyway, I am fine for maternity leave. We have a corp policy where we'll pay 12 weeks of that salary. Like I said I am all for good workers being rewarded. You back to being employed in Australia?? If not, FWA doesn't apply to any young ladies working in your section. BTW....A young lady doesn't have to have a boyfriend to get pregnant, any willing potent male will suffice. Didn't they teach you anything at that very expensive school???? ;)

The head of their accounting team in Australia reports into me.

I have an AU team. That's why I am here this week.

skippy. wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 3:13pm:

____ wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 2:43pm: matty wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 2:23pm: The Greens won't have the bop, so it doesn't matter what they want/think, they will be rendered completely irrelevant. With any luck it will be Xenophon and/or Madigan (if the Coalition doesn't in our own right). Depends if Australia required moderation from Abbott's extreme agenda. Greens in the Senate and in the lower house seats like Batman and Melbourne. Do you think the GREENS will win Batman?

Greens require an 8% swing on primary and we are in the mix.


Greens sets sights on Batman

It's meant to be the safest Labor seat in the nation.


But as the party bickers over preselection for the Melbourne electorate, the Greens have declared "Batman's next" and pronounced themselves a genuine chance to snatch a surprise outright victory.

In her fourth time running as the Greens' candidate for Batman, Alex Bhathal said she has been flooded with community donations.

"I've had aged pensioners donating, people in public housing giving me five dollars, it's just extraordinary people's belief in the Greens and what we stand for," Ms Bhathal said.

Former Australian Greens leader Bob Brown is so confident about the party's prospects he doesn't believe the Greens will have to negotiate a preference deal with either of the two major parties.

Instead he said the battle for Batman will be a two-horse race between the Greens and a Labor party he said no longer represented the progressive views of the electorate.

In the last federal election Ms Bhathal, a Preston social worker, achieved a swing of 6.3 per cent, pinching most of those votes off retiring former Labor frontbencher Martin Ferguson. She’ll need an even bigger swing, of about 8 per cent, if she is to turf out Labor in September.

But on Ms Bhathal's past form, which has seen the Green's primary vote rise by almost 20 per cent within a decade, Bob Brown challenged the perception Batman was in fact as "safe" as it has been touted.

"It's been seen as the safest because the Liberal vote is so small. The Greens vote is growing rapidly and the bean counters tend to look at the two big parties and don’t see the Greens coming," he said.

"It's happened in Cunningham, we won the first seat in the lower house and it's happened in Melbourne.

"Batman is next."

http://www.parramattasun.com.au/story/1557364/greens-sets-sights-on-batman/?cs=12

Lib voters will preference Labor ahead of the Greens.

Lesser of 2 weevils.......

Yea, great. I think looking at that the GREENS will pick up Batman.
Furguson going will help too, the seat would never go to the women bashers party so Batman looks well like being the next GREEN HORs seat. Cool.

Swagman wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 5:01pm:

Lib voters will preference Labor ahead of the Greens. Lesser of 2 weevils.......

Really.
If Libs are same as Lab, why change government.

____ wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 5:52pm:

Swagman wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 5:01pm: Lib voters will preference Labor ahead of the Greens. Lesser of 2 weevils....... Really. If Libs are same as Lab, why change government.

Didn't say they were the same just that from a Lib perspective Labor are less extreme and less radical.

In the electorates of Batman & Melbourne the Green candidate got 80% of Lib preferences.

I don't think this will happen again.  Of course it depends upon the individual voter but I'd say the Lib 'how to vote' cards would have recommended that the ALP candidate be last.  I don't think they will this time.

The reason is that in 2010 it was viewed to be to the Coalition's benefit to minimise the amount of ALP seats even if it meant electing a Green.  This time around with the opinion polls the way they are this shouldn't be an issue.  In fact I'd expect that the Coalition will have the opposite view and deliberately advise their voters not to preference the Greens ahead of Labor everywhere.
.
:(

Swagman wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 6:11pm:

____ wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 5:52pm: Swagman wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 5:01pm: Lib voters will preference Labor ahead of the Greens. Lesser of 2 weevils....... Really. If Libs are same as Lab, why change government. Didn't say they were the same just that from a Lib perspective Labor are less extreme and less radical. In the electorates of Batman & Melbourne the Green candidate got 80% of Lib preferences. I don't think this will happen again.  Of course it depends upon the individual voter but I'd say the Lib 'how to vote' cards would have recommended that the ALP candidate be last.  I don't think they will this time. The reason is that in 2010 it was viewed to be to the Coalition's benefit to minimise the amount of ALP seats even if it meant electing a Green.  This time around with the opinion polls the way they are this shouldn't be an issue.  In fact I'd expect that the Coalition will have the opposite view and deliberately advise their voters not to preference the Greens ahead of Labor everywhere. . :(

This is true. Bandt will lose and the Greens won't come anywhere near winning Batman or any other seat.

Swagman wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 5:01pm:

Lib voters will preference Labor ahead of the Greens. Lesser of 2 weevils.......

Why would they care considering that the Libs are clearly the worst of 3 weevils

Swagman wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 6:11pm:

____ wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 5:52pm: Swagman wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 5:01pm: Lib voters will preference Labor ahead of the Greens. Lesser of 2 weevils....... Really. If Libs are same as Lab, why change government. Didn't say they were the same just that from a Lib perspective Labor are less extreme and less radical. In the electorates of Batman & Melbourne the Green candidate got 80% of Lib preferences. I don't think this will happen again.  Of course it depends upon the individual voter but I'd say the Lib 'how to vote' cards would have recommended that the ALP candidate be last.  I don't think they will this time. The reason is that in 2010 it was viewed to be to the Coalition's benefit to minimise the amount of ALP seats even if it meant electing a Green.  This time around with the opinion polls the way they are this shouldn't be an issue.  In fact I'd expect that the Coalition will have the opposite view and deliberately advise their voters not to preference the Greens ahead of Labor everywhere. . :(

It is understandable Libs fear the Greens more than Labor since Greens are fierce to their beliefs and will not cave.

People who think logically will preference Greens while voting conservative so to minimise ultra right policies being inflicted ~ like Workchoices.

RightSadFred wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 1:36pm:

longweekend58 I find it very undemocratic that we have the most regulated expensive labour market yet unionism is down to 14% its time that we see market deregulation and more democracy overall. Obviously much of this democratic mismatch will be rectified at the upcoming election.

This govt has returned much of IR back to the days prior to the Accords. it gives unions right they do not deserve and will be a battleground for Abbott.  Fortunately, 14% doesn't amount to much of a battle

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 7:20pm:

This govt has returned much of IR back to the days prior to the Accords. it gives unions right they do not deserve ...

Such as?

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 7:29pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 7:20pm: This govt has returned much of IR back to the days prior to the Accords. it gives unions right they do not deserve ... Such as?

watch him run !!!!

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 2:33pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 12:59pm: wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 8:42am: Yes I know, its terrible low income workers can join unions, and get a fair go.     :)        u mean so that low-income workers can pay dues to the union so that the leaders can spend it on whores and holidays? What a ridiculous statement. How many union leaders are there in Australia, and how many of them are spending union fees on "whores and holidays"? There are bad apples in almost every barrel: nobody would ever deny that. And if any bad apple union leaders are found to be spending union money on "whores and holidays", they deserve to be punished to the full extent of the law.  Absolute scumbags who deserve everything they get. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjfT1D1lg-E Most union leaders, however, are hard-working decent people.

how many? WAY TOO MANY. and what's worse are the dropkicks on here defending it. The union movement has a major problem with corruption in case you missed some of the news (and arrests).

skippy. wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 5:22pm:

Yea, great. I think looking at that the GREENS will pick up Batman. Furguson going will help too, the seat would never go to the women bashers party so Batman looks well like being the next GREEN HORs seat. Cool.

are you really that dumb???  the Greens will nto go close to winning ANY seat in the lower house plus lose at least 2 senators. That's what happens when you lose 40% of your vote in 3 years.

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 7:32pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 2:33pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 12:59pm: wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 8:42am: Yes I know, its terrible low income workers can join unions, and get a fair go.     :)        u mean so that low-income workers can pay dues to the union so that the leaders can spend it on whores and holidays? What a ridiculous statement. How many union leaders are there in Australia, and how many of them are spending union fees on "whores and holidays"? There are bad apples in almost every barrel: nobody would ever deny that. And if any bad apple union leaders are found to be spending union money on "whores and holidays", they deserve to be punished to the full extent of the law.  Absolute scumbags who deserve everything they get. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjfT1D1lg-E Most union leaders, however, are hard-working decent people. how many? WAY TOO MANY. and what's worse are the dropkicks on here defending it. The union movement has a major problem with corruption in case you missed some of the news (and arrests).

so has every major police service  .... do you suggest that all police are corrupt?

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 7:29pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 7:20pm: This govt has returned much of IR back to the days prior to the Accords. it gives unions right they do not deserve ... Such as?

right of entry without cause
right to examine books
right to choose subcontractors on building sites
unfair dismissal laws more draconian than prior to Keating

etc

oh and the govt gave the union movement $20M for... nothing.

John Smith wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 7:34pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 7:32pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 2:33pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 12:59pm: wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 8:42am: Yes I know, its terrible low income workers can join unions, and get a fair go.     :)        u mean so that low-income workers can pay dues to the union so that the leaders can spend it on whores and holidays? What a ridiculous statement. How many union leaders are there in Australia, and how many of them are spending union fees on "whores and holidays"? There are bad apples in almost every barrel: nobody would ever deny that. And if any bad apple union leaders are found to be spending union money on "whores and holidays", they deserve to be punished to the full extent of the law.  Absolute scumbags who deserve everything they get. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjfT1D1lg-E Most union leaders, however, are hard-working decent people. how many? WAY TOO MANY. and what's worse are the dropkicks on here defending it. The union movement has a major problem with corruption in case you missed some of the news (and arrests). so has every major police service  .... do you suggest that all police are corrupt?

not a lot of cops stealing money and spending it on whores and holidays. and when it does happen, nobody defends it or pretends it is okay like with unions.

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 7:32pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 2:33pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 12:59pm: wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 8:42am: Yes I know, its terrible low income workers can join unions, and get a fair go.     :)        u mean so that low-income workers can pay dues to the union so that the leaders can spend it on whores and holidays? What a ridiculous statement. How many union leaders are there in Australia, and how many of them are spending union fees on "whores and holidays"? There are bad apples in almost every barrel: nobody would ever deny that. And if any bad apple union leaders are found to be spending union money on "whores and holidays", they deserve to be punished to the full extent of the law.  Absolute scumbags who deserve everything they get. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjfT1D1lg-E Most union leaders, however, are hard-working decent people. how many? WAY TOO MANY. and what's worse are the dropkicks on here defending it. The union movement has a major problem with corruption in case you missed some of the news (and arrests).

Can you be a little more precise than "WAY TOO MANY"?

How many have been charged with spending union money on  "whores and holidays"?

And, who on here is defending the misuse of union funds?

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 7:35pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 7:29pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 7:20pm: This govt has returned much of IR back to the days prior to the Accords. it gives unions right they do not deserve ... Such as? right of entry without cause right to examine books right to choose subcontractors on building sites unfair dismissal laws more draconian than prior to Keating etc oh and the govt gave the union movement $20M for... nothing.

I suggest you buy a copy of the Fair Work Act 2009 (there's a new edition due out any day now).

Your post has demonstrated that you don't know what is actually contained in the legislation.

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 7:36pm:

John Smith wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 7:34pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 7:32pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 2:33pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 12:59pm: wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 8:42am: Yes I know, its terrible low income workers can join unions, and get a fair go.     :)        u mean so that low-income workers can pay dues to the union so that the leaders can spend it on whores and holidays? What a ridiculous statement. How many union leaders are there in Australia, and how many of them are spending union fees on "whores and holidays"? There are bad apples in almost every barrel: nobody would ever deny that. And if any bad apple union leaders are found to be spending union money on "whores and holidays", they deserve to be punished to the full extent of the law.  Absolute scumbags who deserve everything they get. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjfT1D1lg-E Most union leaders, however, are hard-working decent people. how many? WAY TOO MANY. and what's worse are the dropkicks on here defending it. The union movement has a major problem with corruption in case you missed some of the news (and arrests). so has every major police service  .... do you suggest that all police are corrupt? not a lot of cops stealing money and spending it on whores and holidays. and when it does happen, nobody defends it or pretends it is okay like with unions.

Thg police have a reputation for recieving free service at many locations.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 4:21pm:

Lobo wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 3:13pm: andrei.... During the pilot's strike, did your old man front up to management all by himself, or did his union represent him?? Yes folks, andrei's old man was a striker.... ;) ;) He was there at the table with 10 of his senior colleagues fronting up. He said Hawke's man refused to even listen to their case and actually started off when they entered the room by accusing them of thinking they were better than everyone else and that they already earn 5 times the average worker. There's a conciliatory tone. Hawke - friend of the worker eh?

So he was there as part of a union delegation....

:)

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 7:38pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 7:35pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 7:29pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 7:20pm: This govt has returned much of IR back to the days prior to the Accords. it gives unions right they do not deserve ... Such as? right of entry without cause right to examine books right to choose subcontractors on building sites unfair dismissal laws more draconian than prior to Keating etc oh and the govt gave the union movement $20M for... nothing. I suggest you buy a copy of the Fair Work Act 2009 (there's a new edition due out any day now). Your post has demonstrated that you don't know what is actually contained in the legislation.

try the subcontractors issue and tell me how that isn't a gift to unions? The state liberal govts have now banned the practice of allowing unions the right to choose subcontractors in their states. this has lowered the cost of building by 20%. Companies like Lend Lease which have these cozy arrangements with the unions and don't want to renege on it have now been effectively banned from govt building in Vic and NSW. All so that unions can choose (for a price of course) their preferred subbie and effectively discriminate against any non-unionists.

I look forward to Abbott getting rid of the practice entirely.

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 7:36pm:

John Smith wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 7:34pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 7:32pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 2:33pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 12:59pm: wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 8:42am: Yes I know, its terrible low income workers can join unions, and get a fair go.     :)        u mean so that low-income workers can pay dues to the union so that the leaders can spend it on whores and holidays? What a ridiculous statement. How many union leaders are there in Australia, and how many of them are spending union fees on "whores and holidays"? There are bad apples in almost every barrel: nobody would ever deny that. And if any bad apple union leaders are found to be spending union money on "whores and holidays", they deserve to be punished to the full extent of the law.  Absolute scumbags who deserve everything they get. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjfT1D1lg-E Most union leaders, however, are hard-working decent people. how many? WAY TOO MANY. and what's worse are the dropkicks on here defending it. The union movement has a major problem with corruption in case you missed some of the news (and arrests). so has every major police service  .... do you suggest that all police are corrupt? not a lot of cops stealing money and spending it on whores and holidays. and when it does happen, nobody defends it or pretends it is okay like with unions.

Time to answer the questions:

1. how many union leaders are spending union money on  "whores and holidays"?

2. who on here is defending them?

:-/

Dnarever wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 7:41pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 7:36pm: John Smith wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 7:34pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 7:32pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 2:33pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 12:59pm: wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 8:42am: Yes I know, its terrible low income workers can join unions, and get a fair go.     :)        u mean so that low-income workers can pay dues to the union so that the leaders can spend it on whores and holidays? What a ridiculous statement. How many union leaders are there in Australia, and how many of them are spending union fees on "whores and holidays"? There are bad apples in almost every barrel: nobody would ever deny that. And if any bad apple union leaders are found to be spending union money on "whores and holidays", they deserve to be punished to the full extent of the law.  Absolute scumbags who deserve everything they get. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjfT1D1lg-E Most union leaders, however, are hard-working decent people. how many? WAY TOO MANY. and what's worse are the dropkicks on here defending it. The union movement has a major problem with corruption in case you missed some of the news (and arrests). so has every major police service  .... do you suggest that all police are corrupt? not a lot of cops stealing money and spending it on whores and holidays. and when it does happen, nobody defends it or pretends it is okay like with unions. Thg police have a reputation for recieving free service at many locations.

like a subway or a donut??

yeah right up there with stealing $500K and spending it on hookers.

why don't you complain about the GST again?

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 7:43pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 7:36pm: John Smith wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 7:34pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 7:32pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 2:33pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 12:59pm: wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 8:42am: Yes I know, its terrible low income workers can join unions, and get a fair go.     :)        u mean so that low-income workers can pay dues to the union so that the leaders can spend it on whores and holidays? What a ridiculous statement. How many union leaders are there in Australia, and how many of them are spending union fees on "whores and holidays"? There are bad apples in almost every barrel: nobody would ever deny that. And if any bad apple union leaders are found to be spending union money on "whores and holidays", they deserve to be punished to the full extent of the law.  Absolute scumbags who deserve everything they get. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjfT1D1lg-E Most union leaders, however, are hard-working decent people. how many? WAY TOO MANY. and what's worse are the dropkicks on here defending it. The union movement has a major problem with corruption in case you missed some of the news (and arrests). so has every major police service  .... do you suggest that all police are corrupt? not a lot of cops stealing money and spending it on whores and holidays. and when it does happen, nobody defends it or pretends it is okay like with unions. Time to answer the questions: 1. how many union leaders are spending union money on  "whores and holidays"? 2. who on here is defending them? :-/

go back to any thread with Thomson in it and you will find many of the pro-labor drongos (tautologous) pretty much defending his actions.

Now do you want to talk about the war on subcontractors that Gillard has waged at the behest of her unionist masters?  How subbies are often banned from getting ABNs and actively discriminated against?

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 7:46pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 7:43pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 7:36pm: John Smith wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 7:34pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 7:32pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 2:33pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 12:59pm: wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 8:42am: Yes I know, its terrible low income workers can join unions, and get a fair go.     :)        u mean so that low-income workers can pay dues to the union so that the leaders can spend it on whores and holidays? What a ridiculous statement. How many union leaders are there in Australia, and how many of them are spending union fees on "whores and holidays"? There are bad apples in almost every barrel: nobody would ever deny that. And if any bad apple union leaders are found to be spending union money on "whores and holidays", they deserve to be punished to the full extent of the law.  Absolute scumbags who deserve everything they get. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjfT1D1lg-E Most union leaders, however, are hard-working decent people. how many? WAY TOO MANY. and what's worse are the dropkicks on here defending it. The union movement has a major problem with corruption in case you missed some of the news (and arrests). so has every major police service  .... do you suggest that all police are corrupt? not a lot of cops stealing money and spending it on whores and holidays. and when it does happen, nobody defends it or pretends it is okay like with unions. Time to answer the questions: 1. how many union leaders are spending union money on  "whores and holidays"? 2. who on here is defending them? :-/ go back to any thread with Thomson in it and you will find many of the pro-labor drongos (tautologous) pretty much defending his actions. Now do you want to talk about the war on subcontractors that Gillard has waged at the behest of her unionist masters?  How subbies are often banned from getting ABNs and actively discriminated against?

So your answers are:

1. one, possibly

2 nobody, actually

OK

Dnarever wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 6:34pm:

Swagman wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 5:01pm: Lib voters will preference Labor ahead of the Greens. Lesser of 2 weevils....... Why would they care considering that the Libs are clearly the worst of 3 weevils

Clearly 48% of Australians disagree.

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 7:48pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 7:46pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 7:43pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 7:36pm: John Smith wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 7:34pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 7:32pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 2:33pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 12:59pm: wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 8:42am: Yes I know, its terrible low income workers can join unions, and get a fair go.     :)        u mean so that low-income workers can pay dues to the union so that the leaders can spend it on whores and holidays? What a ridiculous statement. How many union leaders are there in Australia, and how many of them are spending union fees on "whores and holidays"? There are bad apples in almost every barrel: nobody would ever deny that. And if any bad apple union leaders are found to be spending union money on "whores and holidays", they deserve to be punished to the full extent of the law.  Absolute scumbags who deserve everything they get. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjfT1D1lg-E Most union leaders, however, are hard-working decent people. how many? WAY TOO MANY. and what's worse are the dropkicks on here defending it. The union movement has a major problem with corruption in case you missed some of the news (and arrests). so has every major police service  .... do you suggest that all police are corrupt? not a lot of cops stealing money and spending it on whores and holidays. and when it does happen, nobody defends it or pretends it is okay like with unions. Time to answer the questions: 1. how many union leaders are spending union money on  "whores and holidays"? 2. who on here is defending them? :-/ go back to any thread with Thomson in it and you will find many of the pro-labor drongos (tautologous) pretty much defending his actions. Now do you want to talk about the war on subcontractors that Gillard has waged at the behest of her unionist masters?  How subbies are often banned from getting ABNs and actively discriminated against? So your answers are: 1. one, possibly 2 nobody, actually OK

good true-believer response. miss the substance of the argument and debate the periphery.  This is why your lot are about to be slaughtered and the union movement brought back under control. Who knows, Abbot might even make unions accountable to their members or even worse - subject them to audits and the law!!!  at that rate the unions and labor itself might fill an entire prison. Theres more than a few already there and a few more lined up to join them,

I expected better from you but if there is one thing a leftie always does it is DISAPPOINT.

The Greens have risen astronomically since the last election. From 12% to 9% primary, about to lose their sole lower house seat, 3-4 Senators, and the bop.

matty wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 7:49pm:

Dnarever wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 6:34pm: Swagman wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 5:01pm: Lib voters will preference Labor ahead of the Greens. Lesser of 2 weevils....... Why would they care considering that the Libs are clearly the worst of 3 weevils Clearly 48% of Australians disagree.

actually it is 49%

and even that figure doesn't include voters for some minority parties that clearly favour the libs. That would make an ABSOLUTE MAJORITY supporting the libs.

love it!

matty wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 7:49pm:

Dnarever wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 6:34pm: Swagman wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 5:01pm: Lib voters will preference Labor ahead of the Greens. Lesser of 2 weevils....... Why would they care considering that the Libs are clearly the worst of 3 weevils Clearly 48% of Australians disagree.

Amazing how conservatives forget about their little bitch, the gNats.

No wonder gNats are dying ~ what are they now, 2%?

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 7:53pm:

matty wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 7:49pm: Dnarever wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 6:34pm: Swagman wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 5:01pm: Lib voters will preference Labor ahead of the Greens. Lesser of 2 weevils....... Why would they care considering that the Libs are clearly the worst of 3 weevils Clearly 48% of Australians disagree. actually it is 49% and even that figure doesn't include voters for some minority parties that clearly favour the libs. That would make an ABSOLUTE MAJORITY supporting the libs. love it!

And the Greens going the way of the Democrats. Good news all around.

____ wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 8:01pm:

matty wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 7:49pm: Dnarever wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 6:34pm: Swagman wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 5:01pm: Lib voters will preference Labor ahead of the Greens. Lesser of 2 weevils....... Why would they care considering that the Libs are clearly the worst of 3 weevils Clearly 48% of Australians disagree. Amazing how conservatives forget about their little bitch, the gNats. No wonder gNats are dying ~ what are they now, 2%?

The number that I quoted is the Coalition vote, not the Liberal vote itself.

matty wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 7:53pm:

The Greens have risen astronomically since the last election. From 12% to 9% primary, about to lose their sole lower house seat, 3-4 Senators, and the bop.

There is no prize in peaking too early before a general election.

matty wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 8:04pm:

____ wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 8:01pm: matty wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 7:49pm: Dnarever wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 6:34pm: Swagman wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 5:01pm: Lib voters will preference Labor ahead of the Greens. Lesser of 2 weevils....... Why would they care considering that the Libs are clearly the worst of 3 weevils Clearly 48% of Australians disagree. Amazing how conservatives forget about their little bitch, the gNats. No wonder gNats are dying ~ what are they now, 2%? The number that I quoted is the Coalition vote, not the Liberal vote itself.

Cheating on the figures aye ... the post was on the Libs, not Libs and their little bitch.

____ wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 8:08pm:

matty wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 8:04pm: ____ wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 8:01pm: matty wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 7:49pm: Dnarever wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 6:34pm: Swagman wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 5:01pm: Lib voters will preference Labor ahead of the Greens. Lesser of 2 weevils....... Why would they care considering that the Libs are clearly the worst of 3 weevils Clearly 48% of Australians disagree. Amazing how conservatives forget about their little bitch, the gNats. No wonder gNats are dying ~ what are they now, 2%? The number that I quoted is the Coalition vote, not the Liberal vote itself. Cheating on the figures aye ... the post was on the Libs, not Libs and their little bitch.

I expect their little bitch to lose even more seats too. Head bitch, Barny Joyce was screeching  the Libs had the next election in the bag on radio during the week. Funny thing is, the same polls that say that also say Barny will get his ass served up to him by Windsor. Funny, the conga line of intellectually challenged canine fornicators don't mention those polls.

Dnarever wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 6:34pm:

Swagman wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 5:01pm: Lib voters will preference Labor ahead of the Greens. Lesser of 2 weevils....... Why would they care considering that the Libs are clearly the worst of 3 weevils

If they thought that they wouldn't be Lib voters Poindexter...... ::)

skippy. wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 8:25pm:

____ wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 8:08pm: matty wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 8:04pm: ____ wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 8:01pm: matty wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 7:49pm: Dnarever wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 6:34pm: Swagman wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 5:01pm: Lib voters will preference Labor ahead of the Greens. Lesser of 2 weevils....... Why would they care considering that the Libs are clearly the worst of 3 weevils Clearly 48% of Australians disagree. Amazing how conservatives forget about their little bitch, the gNats. No wonder gNats are dying ~ what are they now, 2%? The number that I quoted is the Coalition vote, not the Liberal vote itself. Cheating on the figures aye ... the post was on the Libs, not Libs and their little bitch. I expect their little bitch to lose even more seats too. Head bitch, Barny Joyce was screeching  the Libs had the next election in the bag on radio during the week. Funny thing is, the same polls that say that also say Barny will get his ass served up to him by Windsor. Funny, the conga line of intellectually challenged canine fornicators don't mention those polls.

Abbott is silly enough to want the defeated joyce as Governor General.

And yeah, the ultra right here are silent on joyce.

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 7:36pm:

John Smith wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 7:34pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 7:32pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 2:33pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 12:59pm: wrote on Jun 8th, 2013 at 8:42am: Yes I know, its terrible low income workers can join unions, and get a fair go.     :)        u mean so that low-income workers can pay dues to the union so that the leaders can spend it on whores and holidays? What a ridiculous statement. How many union leaders are there in Australia, and how many of them are spending union fees on "whores and holidays"? There are bad apples in almost every barrel: nobody would ever deny that. And if any bad apple union leaders are found to be spending union money on "whores and holidays", they deserve to be punished to the full extent of the law.  Absolute scumbags who deserve everything they get. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjfT1D1lg-E Most union leaders, however, are hard-working decent people. how many? WAY TOO MANY. and what's worse are the dropkicks on here defending it. The union movement has a major problem with corruption in case you missed some of the news (and arrests). so has every major police service  .... do you suggest that all police are corrupt? not a lot of cops stealing money and spending it on whores and holidays. and when it does happen, nobody defends it or pretends it is okay like with unions.

you missed the NSW or Qld royal commissions into corruption into the police force? they found a good many cops were in fact taking bribes ... as for how many visiting whores, we don't know, there was no political point scoring to be made from that and Murdoch wasn't trying to protect his ar$e from the NBN.

Now show me where anyone defends union corruption or pretends it's OK?

Quote:

Abbott is silly enough to want the defeated joyce as Governor General. And yeah, the ultra right here are silent on joyce.

The question is...  where does the Progressive left dig up such rot and do they actually believe it?  ;D ;D ;D

From what Abbott has already said re the GG position, Howard (another Left lie)  and hence Joyce, would not fit his idea of who would be appropriate for it.

You guys are proper dopes when anyone who knows anything could tell you that.

Grendel wrote on Jun 9^th, 2013 at 1:55pm:

Quote: Abbott is silly enough to want the defeated joyce as Governor General. And yeah, the ultra right here are silent on joyce. The question is...  where does the Progressive left dig up such rot and do they actually believe it?  ;D ;D ;D From what Abbott has already said re the GG position, Howard (another Left lie)  and hence Joyce, would not fit his idea of who would be appropriate for it. You guys are proper dopes when anyone who knows anything could tell you that.

Exactly. Phoney tony is much more likely to install  one of his pedophile priest mates as GG.

John Smith wrote on Jun 8^th, 2013 at 9:48pm:

Now show me where anyone defends union corruption or pretends it's OK?

Don't hold your breath.

He won't answer the hard questions.

He implies that most union leaders are corrupt and that all of us lefties here support union corruption, however, when asked to provide evidence ... a big fat zero!   ::)

skippy. wrote on Jun 9^th, 2013 at 3:24pm:

Grendel wrote on Jun 9th, 2013 at 1:55pm: Quote: Abbott is silly enough to want the defeated joyce as Governor General. And yeah, the ultra right here are silent on joyce. The question is...  where does the Progressive left dig up such rot and do they actually believe it?  ;D ;D ;D From what Abbott has already said re the GG position, Howard (another Left lie)  and hence Joyce, would not fit his idea of who would be appropriate for it. You guys are proper dopes when anyone who knows anything could tell you that. Exactly. Phoney tony is much more likely to install  one of his pedophile priest mates as GG.

Ah no Skippy he counted them out too.