The costs of not paying extra for weekend and night work

Date
    February 13, 2014


After 22 years of continuous economic growth and having dodged the bullet of the global financial crisis Australia needs next to do what exactly? Abolish penalty rates, according to Tony Abbott's business supporters.   :(      

He has not been quite as blunt as that. Instead, the Prime Minister has used weasel words about supporting applications by business to abolish penalties, but the effect is the same. The government is lending its weight to pressure to undermine the pay and conditions of the poorest paid, most disadvantaged workers in the country.

The penalty rates debate, driven as it is by the restaurant and catering industry association, is divorced from reality. At the very time last November that the association was appealing against a court's decision to maintain penalty rates, the Bureau of Statistics was noting a 10.6 per cent annual increase in restaurant, cafe and catering turnover.

Penalty rates apply much more broadly than in hospitality, and they are crucial to compensating workers for working unsociable hours that are disruptive to families and ruinous to social lives. In fact, Australian workers throughout the economy rely on penalty payments to lift below average wages into the realm of liveability.


More than 75 per cent of United Voice union members work in industries where penalty pay is often applied. They include ambulance paramedics, office and shopping centre cleaners, bakery workers and security guards. They are the backbone of our community: their jobs are essential and it is essential that they are done at unsociable hours.

One of our members, a 63 year-old widow who cleans a major suburban shopping centre, told us last week that she worked the night shift, starting at midnight, because that was the only way her single income became a living wage. Night shift takes her from $664.60 to $863.98 a week.

A survey of our shopping centre cleaner members who work night shift found that most were middle-aged men working full time, and almost half of them are supporting children. Yet despite the night penalties two thirds of them had trouble paying bills and could not afford to visit a dentist, and a quarter of them could not afford to buy a car.      :(

Ambulance paramedics commonly work a mix of 14-hour and 10-hour shifts on a roster four days on and four days off taking in nights and weekends. For this they receive a fixed penalty of 26.7 per cent. Without that penalty, no one could afford to support a family, Bendigo paramedic Brett Adie told us recently.

The penalty pay is partly compensation for what he gives up by way of his social life, missed family occasions and the chance to coach his children's sport teams. But it is also what pays his mortgage and puts food on the table. “It's a below-average wage without the penalties,” Brett said. “It's not for luxuries; it gets you by every week.”

That is precisely the point overlooked in the public debate being pushed by business's stalking horse, Restaurant & Catering Australia. Penalty rates are not the preserve of university students or backpackers temporarily earning a few extra dollars to support them through next semester or their next adventure.

Working people and their families rely on penalty rates for a decent income. Penalty rates are a traditional way for working people to make up the difference between falling behind their debts on the one hand or creating a little financial security for themselves on the other.

Restaurateurs and the retailers who support their push to abolish penalty pay should be careful what they wish for, because abolishing penalty rates would take an enormous amount of demand out of our economy. The economic damage would be boundless, but there is a fundamental issue of fairness here as well.

Working at night, or at weekends or in a job that impedes your family or social life is a sacrifice deserving of compensation. Australians have long understood that and fought for it. Let us continue to respect those who make that sacrifice and reward them for it.      [smiley=thumbsup.gif]      

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/comment/the-costs-of-not-paying-extra-for-weekend-and-night-work-20140213-32jzg.html#ixzz2tKLc1lN9

There is no valid reason for abolishing penalty-rates.

Greed and selfishness are not valid reasons.

Don't forget the long-term health effects of working funny shifts:-

http://www.webmd.com/sleep-disorders/excessive-sleepiness-10/shift-work?page=2

It's been long known that long term shift work lowers your life expectancy by 5-10 years.  Shocking to consider that so many people in Oz now have that hanging over them - I'm one after my years of 18-20 hour shifts - and what a loss I will be to you all!

Who's going to hold your hands through all the travails of Australia to come, when I am no longer here to do it for you?

Ya gotta love your soft arse fat cats who like to say how easy it all is - how would they know?  Doesn't take too much thinking to understand why history has been filled with revolutions and revolts.

I can only shake my head at the image of a Fat Joe or Skinny Toe or a Red Julia or a Paunchy Kev discussing the cost of fuel they don't pay for - and saying - "Yeah - $2 a litre isn't so bad!  Definitely affordable!"

It's like expecting a feminist who's never missed a square meal or a good night's sleep or a soft ride to a social science degree to understand poverty and oppression....

Truly there will be a day of judgement in the West - soon unless I miss my mark.

Abolish penalty rates and create lots of new jobs.

http://www.theskyisnotyourlimit.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/meerkat-219x300.jpg

Swagman wrote on Feb 15^th, 2014 at 10:06am:

Abolish penalty rates and create lots of new jobs.

http://persephonemagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/colbert-laugh.gif

Easy to say, Swagman but a lot more difficult to prove.

In NZ, employers warned the last Labour Govt that raising the minimum wage would cost jobs.

The Govt ignored them and lifted the wage, anyway.

And guess what? Jobs didn't go down, they went up.

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Feb 15^th, 2014 at 6:04am:

Don't forget the long-term health effects of working funny shifts:- http://www.webmd.com/sleep-disorders/excessive-sleepiness-10/shift-work?page=2 It's been long known that long term shift work lowers your life expectancy by 5-10 years.  Shocking to consider that so many people in Oz now have that hanging over them - I'm one after my years of 18-20 hour shifts - and what a loss I will be to you all! Who's going to hold your hands through all the travails of Australia to come, when I am no longer here to do it for you? Ya gotta love your soft arse fat cats who like to say how easy it all is - how would they know?  Doesn't take too much thinking to understand why history has been filled with revolutions and revolts. I can only shake my head at the image of a Fat Joe or Skinny Toe or a Red Julia or a Paunchy Kev discussing the cost of fuel they don't pay for - and saying - "Yeah - $2 a litre isn't so bad!  Definitely affordable!" It's like expecting a feminist who's never missed a square meal or a good night's sleep or a soft ride to a social science degree to understand poverty and oppression.... Truly there will be a day of judgement in the West - soon unless I miss my mark.

I don't have a problem if it's the same shift all the time.

But, when I was shunting on the railway, I worked what's known as 'rotating shifts'.

Which means, you do one week (7 days) of day-shift, then a week of night shift, then a
week of afternoon shift. You then get a week off, then the cycle re-starts.

After a few months of that, the body-clock is stuffed, and it's often hard to work out what
day  (or even week) it is.

As for Swaggie's idea,  'dump penalty rates and create jobs', a far better idea would be to
outlaw 12-hour shifts altogether, and force companies to run three 8-hour shifts instead.

The most cost effective way of structuring work hours is to have shift work where people's regular hours include a Saturday and Sunday normally.
So they do perhaps Weds - Sun and their two days off are Mon and Tues.
Then you have 5 day workers overlapping but with rotational periods off and you don't pay higher rates beyond the normal.

It's often how we structure our work agreements globally for regular level employees.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 15^th, 2014 at 3:43pm:

The most cost effective way of structuring work hours is to have shift work where people's regular hours include a Saturday and Sunday normally. So they do perhaps Weds - Sun and their two days off are Mon and Tues. Then you have 5 day workers overlapping but with rotational periods off and you don't pay higher rates beyond the normal. It's often how we structure our work agreements globally for regular level employees.

Are you the Poo Bah of Mars?

I interviewed for a role at Mars once. Good benefits.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 15^th, 2014 at 3:52pm:

I interviewed for a role at Mars once. Good benefits.

You rejected the offer from Uranus? Incredible!

As a journo, I worked Xmas Day for years. It was treble time and with a family and a mortgage it was too good to resist.

We opened our presents Xmas morning, but had our real celebration on Boxing Day.

Laugh till you cry wrote on Feb 15^th, 2014 at 4:07pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 15th, 2014 at 3:52pm: I interviewed for a role at Mars once. Good benefits. You rejected the offer from Uranus? Incredible!

I won't ask what benefits his anus offered.

The mind boggles.... :D

Swagman wrote on Feb 15^th, 2014 at 10:06am:

Abolish penalty rates and create lots of new jobs. http://www.theskyisnotyourlimit.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/meerkat-219x300.jpg

Simples,... lol create mass homelessness and give society a return dose of previously eradicated disease!

Yah, good way to understand complex systems there bro!!

Swagman wrote on Feb 15^th, 2014 at 10:06am:

Abolish penalty rates and create lots of new jobs. http://www.theskyisnotyourlimit.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/meerkat-219x300.jpg

Total bullshyte!

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 15^th, 2014 at 3:43pm:

The most cost effective way of structuring work hours is to have shift work where people's regular hours include a Saturday and Sunday normally. So they do perhaps Weds - Sun and their two days off are Mon and Tues. Then you have 5 day workers overlapping but with rotational periods off and you don't pay higher rates beyond the normal. It's often how we structure our work agreements globally for regular level employees.

--> the ol 9 day rotating roster: what a shambles those jobs are!!

Peter Freedman wrote on Feb 15^th, 2014 at 7:35pm:

As a journo, I worked Xmas Day for years. It was treble time and with a family and a mortgage it was too good to resist. We opened our presents Xmas morning, but had our real celebration on Boxing Day.

I worked more than one Xmas Day when at the newspapers.

We'd start after lunch, and go til around 2am Boxing Day, to get the
papers out. As much pre=production as possible would be done by
knock-off time on Xmas Eve.

My pay-packet loved it.

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Feb 15^th, 2014 at 6:04am:

Don't forget the long-term health effects of working funny shifts:- http://www.webmd.com/sleep-disorders/excessive-sleepiness-10/shift-work?page=2 It's been long known that long term shift work lowers your life expectancy by 5-10 years.  Shocking to consider that so many people in Oz now have that hanging over them - I'm one after my years of 18-20 hour shifts - and what a loss I will be to you all! Who's going to hold your hands through all the travails of Australia to come, when I am no longer here to do it for you? Ya gotta love your soft arse fat cats who like to say how easy it all is - how would they know?  Doesn't take too much thinking to understand why history has been filled with revolutions and revolts. I can only shake my head at the image of a Fat Joe or Skinny Toe or a Red Julia or a Paunchy Kev discussing the cost of fuel they don't pay for - and saying - "Yeah - $2 a litre isn't so bad!  Definitely affordable!" It's like expecting a feminist who's never missed a square meal or a good night's sleep or a soft ride to a social science degree to understand poverty and oppression.... Truly there will be a day of judgement in the West - soon unless I miss my mark.

18-20 hours??
What part of Western Australia were you driving trucks in again sorry  :D :D :D :D :D :D

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 15^th, 2014 at 3:43pm:

The most cost effective way of structuring work hours is to have shift work where people's regular hours include a Saturday and Sunday normally. So they do perhaps Weds - Sun and their two days off are Mon and Tues. Then you have 5 day workers overlapping but with rotational periods off and you don't pay higher rates beyond the normal. It's often how we structure our work agreements globally for regular level employees.

and you can stick that up your jacksie Andrei!!!

Not everyone works shift work that covers a seven day roster.... and people in 8 to 5 jobs why should they have to work Sat & Sun when all their friends have every weekend off..... like the majority of people.

The working week is Monday to Friday.... if you want people to work Sat & Sun .... then it's gonna cost you extra.

Gnads wrote on Feb 15^th, 2014 at 7:50pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 15th, 2014 at 3:43pm: The most cost effective way of structuring work hours is to have shift work where people's regular hours include a Saturday and Sunday normally. So they do perhaps Weds - Sun and their two days off are Mon and Tues. Then you have 5 day workers overlapping but with rotational periods off and you don't pay higher rates beyond the normal. It's often how we structure our work agreements globally for regular level employees. and you can stick that up your jacksie Andrei!!! Not everyone works shift work that covers a seven day roster.... and people in 8 to 5 jobs why should they have to work Sat & Sun when all their friends have every weekend off..... like the majority of people. The working week is Monday to Friday.... if you want people to work Sat & Sun .... then it's gonna cost you extra.

Andrei is fighting to enslave the worker globally!

:o :o ;)

Kat wrote on Feb 15^th, 2014 at 7:46pm:

Peter Freedman wrote on Feb 15th, 2014 at 7:35pm: As a journo, I worked Xmas Day for years. It was treble time and with a family and a mortgage it was too good to resist. We opened our presents Xmas morning, but had our real celebration on Boxing Day. I worked more than one Xmas Day when at the newspapers. We'd start after lunch, and go til around 2am Boxing Day, to get the papers out. As much pre=production as possible would be done by knock-off time on Xmas Eve. My pay-packet loved it.

I worked a 3-11 shift on Xmas Day.

Had many sober Xmases, but made up for it the next day.

Gnads wrote on Feb 15^th, 2014 at 7:50pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 15th, 2014 at 3:43pm: The most cost effective way of structuring work hours is to have shift work where people's regular hours include a Saturday and Sunday normally. So they do perhaps Weds - Sun and their two days off are Mon and Tues. Then you have 5 day workers overlapping but with rotational periods off and you don't pay higher rates beyond the normal. It's often how we structure our work agreements globally for regular level employees. and you can stick that up your jacksie Andrei!!! Not everyone works shift work that covers a seven day roster.... and people in 8 to 5 jobs why should they have to work Sat & Sun when all their friends have every weekend off..... like the majority of people. The working week is Monday to Friday.... if you want people to work Sat & Sun .... then it's gonna cost you extra.

Because it makes sense from a corporate perspective which means the company is more profitable which means job security.
It's the terms we offer, if people don't accept it, there's plenty that will.

I'm a big fan of structuring our base level workforce on rotational rosters.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 15^th, 2014 at 9:03pm:

Gnads wrote on Feb 15th, 2014 at 7:50pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 15th, 2014 at 3:43pm: The most cost effective way of structuring work hours is to have shift work where people's regular hours include a Saturday and Sunday normally. So they do perhaps Weds - Sun and their two days off are Mon and Tues. Then you have 5 day workers overlapping but with rotational periods off and you don't pay higher rates beyond the normal. It's often how we structure our work agreements globally for regular level employees. and you can stick that up your jacksie Andrei!!! Not everyone works shift work that covers a seven day roster.... and people in 8 to 5 jobs why should they have to work Sat & Sun when all their friends have every weekend off..... like the majority of people. The working week is Monday to Friday.... if you want people to work Sat & Sun .... then it's gonna cost you extra. Because it makes sense from a corporate perspective which means the company is more profitable which means job security. It's the terms we offer, if people don't accept it, there's plenty that will. I'm a big fan of structuring our base level workforce on rotational rosters.

Flexibility: Napoleon.. jebus, you're impressive!  ;D ;D

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Feb 15^th, 2014 at 9:19pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 15th, 2014 at 9:03pm: Gnads wrote on Feb 15th, 2014 at 7:50pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 15th, 2014 at 3:43pm: The most cost effective way of structuring work hours is to have shift work where people's regular hours include a Saturday and Sunday normally. So they do perhaps Weds - Sun and their two days off are Mon and Tues. Then you have 5 day workers overlapping but with rotational periods off and you don't pay higher rates beyond the normal. It's often how we structure our work agreements globally for regular level employees. and you can stick that up your jacksie Andrei!!! Not everyone works shift work that covers a seven day roster.... and people in 8 to 5 jobs why should they have to work Sat & Sun when all their friends have every weekend off..... like the majority of people. The working week is Monday to Friday.... if you want people to work Sat & Sun .... then it's gonna cost you extra. Because it makes sense from a corporate perspective which means the company is more profitable which means job security. It's the terms we offer, if people don't accept it, there's plenty that will. I'm a big fan of structuring our base level workforce on rotational rosters. Flexibility: Napoleon.. jebus, you're impressive!  ;D ;D

It is flexible.
Not everyone wants sat and sun off.
Some prefer mid week.
What about Jews whose sabbath is not sunday?

We save money - we have workers working on weekends at regular pay.
I calcd the initial proposal saves us $450m

Gnads wrote on Feb 15^th, 2014 at 7:44pm:

Swagman wrote on Feb 15th, 2014 at 10:06am: Abolish penalty rates and create lots of new jobs. http://www.theskyisnotyourlimit.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/meerkat-219x300.jpg Total bullshyte!

Why?

Gnads wrote on Feb 15^th, 2014 at 7:50pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 15th, 2014 at 3:43pm: The most cost effective way of structuring work hours is to have shift work where people's regular hours include a Saturday and Sunday normally. So they do perhaps Weds - Sun and their two days off are Mon and Tues. Then you have 5 day workers overlapping but with rotational periods off and you don't pay higher rates beyond the normal. It's often how we structure our work agreements globally for regular level employees. and you can stick that up your jacksie Andrei!!! Not everyone works shift work that covers a seven day roster.... and people in 8 to 5 jobs why should they have to work Sat & Sun when all their friends have every weekend off..... like the majority of people. The working week is Monday to Friday.... if you want people to work Sat & Sun .... then it's gonna cost you extra.

The world has moved on, even if you havent noticed; this is the mindset that keeps working people from utilizing their options of flexibility in the workplace. No, I'm not talking about Flexitime in the public service...

Swagman wrote on Feb 15^th, 2014 at 9:45pm:

Gnads wrote on Feb 15th, 2014 at 7:44pm: Swagman wrote on Feb 15th, 2014 at 10:06am: Abolish penalty rates and create lots of new jobs. http://www.theskyisnotyourlimit.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/meerkat-219x300.jpg Total bullshyte! Why?

It's been proven that it does not create any new jobs.

The people employed are just expected to work weekends for ordinary pay.

The Heartless Felon wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 8:27am:

Gnads wrote on Feb 15th, 2014 at 7:50pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 15th, 2014 at 3:43pm: The most cost effective way of structuring work hours is to have shift work where people's regular hours include a Saturday and Sunday normally. So they do perhaps Weds - Sun and their two days off are Mon and Tues. Then you have 5 day workers overlapping but with rotational periods off and you don't pay higher rates beyond the normal. It's often how we structure our work agreements globally for regular level employees. and you can stick that up your jacksie Andrei!!! Not everyone works shift work that covers a seven day roster.... and people in 8 to 5 jobs why should they have to work Sat & Sun when all their friends have every weekend off..... like the majority of people. The working week is Monday to Friday.... if you want people to work Sat & Sun .... then it's gonna cost you extra. The world has moved on, even if you havent noticed; this is the mindset that keeps working people from utilizing their options of flexibility in the workplace. No, I'm not talking about Flexitime in the public service...

Ahhh the old "flexible shirt" mantra ...... on the ever downward spiral to the lowest common denominator.

All the flex has gone out of the shirts & it's time to put some starch back into the washing.

The world hasn't moved on..... it's going backward ... to a time when the work place & conditions were so bad that people banded together to fight to improve them.

You lot want to turn the clock back 70 yrs..... because of greed.

To solve a problem you as to address the reason behind the reason.
ie you have a fire the best way to stop it is remove the fuel, not attack the flames.
We got a problem with wages and allowances, deal with cost of living issues which drive the need for wages.
ie housing, energy , food etc.
Anything else is a band aid and really just a waste of time.

Gnads wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 8:36am:

The Heartless Felon wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 8:27am: Gnads wrote on Feb 15th, 2014 at 7:50pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 15th, 2014 at 3:43pm: The most cost effective way of structuring work hours is to have shift work where people's regular hours include a Saturday and Sunday normally. So they do perhaps Weds - Sun and their two days off are Mon and Tues. Then you have 5 day workers overlapping but with rotational periods off and you don't pay higher rates beyond the normal. It's often how we structure our work agreements globally for regular level employees. and you can stick that up your jacksie Andrei!!! Not everyone works shift work that covers a seven day roster.... and people in 8 to 5 jobs why should they have to work Sat & Sun when all their friends have every weekend off..... like the majority of people. The working week is Monday to Friday.... if you want people to work Sat & Sun .... then it's gonna cost you extra. The world has moved on, even if you havent noticed; this is the mindset that keeps working people from utilizing their options of flexibility in the workplace. No, I'm not talking about Flexitime in the public service... Ahhh the old "flexible shirt" mantra ...... on the ever downward spiral to the lowest common denominator. All the flex has gone out of the shirts & it's time to put some starch back into the washing. The world hasn't moved on..... it's going backward ... to a time when the work place & conditions were so bad that people banded together to fight to improve them. You lot want to turn the clock back 70 yrs..... because of greed.

You seem to be very insecure...let go of the past and embrace the future, Grasshopper!

Rubin wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 9:19am:

To solve a problem you as to address the reason behind the reason. ie you have a fire the best way to stop it is remove the fuel, not attack the flames. We got a problem with wages and allowances, deal with cost of living issues which drive the need for wages. ie housing, energy , food etc. Anything else is a band aid and really just a waste of time.

Absolutely spot on - reducing wages before any lowering of cost of living - which BTW will never happen anyway - means ONLY that most people will be plunged into neo-poverty to feed the hungry pockets of their 'betters'.

Robber barons all and due for a place on the long wall.....

Lower or freeze cost of living FIRST to allow people to LIVE - then discuss lowering BOTH at the same time.

No more rises in power, fuel etc.. freeze housing costs, ban investment property hoarding, abolish the GST and negative gearing.... let the market stabilise THEN discuss how to lower BOTH at the same time so that our dollar value equals the peasant countries.

Desperate times call for desperate measures, Tony - let's get with it here and do something REAL instead of pandering to your fat mates.


ADDS:-  I'd love to see Andrei's figures on how to save $450m - I honestly cannot see that working weekend days instead of week days and compensating via salary etc will save you a brass razoo.

And I'm not overly impressed with the attitude that if people don't want to serve your boss, there are plenty who will.  You are inciting revolution, my son.

That was the Wee Johnnie WorkChoices dream - work em all round and give 'em a tradeoff in hourly rate - now (LMAO) 'wages are too high' - what a joke!

Andrei - why do I get the idea you studied accounting at the School For Rubbery Figures?  Good reason not to employ accountants in business.

The Heartless Felon wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 10:17am:

Gnads wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 8:36am: The Heartless Felon wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 8:27am: Gnads wrote on Feb 15th, 2014 at 7:50pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 15th, 2014 at 3:43pm: The most cost effective way of structuring work hours is to have shift work where people's regular hours include a Saturday and Sunday normally. So they do perhaps Weds - Sun and their two days off are Mon and Tues. Then you have 5 day workers overlapping but with rotational periods off and you don't pay higher rates beyond the normal. It's often how we structure our work agreements globally for regular level employees. and you can stick that up your jacksie Andrei!!! Not everyone works shift work that covers a seven day roster.... and people in 8 to 5 jobs why should they have to work Sat & Sun when all their friends have every weekend off..... like the majority of people. The working week is Monday to Friday.... if you want people to work Sat & Sun .... then it's gonna cost you extra. The world has moved on, even if you havent noticed; this is the mindset that keeps working people from utilizing their options of flexibility in the workplace. No, I'm not talking about Flexitime in the public service... Ahhh the old "flexible shirt" mantra ...... on the ever downward spiral to the lowest common denominator. All the flex has gone out of the shirts & it's time to put some starch back into the washing. The world hasn't moved on..... it's going backward ... to a time when the work place & conditions were so bad that people banded together to fight to improve them. You lot want to turn the clock back 70 yrs..... because of greed. You seem to be very insecure...let go of the past and embrace the future, Grasshopper!

It would be more pertinent to say you have learnt nothing from the past & are endeavouring embrace it again in the guise of it being futuristic. Re-inventing the wheel ey?

Gnads wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 8:31am:

Swagman wrote on Feb 15th, 2014 at 9:45pm: Gnads wrote on Feb 15th, 2014 at 7:44pm: Swagman wrote on Feb 15th, 2014 at 10:06am: Abolish penalty rates and create lots of new jobs. http://www.theskyisnotyourlimit.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/meerkat-219x300.jpg Total bullshyte! Why? It's been proven that it does not create any new jobs. The people employed are just expected to work weekends for ordinary pay.

That would then be overtime and defeat the purpose?


Gnads wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 8:31am:

It's been proven that it does not create any new jobs

Has it really?  I suppose that you have a credible source for this?

Gnads wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 8:31am:

Swagman wrote on Feb 15th, 2014 at 9:45pm: Gnads wrote on Feb 15th, 2014 at 7:44pm: Swagman wrote on Feb 15th, 2014 at 10:06am: Abolish penalty rates and create lots of new jobs. http://www.theskyisnotyourlimit.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/meerkat-219x300.jpg Total bullshyte! Why? It's been proven that it does not create any new jobs. The people employed are just expected to work weekends for ordinary pay.

That's correct.  They are bullied into working extra hours, quite often at their normal rate of pay.  It's much cheaper to have existing staff do the extra work than it is to employ new workers.

In fact, abolishing penalty rates has the potential to increase unemployment.

Millions of workers receive some sort of penalty rate payment as part of their wage every week.  This adds up to billions of dollars every year.

Cutting penalty rates would reduce the standard of living of those workers and take many billions of dollars out of the economy, thus, costing jobs.

The idea that abolishing penalty rates would create jobs is extremely naive, to say the least.

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 11:57am:

That's correct.  They are bullied into working extra hours, quite often at their normal rate of pay

Garbage.


greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 11:57am:

In fact, abolishing penalty rates has the potential to increase unemployment.

Garbage


greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 11:57am:

Millions of workers receive some sort of penalty rate payment as part of their wage every week.  This adds up to billions of dollars every year

Yes.  Exactly. just how many extra people per annum could be employed by these billions?


greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 11:57am:

Cutting penalty rates would reduce the standard of living of those workers and take many billions of dollars out of the economy, thus, costing jobs.

Garbage


greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 11:57am:

The idea that abolishing penalty rates would create jobs is extremely naive, to say the least.

It's effin logical not na·ive.

Potentially thousands of small businesses keep their doors closed because they can't afford to pay people double time for no other reason than it being a weekend or a public holiday.

Thousand of jobs and work hours and trading hours are lost because of the greed of unions.

Penalty rates adds to the price of product.  They make product uncompetitive.  Penalty rates have contributed to the demise of manufacturing and to the demise of the car industry.

Union greed. >:(

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 15^th, 2014 at 3:43pm:

The most cost effective way of structuring work hours is to have shift work where people's regular hours include a Saturday and Sunday normally. So they do perhaps Weds - Sun and their two days off are Mon and Tues. Then you have 5 day workers overlapping but with rotational periods off and you don't pay higher rates beyond the normal. It's often how we structure our work agreements globally for regular level employees.

And what family life do you plan for these people? I can just see it in a year or 2 time when Hicks comes out with "I blame the parents for these delinquent kids.  They should have been around for them".  Pathetic

Swagman wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 9:03pm:

Penalty rates adds to the price of product.  They make product uncompetitive.  Penalty rates have contributed to the demise of manufacturing and to the demise of the car industry. Union greed. >:(

That's why we had (LMAO) Workchoices and agreed payments etc.. DIDN'T WORK!

One style of bullying didn't work out for the overseer class, now they want to go further.

If they put Australia first instead of themselves and their mates, we wouldn't be in this situation.  Proper handling of the economy - not along the lines of fire sales and resource digging instead of solid development of hard core industries would have gone a long way - but I suppose when your mates all want handouts to dig big holes and make billions you need to rush to the til and open it wide for them, hand out the licences for a a song, then sit back and pretend to tax them while screwing over the ordinary taxpayers instead.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 15^th, 2014 at 9:24pm:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Feb 15th, 2014 at 9:19pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 15th, 2014 at 9:03pm: Gnads wrote on Feb 15th, 2014 at 7:50pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 15th, 2014 at 3:43pm: The most cost effective way of structuring work hours is to have shift work where people's regular hours include a Saturday and Sunday normally. So they do perhaps Weds - Sun and their two days off are Mon and Tues. Then you have 5 day workers overlapping but with rotational periods off and you don't pay higher rates beyond the normal. It's often how we structure our work agreements globally for regular level employees. and you can stick that up your jacksie Andrei!!! Not everyone works shift work that covers a seven day roster.... and people in 8 to 5 jobs why should they have to work Sat & Sun when all their friends have every weekend off..... like the majority of people. The working week is Monday to Friday.... if you want people to work Sat & Sun .... then it's gonna cost you extra. Because it makes sense from a corporate perspective which means the company is more profitable which means job security. It's the terms we offer, if people don't accept it, there's plenty that will. I'm a big fan of structuring our base level workforce on rotational rosters. Flexibility: Napoleon.. jebus, you're impressive!  ;D ;D It is flexible. Not everyone wants sat and sun off. Some prefer mid week. What about Jews whose sabbath is not sunday? We save money - we have workers working on weekends at regular pay. I calcd the initial proposal saves us $450m

When I go buy anything in this world, be it for goods or services, I know I have to pay extra for extras.  Why is it that business understands this concept perfectly well except when its their turn to pay. The weekends are extras so business like everyone else has to pay for extras. GET IT!  Ahh but no Hicks needs to transfer extrernalities so he dream up this elaborate absurd plan for restructuring everybody's life including their leisure life so that business can escape paying a few extra bucks on the weekends.  Reminds me a few years ago when someone in the tourist industry came out saying that Australians should only be allowed to take holidays during the off tourist season in Aust so the tourist sector would have a more even income flow throughout the year.  Just selfish pigs   

Swagman wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 9:03pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:57am: That's correct.  They are bullied into working extra hours, quite often at their normal rate of pay Penalty rates adds to the price of product.  They make product uncompetitive.  Penalty rates have contributed to the demise of manufacturing and to the demise of the car industry. Union greed.

This need to be catered for in the business model, If the employer can not afford the appropriate rates then it isn't the employees responsibility to subsidise an unviable business decision.

Swagman wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 9:03pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:57am: That's correct.  They are bullied into working extra hours, quite often at their normal rate of pay Garbage. greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:57am: In fact, abolishing penalty rates has the potential to increase unemployment. Garbage greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:57am: Millions of workers receive some sort of penalty rate payment as part of their wage every week.  This adds up to billions of dollars every year Yes.  Exactly. just how many extra people per annum could be employed by these billions? greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:57am: Cutting penalty rates would reduce the standard of living of those workers and take many billions of dollars out of the economy, thus, costing jobs. Garbage greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:57am: The idea that abolishing penalty rates would create jobs is extremely naive, to say the least. It's effin logical not na·ive. Potentially thousands of small businesses keep their doors closed because they can't afford to pay people double time for no other reason than it being a weekend or a public holiday. Thousand of jobs and work hours and trading hours are lost because of the greed of unions. Penalty rates adds to the price of product.  They make product uncompetitive.  Penalty rates have contributed to the demise of manufacturing and to the demise of the car industry. Union greed. >:(

There are 3 words you have used here in your reply that are more than adequate to describe your own response............

GARBAGE X 3.

The greed sits squarely in the court of the employer group.

You have been given more than enough examples to show that all your ideas do nothing for creating new employment opportunities .... they simply allow employers to make their existing employees work longer hours for less.


Quote:

When I go buy anything in this world, be it for goods or services, I know I have to pay extra for extras.  Why is it that business understands this concept perfectly well except when its their turn to pay. The weekends are extras so business like everyone else has to pay for extras. GET IT!  Ahh but no Hicks needs to transfer extrernalities so he dream up this elaborate absurd plan for restructuring everybody's life including their leisure life so that business can escape paying a few extra bucks on the weekends.  Reminds me a few years ago when someone in the tourist industry came out saying that Australians should only be allowed to take holidays during the off tourist season in Aust so the tourist sector would have a more even income flow throughout the year.  Just selfish pigs

Quote:

That's why we had (LMAO) Workchoices and agreed payments etc.. DIDN'T WORK! One style of bullying didn't work out for the overseer class, now they want to go further. If they put Australia first instead of themselves and their mates, we wouldn't be in this situation.  Proper handling of the economy - not along the lines of fire sales and resource digging instead of solid development of hard core industries would have gone a long way - but I suppose when your mates all want handouts to dig big holes and make billions you need to rush to the til and open it wide for them, hand out the licences for a a song, then sit back and pretend to tax them while screwing over the ordinary taxpayers instead.

Quote:

That's correct.  They are bullied into working extra hours, quite often at their normal rate of pay.  It's much cheaper to have existing staff do the extra work than it is to employ new workers. In fact, abolishing penalty rates has the potential to increase unemployment. Millions of workers receive some sort of penalty rate payment as part of their wage every week.  This adds up to billions of dollars every year. Cutting penalty rates would reduce the standard of living of those workers and take many billions of dollars out of the economy, thus, costing jobs. The idea that abolishing penalty rates would create jobs is extremely naive, to say the least.

All quite logically put, so no need for me to justify my stance against your Union bashing mindset driven by Tory based greed & fantasy.

Swagman wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 9:03pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:57am: That's correct.  They are bullied into working extra hours, quite often at their normal rate of pay Garbage. greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:57am: In fact, abolishing penalty rates has the potential to increase unemployment. Garbage greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:57am: Millions of workers receive some sort of penalty rate payment as part of their wage every week.  This adds up to billions of dollars every year Yes.  Exactly. just how many extra people per annum could be employed by these billions? greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:57am: Cutting penalty rates would reduce the standard of living of those workers and take many billions of dollars out of the economy, thus, costing jobs. Garbage greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:57am: The idea that abolishing penalty rates would create jobs is extremely naive, to say the least. It's effin logical not na·ive. Potentially thousands of small businesses keep their doors closed because they can't afford to pay people double time for no other reason than it being a weekend or a public holiday. Thousand of jobs and work hours and trading hours are lost because of the greed of unions. Penalty rates adds to the price of product.  They make product uncompetitive.  Penalty rates have contributed to the demise of manufacturing and to the demise of the car industry. Union greed. >:(

Garbage.

You have no idea how the real world, and the economy, works.

I've not seen such ignorance in quite some time.

As for 'abolishing penalty rates will create jobs" - they've demolished half the workforce already thus cutting costs in half - they've had 'workchoices' and 'flexible working conditions' and 'creating a better and more business-friendly environment'...... how many more 'opportunities' does business need to start putting people in work - and to stop whining when the very people they robbed of an income can't buy their goods any more?

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Feb 17^th, 2014 at 9:49am:

As for 'abolishing penalty rates will create jobs" - they've demolished half the workforce already thus cutting costs in half - they've had 'workchoices' and 'flexible working conditions' and 'creating a better and more business-friendly environment'...... how many more 'opportunities' does business need to start putting people in work - and to stop whining when the very people they robbed of an income can't buy their goods any more?

Correctamundo [smiley=thumbsup.gif]

Gnads wrote on Feb 17^th, 2014 at 9:09am:

You have been given more than enough examples to show that all your ideas do nothing for creating new employment opportunities

Nope.  Just biased opinions and as usual no proof.


Gnads wrote on Feb 17^th, 2014 at 9:09am:

they simply allow employers to make their existing employees work longer hours for less.

I didn't say anything about abolishing IR completely.  Any hours over the max still get overtime that's why I said


Quote:

That would then be overtime and defeat the purpose?

Gnads wrote on Feb 17^th, 2014 at 9:09am:

The greed sits squarely in the court of the employer group.

More ideological 'garbage'.  Efficiency is not greed.  Employing someone that is currently unemployed at the same hourly rate as other staff doing the same job on a weekday is LOGICAL and EFFICIENT not greedy.

Almost everyone should be happy.  The business is paying the same price for its labour not one artificially set by collusion,  the Govt is happy because it's one less person it has to hand out the dole to,  the new employee is happy they have a job, the other employees are happy as they don't have to work extra hours or weekends, the consumer is happy because the policy has a deflationary effect on product and they have more choice on weekends and public holidays - everyone except socialist trade unionists are happy.  They are upset because they aren't stabbing the employer and the economy in the back.


Gnads wrote on Feb 17^th, 2014 at 9:09am:

When I go buy anything in this world, be it for goods or services, I know I have to pay extra for extras.

Really?  So if you buy a beer on a Sunday or a Public Holiday you expect it to cost twice as much?


Gnads wrote on Feb 17^th, 2014 at 9:09am:

Why is it that business understands this concept perfectly well except when its their turn to pay. The weekends are extras so business like everyone else has to pay for extras. GET IT!

It's only an 'extra' if it's overtime.  GET IT?

Overtime is a reward for 'extra' effort.  Not a penalty.

If a single business can't get staff on a weekend it will pay a higher rate to attract them.  That is competition.

Having to pay DOUBLE across the board regardless of trade is and regardless of demand is why lots of businesses just don't open.

Hence penalty rates is a stupid policy that creates an EXTRA cost without a corresponding EXTRA earn.  It's inefficient and therefore responsible for unemployment as jobs are going begging because businesses keep their doors shut when they could be trading..


Gnads wrote on Feb 17^th, 2014 at 9:09am:

Ahh but no Hicks needs to transfer extrernalities so he dream up this elaborate absurd plan for restructuring everybody's life including their leisure life so that business can escape paying a few extra bucks on the weekends.

If you don't want to work weekends then don't.  Plenty of people without a job would be willing to work and be paid the same rate as you for the same job. 

You're happy you get to sit on your arse and the unemployed is happy he has a job and the business is happy he's not paying more for no reason and the tax-payer doubly happy because he's not handing out the dole and is receiving extra tax and the pensioners are happy because the GOVT has more money to spend on them.


Dnarever wrote on Feb 17^th, 2014 at 8:29am:

This need to be catered for in the business model, If the employer can not afford the appropriate rates then it isn't the employees responsibility to subsidise an unviable business decision.

No it's not and the business doesn't open because it's not going to be viable.  Potential employment for an unemployed person has been lost, potential trade and tax revenues have been lost, potential competition for other business has been lost, the dole bill is more, the tax take is less and another nail driven into the economy.  Congratulations you have just provided another example of how penalty rates cause unemployment. :(

Most of the quotes you attribute to me were the quotes of others...... I may have re-quoted them ... because they make sense.


Quote:

Swagman quote: I didn't say anything about abolishing IR completely.  Any hours over the max still get overtime that's why I said

Working beyond maximum hours for ordinary time is not overtime. It's excess time.

Employers are making maximum shift lengths longer & longer @ ordinary rates. Then want more.

It should also be easy to see that this does not create more employment but allows less or the same people do more.

And the longer the shift lengths the more likely accidents are to occur.

All the companies that have pushed shifts through to 12 hours have followed that up with staff reductions.... it's a fact.

So the ideology bag is in your court ......... & the  people you support are members of Unions .... of Employers.

Hypocrites.

Swagman wrote on Feb 17^th, 2014 at 10:05am:

Hence penalty rates is a stupid policy that creates an EXTRA cost without a corresponding EXTRA earn.  It's inefficient and therefore responsible for unemployment as jobs are going begging because businesses keep their doors shut when they could be trading..

Nope.  Just biased opinions and as usual no proof.

Gnads wrote on Feb 17^th, 2014 at 11:30am:

Working beyond maximum hours for ordinary time is not overtime. It's excess time

Assume a working week is 40 hours.  8 hours a day.

Work Mon-Fri and do 40 hrs.

If employer wants you to work another 8 hours on the weekend that is overtime and an overtime rate is paid accordingly.

If however the business doesn't want to pay you 1.5X or 2X for the same return it can (if the law was relaxed) employ someone else (that may be currently unemployed) to work the 16 hours for Sat and Sun at the same rate.  Everyone should be happy.

The price of the labour is the same and an extra 16 hours of work is created.

Is it really that god damned difficult to grasp?  :-?

Swagman wrote on Feb 17^th, 2014 at 12:07pm:

Gnads wrote on Feb 17th, 2014 at 11:30am: Working beyond maximum hours for ordinary time is not overtime. It's excess time Assume a working week is 40 hours.  8 hours a day. Work Mon-Fri and do 40 hrs. If employer wants you to work another 8 hours on the weekend that is overtime and an overtime rate is paid accordingly. If however the business doesn't want to pay you 1.5X or 2X for the same return it can (if the law was relaxed) employ someone else (that may be currently unemployed) to work the 16 hours for Sat and Sun at the same rate.  Everyone should be happy. The price of the labour is the same and an extra 16 hours of work is created. Is it really that god damned difficult to grasp?  :-?

>:( >:( >:(  Why bother trying  !!! ;) ;)

woody2014 wrote on Feb 17^th, 2014 at 12:11pm:

Why bother trying

http://www.cps.k12.in.us/cms/lib03/IN01000800/Centricity/Domain/941/I%20think%20I%20can%20train.jpg

......embrace a challenge.... :)

Swagman wrote on Feb 17^th, 2014 at 12:07pm:

Gnads wrote on Feb 17th, 2014 at 11:30am: Working beyond maximum hours for ordinary time is not overtime. It's excess time Assume a working week is 40 hours.  8 hours a day. Work Mon-Fri and do 40 hrs. If employer wants you to work another 8 hours on the weekend that is overtime and an overtime rate is paid accordingly. If however the business doesn't want to pay you 1.5X or 2X for the same return it can (if the law was relaxed) employ someone else (that may be currently unemployed) to work the 16 hours for Sat and Sun at the same rate.  Everyone should be happy. The price of the labour is the same and an extra 16 hours of work is created. Is it really that god damned difficult to grasp?  :-?

Surely a 1.5x or 2x penalty rate would encourage businesses to hire extra 16 hour staff more than a flat rate ?

You seem to dismiss the cost of business of employing someone.  It cost more to have 2 people doing 60 hours, than 1 person doing it, when you consider the management overheads (costs) of managing 2 people, contracts, HR, super, etc, etc.

Yes - that's why people even here are telling me they are working 60 hours or more, while we have one of the highest unemployment rates in the State of NSW.

It's called bad management.....

Oh - and may I just add - a significant part of th3e problem is what I will now dub 'The Andrei Hicks Syndrome' - the employment of numbah crunchahs, whiz kids etc as 'management' at prolific cost in travel, offices and so forth - when for the same money you could employ 5-6 or even more REAL workers.

The hidden cost of excessive management is one of the most undug trenches in the industrial relations/wages debate.

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Feb 17^th, 2014 at 4:01pm:

Yes - that's why people even here are telling me they are working 60 hours or more, while we have one of the highest unemployment rates in the State of NSW. It's called bad management..... Oh - and may I just add - a significant part of the problem is what I will now dub 'The Andrei Hicks Syndrome' - the employment of numbah crunchahs, whiz kids etc as 'management' at prolific cost in travel, offices and so forth - when for the same money you could employ 5-6 or even more REAL workers. The hidden cost of excessive management is one of the most undug trenches in the industrial relations/wages debate.

And the answer is obvious. Smash corporations, conglomerates and cartels.

And outlaw 'futures' trading and currency speculation.

And watch competition and job creation blossom overnight.

You won't have enough unemployed to fill the positions available.

Kat wrote on Feb 17^th, 2014 at 7:44pm:

And the answer is obvious. Smash corporations, conglomerates and cartels

Trade Unions are 'cartels'

Swagman wrote on Feb 17^th, 2014 at 7:47pm:

Kat wrote on Feb 17th, 2014 at 7:44pm: And the answer is obvious. Smash corporations, conglomerates and cartels Trade Unions are 'cartels'

Yeah - but cartels with a lot of dividing lines - not just a monolithic group of graspers - a good many of their workers - and I've been one - have the best interests of both worker and company at heart... and cop it from both sides.

As a Union delegate I copped flat tyres from the workers, and personal attacks from the 'managers'.

Idiots the lot of them, and they all deserved to lose their livelihood - though I didn't, since I struggled to be a fair arbiter and spokesperson while out-performing everyone else at the work.

BTW - on the AHS (above) - this company at one time had over 60 'staff' for 120 workers......... read it again.....

Swagman wrote on Feb 17^th, 2014 at 7:47pm:

Kat wrote on Feb 17th, 2014 at 7:44pm: And the answer is obvious. Smash corporations, conglomerates and cartels Trade Unions are 'cartels'

Bring in the "class" distinction ey?

& are they the same "cartels" as Unions of Employers?

& no .... working an extra 8 hrs on a Saturday at ordinary rate after 40 hrs Mon- Fri is not overtime.

It's an excess shift.

It's an encroachment on your family & leisure time.

I have to wonder if any of you rabid Tory disciples have any notion of those ideals............

except that maybe for you but not for "Trade Unionists".

The push for a 7 day a week at ordinary rates casual workforce is simply a return to the past because of innate greed.

It creates no more meaningful employment... in fact it increases unemployment..........

thus expanding your "dole" queue.

Gnads wrote on Feb 18^th, 2014 at 9:32am:

The push for a 7 day a week at ordinary rates casual workforce is simply a return to the past because of innate greed. It creates no more meaningful employment... in fact it increases unemployment..........

Exactly!

Gnads wrote on Feb 18^th, 2014 at 9:32am:

& no .... working an extra 8 hrs on a Saturday at ordinary rate after 40 hrs Mon- Fri is not overtime. It's an excess shift.

Oh for chrissake........It wouldn't be at the ordinary rate, it would be at the overtime rate where the worker has already worked their max contracted hours for the week.

I did not advocate the abolishing of overtime.

My argument is that otherwise unemployed individuals could pick up work on a weekend in businesses that are now closed because they can't justify paying 1.5X or 2X the normal rate.

In fact it's CRAZY not to do this IMO

We have people sitting on the dole and businesses closed that they could otherwise be working at.

That's the argument.  It's common sense.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 15^th, 2014 at 9:24pm:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Feb 15th, 2014 at 9:19pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 15th, 2014 at 9:03pm: Gnads wrote on Feb 15th, 2014 at 7:50pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 15th, 2014 at 3:43pm: The most cost effective way of structuring work hours is to have shift work where people's regular hours include a Saturday and Sunday normally. So they do perhaps Weds - Sun and their two days off are Mon and Tues. Then you have 5 day workers overlapping but with rotational periods off and you don't pay higher rates beyond the normal. It's often how we structure our work agreements globally for regular level employees. and you can stick that up your jacksie Andrei!!! Not everyone works shift work that covers a seven day roster.... and people in 8 to 5 jobs why should they have to work Sat & Sun when all their friends have every weekend off..... like the majority of people. The working week is Monday to Friday.... if you want people to work Sat & Sun .... then it's gonna cost you extra. Because it makes sense from a corporate perspective which means the company is more profitable which means job security. It's the terms we offer, if people don't accept it, there's plenty that will. I'm a big fan of structuring our base level workforce on rotational rosters. Flexibility: Napoleon.. jebus, you're impressive!  ;D ;D It is flexible. Not everyone wants sat and sun off. Some prefer mid week. What about Jews whose sabbath is not sunday? We save money - we have workers working on weekends at regular pay. I calcd the initial proposal saves us $450m

"Flexibility" is a corporate buzz word. It means higher profits by dropping wages and eroding conditions.

As a union advocate, I would be rich if I was paid just $2 for every time an employer's advocate mentioned the word "flexibility".

Swagman wrote on Feb 17^th, 2014 at 7:47pm:

Kat wrote on Feb 17th, 2014 at 7:44pm: And the answer is obvious. Smash corporations, conglomerates and cartels Trade Unions are 'cartels'

The Oxford Concise English Dictionary defines cartel as "a manufacturers union that controls prices, production, marketing arrangements etc"

Trade unions don't get a mention.

Is the dictionary wrong, Swag?

Peter Freedman wrote on Feb 18^th, 2014 at 1:34pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 15th, 2014 at 9:24pm: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Feb 15th, 2014 at 9:19pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 15th, 2014 at 9:03pm: Gnads wrote on Feb 15th, 2014 at 7:50pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 15th, 2014 at 3:43pm: The most cost effective way of structuring work hours is to have shift work where people's regular hours include a Saturday and Sunday normally. So they do perhaps Weds - Sun and their two days off are Mon and Tues. Then you have 5 day workers overlapping but with rotational periods off and you don't pay higher rates beyond the normal. It's often how we structure our work agreements globally for regular level employees. and you can stick that up your jacksie Andrei!!! Not everyone works shift work that covers a seven day roster.... and people in 8 to 5 jobs why should they have to work Sat & Sun when all their friends have every weekend off..... like the majority of people. The working week is Monday to Friday.... if you want people to work Sat & Sun .... then it's gonna cost you extra. Because it makes sense from a corporate perspective which means the company is more profitable which means job security. It's the terms we offer, if people don't accept it, there's plenty that will. I'm a big fan of structuring our base level workforce on rotational rosters. Flexibility: Napoleon.. jebus, you're impressive!  ;D ;D It is flexible. Not everyone wants sat and sun off. Some prefer mid week. What about Jews whose sabbath is not sunday? We save money - we have workers working on weekends at regular pay. I calcd the initial proposal saves us $450m "Flexibility" is a corporate buzz word. It means higher profits by dropping wages and eroding conditions. As a union advocate, I would be rich if I was paid just $2 for every time an employer's advocate mentioned the word "flexibility".

That's right ....... for me as well....... I just say to them when ever they toss it up, "There's no more flex left in the shirt .... & I'm putting in double the amount of starch".

Get rid of the of all penalty rates let the employers dictate what wages should lets say $5 per hour unskilled work that should cover your transport to and from work. Who cares if you can feed clothe or house yourself, after all people just want live to work, not work to live right. As is you want to see ya kids and family weekend anyway. Everyman for himself and fu all I'm alright jack. If you work on weekend you don't deserve to live in a house anyway because of your average performance at school. Only the top 20% of the population deserves to be comfortable the rest of you should work to make them comfortable.
Unions and whs must go making business yo hard to manage

Swagman wrote on Feb 18^th, 2014 at 12:55pm:

Gnads wrote on Feb 18th, 2014 at 9:32am: & no .... working an extra 8 hrs on a Saturday at ordinary rate after 40 hrs Mon- Fri is not overtime. It's an excess shift. Oh for chrissake........It wouldn't be at the ordinary rate, it would be at the overtime rate where the worker has already worked their max contracted hours for the week. I did not advocate the abolishing of overtime. My argument is that otherwise unemployed individuals could pick up work on a weekend in businesses that are now closed because they can't justify paying 1.5X or 2X the normal rate. In fact it's CRAZY not to do this IMO We have people sitting on the dole and businesses closed that they could otherwise be working at. That's the argument.  It's common sense.

I agree to some extent, and often say the same thing.  Employ more people and that makes the whole economy more robust and flowing with cash.

However, the problem is in training - if you employ people only on a weekend or whatever for a few hours, you cary the burden of training them up etc, and becuase they ahve a long time lapse between shifts, they lose their edge.

This equates to constantly re-training and  is a bit like the cost of replacement of an employee - which used to be touted as around 3-4 times the cost of retaining one.

What this means - to me - is that somewhere along the way we lost the fine art of training people from the bottom up so they know the ropes and can simply do the job.

**spits on sidewalk** - it's thet darned book larnin'!

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Feb 18^th, 2014 at 9:47pm:

Swagman wrote on Feb 18th, 2014 at 12:55pm: Gnads wrote on Feb 18th, 2014 at 9:32am: & no .... working an extra 8 hrs on a Saturday at ordinary rate after 40 hrs Mon- Fri is not overtime. It's an excess shift. Oh for chrissake........It wouldn't be at the ordinary rate, it would be at the overtime rate where the worker has already worked their max contracted hours for the week. I did not advocate the abolishing of overtime. My argument is that otherwise unemployed individuals could pick up work on a weekend in businesses that are now closed because they can't justify paying 1.5X or 2X the normal rate. In fact it's CRAZY not to do this IMO We have people sitting on the dole and businesses closed that they could otherwise be working at. That's the argument.  It's common sense. I agree to some extent, and often say the same thing.  Employ more people and that makes the whole economy more robust and flowing with cash. However, the problem is in training - if you employ people only on a weekend or whatever for a few hours, you cary the burden of training them up etc, and becuase they ahve a long time lapse between shifts, they lose their edge. This equates to constantly re-training and  is a bit like the cost of replacement of an employee - which used to be touted as around 3-4 times the cost of retaining one. What this means - to me - is that somewhere along the way we lost the fine art of training people from the bottom up so they know the ropes and can simply do the job. **spits on sidewalk** - it's thet darned book larnin'!

What I like best about swags idea is get people from unemployed to underemployed that way the lose any government assistance with housing and medical subs and have to live one $250 a week by working sat and sun. That way less welfare means we pay less tax sweet. Love to hear more swag

Two days a week hardly cuts it for meaningful employment.

If they are going to be paid penalty rates maybe .... but I thought the push by all the Tories was to ditch penalty rates?

Then if so .... those who work the weekend would be considering how much they earn(gross) reduces their dole or affects any other benefits they get.

Gnads wrote on Feb 19^th, 2014 at 6:44am:

Two days a week hardly cuts it for meaningful employment. If they are going to be paid penalty rates maybe .... but I thought the push by all the Tories was to ditch penalty rates? Then if so .... those who work the weekend would be considering how much they earn(gross) reduces their dole or affects any other benefits they get.

Two days is better than none.  For lots of individuals such as full time students and stay at home mums weekend work is preferable.


Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Feb 18^th, 2014 at 9:47pm:

However, the problem is in training - if you employ people only on a weekend or whatever for a few hours, you cary the burden of training them up etc, and becuase they ahve a long time lapse between shifts, they lose their edge

Yes training and all the other squillion overhead costs are an issue and also test viability.

Changes in IR policy is always going to be about winners and losers.

It's the unions job to maintain the benefits of their members and its therefore understandable that (most) union officials don't give a stuff about the unemployed and the economy in general.

That's where AWAs were advantageous.  All business situations are different.  Some business situations will need to pay people extra to work on W/E and public holidays simply because of labour supply and demand.  That becomes and incentive rate or a reward rate not a 'penalty' rate.  Even the terminology is negative  :-?

Making the payment of penalty rates a collective law is stupid, uncompetitive, inefficient and causes unemployment and is detrimental to the economy and all these factors will eventually detrimentally effect the members of unions, welfare recipients and the tax-payer.....indeed they already have.  The slow death of manufacturing in this country is a classic example. :(

Swagman wrote on Feb 19^th, 2014 at 8:58am:

Gnads wrote on Feb 19th, 2014 at 6:44am: Two days a week hardly cuts it for meaningful employment. If they are going to be paid penalty rates maybe .... but I thought the push by all the Tories was to ditch penalty rates? Then if so .... those who work the weekend would be considering how much they earn(gross) reduces their dole or affects any other benefits they get. Two days is better than none.  For lots of individuals such as full time students and stay at home mums weekend work is preferable. Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Feb 18th, 2014 at 9:47pm: However, the problem is in training - if you employ people only on a weekend or whatever for a few hours, you cary the burden of training them up etc, and becuase they ahve a long time lapse between shifts, they lose their edge Yes training and all the other squillion overhead costs are an issue and also test viability. Changes in IR policy is always going to be about winners and losers. It's the unions job to maintain the benefits of their members and its therefore understandable that (most) union officials don't give a stuff about the unemployed and the economy in general. That's where AWAs were advantageous.  All business situations are different.  Some business situations will need to pay people extra to work on W/E and public holidays simply because of labour supply and demand.  That becomes and incentive rate or a reward rate not a 'penalty' rate.  Even the terminology is negative  :-? Making the payment of penalty rates a collective law is stupid, uncompetitive, inefficient and causes unemployment and is detrimental to the economy and all these factors will eventually detrimentally effect the members of unions, welfare recipients and the tax-payer.....indeed they already have.  The slow death of manufacturing in this country is a classic example. :(

Two days work is better than none in a national perspective great for country. Desaster for the invidual unless the live with mum and dad or their partner earns a signifanct wage.

Gnads wrote on Feb 19^th, 2014 at 6:44am:

Two days a week hardly cuts it for meaningful employment. If they are going to be paid penalty rates maybe .... but I thought the push by all the Tories was to ditch penalty rates? Then if so .... those who work the weekend would be considering how much they earn(gross) reduces their dole or affects any other benefits they get.

I think what has been lost sight of here is a viable income and a living wage - not just some furphy to get people off the dole.  That helps nobody and especially the employer who will not get the best work.

No incentive - no performance.

LIVING WAGE - it used to exist after decades of Union struggle - as the SINGLE LIVING WAGE - with the advent of women working etc this first became the MADIF, then the utter disaster it has now become with millions out of work and underemployed while a few get all the cream, and costs of living geared to the MADIF.

The whole thing needs to be reverted to a SINGLE FAMILY UNIT LIVING WAGE and all related issues such as employment rights must be based on the Family unit and not just open slather for all - and a family unit can be a single person living alone.

I continue to be astounded that people will fall over themselves to give someone in a job another job - and refuse the person without a job - on the basis that the person with the job is a 'good person' - the other one is a 'bum'!!

Astounding reasoning!  HTF do you get to not be a 'bum' when nobody give you the chance?

smacking morons!

Nope - single living family income  is the only way to save this place...

Rubin wrote on Feb 19^th, 2014 at 11:45am:

Two days work is better than none in a national perspective great for country. Desaster for the invidual unless the live with mum and dad or their partner earns a signifanct wage.

It's still work.  It's getting people off the dole or decreasing their reliance on it, or it's supplementing family incomes.

Why is this bad?

Swagman wrote on Feb 19^th, 2014 at 8:58am:

Gnads wrote on Feb 19th, 2014 at 6:44am: Two days a week hardly cuts it for meaningful employment. If they are going to be paid penalty rates maybe .... but I thought the push by all the Tories was to ditch penalty rates? Then if so .... those who work the weekend would be considering how much they earn(gross) reduces their dole or affects any other benefits they get. Two days is better than none.  For lots of individuals such as full time students and stay at home mums weekend work is preferable. Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Feb 18th, 2014 at 9:47pm: However, the problem is in training - if you employ people only on a weekend or whatever for a few hours, you cary the burden of training them up etc, and becuase they ahve a long time lapse between shifts, they lose their edge Yes training and all the other squillion overhead costs are an issue and also test viability. Changes in IR policy is always going to be about winners and losers. It's the unions job to maintain the benefits of their members and its therefore understandable that (most) union officials don't give a stuff about the unemployed and the economy in general. That's where AWAs were advantageous.  All business situations are different.  Some business situations will need to pay people extra to work on W/E and public holidays simply because of labour supply and demand.  That becomes and incentive rate or a reward rate not a 'penalty' rate.  Even the terminology is negative  :-? Making the payment of penalty rates a collective law is stupid, uncompetitive, inefficient and causes unemployment and is detrimental to the economy and all these factors will eventually detrimentally effect the members of unions, welfare recipients and the tax-payer.....indeed they already have.  The slow death of manufacturing in this country is a classic example. :(

Hey swag.  Are you one of these farmers in line for the govt welfare they're calling drought relief?????

What makes you think I'm a farmer? :-?

Swagman, what you have you understand about I'mSpartacus2, is that 'he doesn't think'. He just types.

Gnads wrote on Feb 19^th, 2014 at 6:44am:

Two days a week hardly cuts it for meaningful employment. If they are going to be paid penalty rates maybe .... but I thought the push by all the Tories was to ditch penalty rates? Then if so .... those who work the weekend would be considering how much they earn(gross) reduces their dole or affects any other benefits they get.

Two days a week hardly cuts it for meaningful employment.

Particularly two day underpaid work.

Swagman wrote on Feb 19^th, 2014 at 1:32pm:

Rubin wrote on Feb 19th, 2014 at 11:45am: Two days work is better than none in a national perspective great for country. Desaster for the invidual unless the live with mum and dad or their partner earns a signifanct wage. It's still work.  It's getting people off the dole or decreasing their reliance on it, or it's supplementing family incomes. Why is this bad?

It's not bad for the rest of just the person going of the dole who now earns $500 a fortnight instead of $ 370, but looses subsidised accommodation, medicines, rego and alike so working for two days instead of the dole is admirable if you need to support yourself you're up the creek that's the reason so many opt for dole rather than part time work. Obviously part time part work is still appealing to students as a interim while studying and living at home or with a group of friends but this is not a long term options so leave the employer with big training liabilities and high staff turnover.

Swagman wrote on Feb 19^th, 2014 at 3:58pm:

What makes you think I'm a farmer? :-?

Well its just what people are saying but of course you're free to deny it.