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


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:



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.

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

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


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:


Quote:


Quote:


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

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?

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


Nope.  Just biased opinions and as usual no proof.

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


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

Quote:


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


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:


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:


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:


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:


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.