Australian Politics Forum - The Push For Fees For Non-Union Members

freediver

Gold Member

Online

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49281
At my desk.

Re: The Push For Fees For Non-Union Members
Reply #15 - Jan 23^rd, 2023 at 12:10pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2023 at 11:51am:

freediver wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2023 at 11:30am:

All we need is for grappler to start calling them scabs, and we will have gone through the entire repertoire of union recruitment. Again.

No need for name calling, or forcing people to join a union, or forcing them to pay other fees.

Let's be civil.

The solution is simple: union members get union-won entitlements, and non-members don't.

Only Medibank Private members get Medibank Private benefits. Yeah?

So, only union members should get union-won benefits.

I don't see how any reasonable person can be opposed to this simple, fair solution.

Sure. After all, most non-union members earn more anyway. The unions would have no trouble recruiting if they actually benefitted their members, rather than trying to claim credit for the sun coming up in the morning.

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 138740
Gender: male

Re: The Push For Fees For Non-Union Members
Reply #16 - Jan 23^rd, 2023 at 12:19pm

freediver wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2023 at 12:10pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2023 at 11:51am:

freediver wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2023 at 11:30am:

All we need is for grappler to start calling them scabs, and we will have gone through the entire repertoire of union recruitment. Again.

No need for name calling, or forcing people to join a union, or forcing them to pay other fees.

Let's be civil.

The solution is simple: union members get union-won entitlements, and non-members don't.

Only Medibank Private members get Medibank Private benefits. Yeah?

So, only union members should get union-won benefits.

I don't see how any reasonable person can be opposed to this simple, fair solution.

Sure. After all, most non-union members earn more anyway. The unions would have no trouble recruiting if they actually benefitted their members, rather than trying to claim credit for the sun coming up in the morning.

You don't see annual leave, sick pay, meal breaks, superannuation, maternity leave, penalty rates, etc. as benefits?

Back to top

IP Logged

Captain Caveman

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6211
Gender: male

Re: The Push For Fees For Non-Union Members
Reply #17 - Jan 23^rd, 2023 at 12:22pm

freediver wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2023 at 12:10pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2023 at 11:51am:

freediver wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2023 at 11:30am:

All we need is for grappler to start calling them scabs, and we will have gone through the entire repertoire of union recruitment. Again.

No need for name calling, or forcing people to join a union, or forcing them to pay other fees.

Let's be civil.

The solution is simple: union members get union-won entitlements, and non-members don't.

Only Medibank Private members get Medibank Private benefits. Yeah?

So, only union members should get union-won benefits.

I don't see how any reasonable person can be opposed to this simple, fair solution.

Sure. After all, most non-union members earn more anyway. The unions would have no trouble recruiting if they actually benefitted their members, rather than trying to claim credit for the sun coming up in the morning.

Yeah, not in construction champ.

Back to top

IP Logged

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 138740
Gender: male

Re: The Push For Fees For Non-Union Members
Reply #18 - Jan 23^rd, 2023 at 12:26pm

freediver wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2023 at 12:10pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2023 at 11:51am:

freediver wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2023 at 11:30am:

All we need is for grappler to start calling them scabs, and we will have gone through the entire repertoire of union recruitment. Again.

No need for name calling, or forcing people to join a union, or forcing them to pay other fees.

Let's be civil.

The solution is simple: union members get union-won entitlements, and non-members don't.

Only Medibank Private members get Medibank Private benefits. Yeah?

So, only union members should get union-won benefits.

I don't see how any reasonable person can be opposed to this simple, fair solution.

Sure. After all, most non-union members earn more anyway.

"The evidence for union wage premium come from the Australian Bureau of Statistics, which shows that union members have median weekly earnings from their main job that are 32% more than for non-members."

Back to top

IP Logged

Jasin

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 49141
Gender: male

Re: The Push For Fees For Non-Union Members
Reply #19 - Jan 23^rd, 2023 at 12:26pm

Captain Caveman wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2023 at 12:02pm:

Jasin wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2023 at 11:52am:

Push to have all Unionists offer up their wives, sisters and daughters to provide pussy towards Australian non-unionist workers and their endeavour to provide Australia with a self-sufficient population growth.

So you still want to scab off union members?

Like Unionists scabbing off Workers?

Back to top

AIMLESS EXTENTION OF KNOWLEDGE HOWEVER, WHICH IS WHAT I THINK YOU REALLY MEAN BY THE TERM 'CURIOSITY', IS MERELY INEFFICIENCY. I AM DESIGNED TO AVOID INEFFICIENCY.

IP Logged

Jasin

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 49141
Gender: male

Re: The Push For Fees For Non-Union Members
Reply #20 - Jan 23^rd, 2023 at 12:28pm

Captain Caveman wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2023 at 12:22pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2023 at 12:10pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2023 at 11:51am:

freediver wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2023 at 11:30am:

All we need is for grappler to start calling them scabs, and we will have gone through the entire repertoire of union recruitment. Again.

No need for name calling, or forcing people to join a union, or forcing them to pay other fees.

Let's be civil.

The solution is simple: union members get union-won entitlements, and non-members don't.

Only Medibank Private members get Medibank Private benefits. Yeah?

So, only union members should get union-won benefits.

I don't see how any reasonable person can be opposed to this simple, fair solution.

Sure. After all, most non-union members earn more anyway. The unions would have no trouble recruiting if they actually benefitted their members, rather than trying to claim credit for the sun coming up in the morning.

Yeah, not in construction champ.

What? Sh*itty Commercial jobs that no tradie would want unless desperate for the work. Crap tradies do the commercial unionised jobs.

Back to top

AIMLESS EXTENTION OF KNOWLEDGE HOWEVER, WHICH IS WHAT I THINK YOU REALLY MEAN BY THE TERM 'CURIOSITY', IS MERELY INEFFICIENCY. I AM DESIGNED TO AVOID INEFFICIENCY.

IP Logged

Gnads

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 29830
Gender: male

Re: The Push For Fees For Non-Union Members
Reply #21 - Jan 23^rd, 2023 at 12:34pm

Lisa Jones wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2023 at 8:40am:

Gnads wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2023 at 8:04am:

That would upset all the non contributing leaning scabs that now infest the workplace.....

they take the money, the conditions & benefits and never batt an eyelid of guilt

the lowest of the lowest common denominators.

https://amp.smh.com.au/politics/federal/top-state-unionists-push-actu-on-fees-fo...

Gnads - I'm not happy with you this morning.

What you're REALLY saying is this : If I can't do my job in recruiting more members (mind you I myself command an obscene salary) I should be protected by law so I can go about punishing those who refuse to become members to the tune of $550 per annum???

You do realise that Keating, Rudd and Gillard thought this wasn't right.

So why do YOU think it is?

Especially NOW .... right off the back of an unresolved global pandemic driven recession with rising inflation and rising interest rates?

Like I actually give a rats arse.... seriously?

When I first entered the Railways in 1973 I joined the relevant Union after I was shown exactly what Unionism had bought to the workplace for the benefit of all employees.

Any fair minded person could see the reasoning there.

At that time anyone who chose not to, objected to & refused to join a Union relevant to their classification (there were many classifications in a railway) would have an equivalent amount of money to their applicable Union dues deducted from their pay every fortnight by the Employer to be given to a nominated charity.

It was a good idea & a fair result for all. Even the employer realised that.

It only changed when slimey Johnny Howard got into the seat in 1996.

Opened the door to all the leaners & scabs who are prepared to take & not contribute - Jasins testament to that.

The same sort of people that come running looking for Union assistance when they think they have been wronged by their employer.

8 hr day, 5 day week - now a 38 hr week, annual leave, sick leave, maternity leave, compassionate leave, cultural leave, meal breaks,workplace health & safety, superannuation, workplace amenities, reasonable hours of work etc. etc.

All part of what Unions have won for their members & not one bit of that was ever given freely out of the goodness of their hearts to workers by employers.

Regarding your 1st paragraph .... don't tell me you're a Union Rep? None that I know are on or commanding obscene salaries.

$550 per annum = $21.15 per fortnight.

The Union dues as Locomotive Driver of my former Union the RTBU is
$29.40 per fortnight = $764.40 per annum.

Other Unions & occupations there covered have much higher dues.

So $550 is a more than reasonable contribution.

Otherwise those who chose not to should forgo any of the above mentioned workplace wages & conditions negotiated & won by Unions.

Other Unions are higher

Back to top

« Last Edit: Jan 23^rd, 2023 at 12:44pm by Gnads »

"When you are dead, you do not know you are dead. It's only painful and difficult for others. The same applies when you are stupid." ~ Ricky Gervais

IP Logged

Gnads Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 29830 Gender:	Re: The Push For Fees For Non-Union Members Reply #22 - Jan 23^rd, 2023 at 12:37pm Frank wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2023 at 11:10am: The entitlements are granted by the employer, not the union. Absolutely, positively, indubitably 100% incorrect.
Back to top	"When you are dead, you do not know you are dead. It's only painful and difficult for others. The same applies when you are stupid." ~ Ricky Gervais IP Logged

Gnads Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 29830 Gender:	Re: The Push For Fees For Non-Union Members Reply #23 - Jan 23^rd, 2023 at 12:38pm Jasin wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2023 at 11:20am: Unionism is a Gay Movement. You obsessing over homosexuality again Scab?
Back to top	"When you are dead, you do not know you are dead. It's only painful and difficult for others. The same applies when you are stupid." ~ Ricky Gervais IP Logged

Gnads Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 29830 Gender:	Re: The Push For Fees For Non-Union Members Reply #24 - Jan 23^rd, 2023 at 12:38pm Jasin wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2023 at 11:52am: Push to have all Unionists offer up their wives, sisters and daughters to provide pussy towards Australian non-unionist workers and their endeavour to provide Australia with a self-sufficient population growth. Idiot
Back to top	"When you are dead, you do not know you are dead. It's only painful and difficult for others. The same applies when you are stupid." ~ Ricky Gervais IP Logged

Gnads

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 29830
Gender: male

Re: The Push For Fees For Non-Union Members
Reply #25 - Jan 23^rd, 2023 at 12:40pm

freediver wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2023 at 12:10pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2023 at 11:51am:

freediver wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2023 at 11:30am:

All we need is for grappler to start calling them scabs, and we will have gone through the entire repertoire of union recruitment. Again.

No need for name calling, or forcing people to join a union, or forcing them to pay other fees.

Let's be civil.

The solution is simple: union members get union-won entitlements, and non-members don't.

Only Medibank Private members get Medibank Private benefits. Yeah?

So, only union members should get union-won benefits.

I don't see how any reasonable person can be opposed to this simple, fair solution.

Sure. After all, most non-union members earn more anyway. The unions would have no trouble recruiting if they actually benefitted their members, rather than trying to claim credit for the sun coming up in the morning.

Another one who is 100% incorrect again.

Back to top

"When you are dead, you do not know you are dead. It's only painful and difficult for others. The same applies when you are stupid." ~ Ricky Gervais

IP Logged

Gnads

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 29830
Gender: male

Re: The Push For Fees For Non-Union Members
Reply #26 - Jan 23^rd, 2023 at 12:41pm

Jasin wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2023 at 12:26pm:

Captain Caveman wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2023 at 12:02pm:

Jasin wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2023 at 11:52am:

Push to have all Unionists offer up their wives, sisters and daughters to provide pussy towards Australian non-unionist workers and their endeavour to provide Australia with a self-sufficient population growth.

So you still want to scab off union members?

Like Unionists scabbing off Workers?

Doesn't happen ... you're the leaner & scab

that is when you actually have employment.

Back to top

"When you are dead, you do not know you are dead. It's only painful and difficult for others. The same applies when you are stupid." ~ Ricky Gervais

IP Logged

Gnads

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 29830
Gender: male

Re: The Push For Fees For Non-Union Members
Reply #27 - Jan 23^rd, 2023 at 12:42pm

Jasin wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2023 at 12:28pm:

Captain Caveman wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2023 at 12:22pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2023 at 12:10pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2023 at 11:51am:

freediver wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2023 at 11:30am:

All we need is for grappler to start calling them scabs, and we will have gone through the entire repertoire of union recruitment. Again.

No need for name calling, or forcing people to join a union, or forcing them to pay other fees.

Let's be civil.

The solution is simple: union members get union-won entitlements, and non-members don't.

Only Medibank Private members get Medibank Private benefits. Yeah?

So, only union members should get union-won benefits.

I don't see how any reasonable person can be opposed to this simple, fair solution.

Sure. After all, most non-union members earn more anyway. The unions would have no trouble recruiting if they actually benefitted their members, rather than trying to claim credit for the sun coming up in the morning.

Yeah, not in construction champ.

What? Sh*itty Commercial jobs that no tradie would want unless desperate for the work. Crap tradies do the commercial unionised jobs.

You're not a tradie

you wouldn't know shyte from clay

Back to top

"When you are dead, you do not know you are dead. It's only painful and difficult for others. The same applies when you are stupid." ~ Ricky Gervais

IP Logged

Jasin

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 49141
Gender: male

Re: The Push For Fees For Non-Union Members
Reply #28 - Jan 23^rd, 2023 at 12:44pm

So Gonads - do you think that Registered Nurses who just push a Medicine Trolley around in an Aged Care Facility of a boring General Ward should NOT be paid the same amount of money as RN's who work in Emergency and other busier departments?
Are those ACF and GW Nurses 'scabs' who get the same money as harder working Nurses?

Call me bludger, scab, etc all you like.
I'm not going to make my private life available to your exploitation. You must think I'm stupid? Roll Eyes

You get wrong'uns and googlies from me only.

The mere coercive manipulation of calling Workers as 'non'-union members shows the corrupt intentions of the Unions.
Workers are workers, they are not 'non'-member to anything else.
The only Scab in this country is the Unions as they wave their Yankee Eureka Flag and have stickers of Cop-Killer Terrorist Ned Kelly as their hero.

Back to top

AIMLESS EXTENTION OF KNOWLEDGE HOWEVER, WHICH IS WHAT I THINK YOU REALLY MEAN BY THE TERM 'CURIOSITY', IS MERELY INEFFICIENCY. I AM DESIGNED TO AVOID INEFFICIENCY.

IP Logged

greggerypeccary Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 138740 Gender:	Re: The Push For Fees For Non-Union Members Reply #29 - Jan 23^rd, 2023 at 12:51pm Union members earn 32% more than non-members per week. Here’s why. The data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics clearly shows that union membership equals higher pay, no matter which way you cut it. This is because of a combination of the benefits of union membership
Back to top	IP Logged