Politics Super Thread - keep it all in here

[AndTheKungFoSing]

Yoss, is there really employers out there who expect employees to work extra hours without pay? I struggle to believe that one. To me, expecting anyone to do that is just ridiculous…. They simply wouldn't turn up the next day?!

You Work = You Get Paid... You Work Harder = You Get a Bonus.

I will say this though. Turning up at your workplace at a set time isn't working!

Have a chat to anyone who works in the Marketing world, especially junior burgers.
You don't dare ask for overtime or time in lieu. And if you complain or make any movements around unfair dismissal etc. the industry will almost certainly ensure you're made unemployable within the industry.

Incredibly unfair and part of the 'norm'.

 

[Tiger_Watto]

CB, that really makes my blood boil… If I ever found out one of my managers was doing that, well...

I see myself as a tuff boss, but I will always reward those employees who put in. As for the others, they should get paid accordingly for the dribble they deliver. Unfortunately, the governments don't see it as simple as that!

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

CB, that really makes my blood boil… If I ever found out one of my managers was doing that, well...

I see myself as a tuff boss, but I will always reward those employees who put in. As for the others, they should get paid accordingly for the dribble they deliver. Unfortunately, the governments don't see it as simple as that!

I agree that it works both ways, there are most certainly lazy people whom benefit from the protection of award rates and conditions. But it is folly to believe that businesses, irrespective of size, will follow industrial relations to the letter of the law. If you do refuse to exploit your employees I applaud you. You're definitely in the minority though. I would support reduced award wages and productivity bonuses if I knew all businesses would adhere to and enforce those rules. I know the large majority would exploit them however and there is no real way to quantify a contribution to a company and legal challenges would be rampant as a result.

 

[happy_tiger]

Watto , if you can create a good working environment that your employees get even an extra $500 -1000 a year through a bonus program which will get a better class of employee wanting to work for you

Better staff + Happy staff = better service which leads to more happy customers which leads to repeat business

Creates a whole circle which will help your businesses grow and grow on itself

 

[stryker]

I guess in a democracy the 'only the small business owner is allowed an opinion' spin doesn't apply

Explain your point better. This doesnt make sense.

Recall when John Howard, the most popular PM in a generation, lost his own seat in the backlash against Work Choices. Scaremongering? I would say it was more a case of voters feeling the balance had been tipped too far in favour of business.

You are completely wrong there. Howard lost that election for 2 reasons:

1) He was considered too old by a new generation of voters who thought they were extremely worldly because they studied at university level and had attended a contiki tour to Bali. If you dont believe me, go back through the threads and you will find a very heated debate between me and that idiot MacDougal about the election result. That clown seriously believed that only young people knew what was going on in the world….no crap it is there in black and white.

2) Because the electorate was brainwashed by a 'reality tv' styled campaign by Rudd including the horrendous "Kevin 07" tag backed up by appearances in the worst tv shows including interviews with Rove MacManus, Kyle Sandilands and Jackie O, Richard Wilkins...etc. Basically the majority of the electorate was hornswaggled beacuse they knew no better and Howard misjudged his power. He should have relinquished before the election as promised but was too stubborn to do so. Policies had zero to do with that result...it was a popularity contest pure and simple i.e. Howard was 100 years old and Rudd was the flavour of the month....Remind me again how that worked out....

Maybe the solution is for every single person in Australia to be a small business owner, that way we'd all be rich?

Usually I respect your statements enough to reply…this is nothing short of an imbicilic retort....sorry to say. You are better than that, I have nothing more to add and I am sure you understand.

 

[stryker]

Yes, because we all get dealt exactly the same cards in life :unamused:

No we dont Flip…and that has bugger all to do with it.

There are many documented cases of people who came from priviledge who turned out to be dunderheads. There are also many cases of people who came form poor backgrounds who became titans.

Blaming ones upbringing is a cop out. I know this personally.

 

[Winnipeg]

Explain your point better. This doesnt make sense.

I was referring to earlier comments [from Watto I think] asking whether another poster ran a business or not. Just pointing out that governments need to govern in the interests of everyone and not just the small business person.

You are completely wrong there. Howard lost that election for 2 reasons:

You are right that Rudd ran a campaign in which he managed the media very well. But you are wrong if you don't think Work Choices was a major factor. Brendan Nelson came out straight away as Opposition Leader saying they would 'listen and learn' from the electorate and every Liberal leader since has declared the policy dead.

Also I think it's a bit rich to complain about a scare campaign against Work Choices when the Coalition is still persisting with the mother of all scare campaigns against pricing carbon. I've been meaning to go back through the thread and dredge up some of the comments about it being a dangerous policy that will wreck us all. Does anyone want to save me the time and fess up that they might have been duped just a little?

Maybe the solution is for every single person in Australia to be a small business owner, that way we'd all be rich?

Usually I respect your statements enough to reply…this is nothing short of an imbicilic retort....sorry to say. You are better than that, I have nothing more to add and I am sure you understand.

That wasn't really directed at you, but I do apologise. It was more directed at Watto saying 'I'm saving for my own retirement, not anyone elses'.

 

[southerntiger]

Yoss, is there really employers out there who expect employees to work extra hours without pay? I struggle to believe that one. To me, expecting anyone to do that is just ridiculous…. They simply wouldn't turn up the next day?!

You Work = You Get Paid... You Work Harder = You Get a Bonus.

I will say this though. Turning up at your workplace at a set time isn't working!

Do you really believe there isnt it? When I was at university, I worked at the Industrial Relations Commissions as a part time job. Just as a court reporter. I had no ideological persuasions either way.

The cases I saw would make your hair curl. I saw both sides. However, what stuck with me was what some employers thought they could get away with.

In one case, an employer made an under performing employee clean the floor and drains with a **toothbrush**. No kidding.

In another case, the employer put the person on a four week unpaid training contract (not allowed by law) and then sacked them after the four weeks. It just happened that this was over the busy summer period.

 

[Tiger_Watto]

There is obviously some nutters out there then… As a question Southern, were the majority of the stupid stuff constructed by Managers or Owners? I can understand a Manager seeing the funny side of 'bullying' an employee, but at the end of the day, as a business owner I'd rather people be more productive.

Winnipeg, why do you perceive people who own businesses are rich? I'm far from rich and its not easy balancing the books day to day, but I suppose I get a positive result with all my hard work. This is usually a result of me working 6-7 days most weeks.

On funding ageing Australia, at the end of the day, Employer Funded Super is just another Tax placed on business. Businesses obviously pass this onto the consumer whenever possible but it gets tired having to move prices up all the time. Next time your in Coles buying your groceries and you see a couple of thier employees having a chat not working, just remember you are funding those employees retirement also!

 

[Gary_Bakerloo]

On funding ageing Australia, at the end of the day, Employer Funded Super is just another Tax placed on business. Businesses obviously pass this onto the consumer whenever possible but it gets tired having to move prices up all the time.

That is just your perception.

It may shock you, but many of the awards constructed in the 1980's (agreed between employers and unions) were actually negotiated. Compulsory superannuation was introduced, but unions/employees had to accept reduced take home pay. Since then and broadly speaking, any further increases should have been based on productivity increases (yes, I know, not entirely across the board). To say it is a tax is actually akin to saying all wages are just another tax placed on business.

Anyway, you have suggested removing minimum wages & compulsory superannuation - two of the foundations of the Australian economy that ensures a high minimum standard of living.

What's next? Remove public spending on educational facilities? Why should we have to pay for people to get an education? They should learn by themselves….

 

[Winnipeg]

Winnipeg, why do you perceive people who own businesses are rich? I'm far from rich and its not easy balancing the books day to day, but I suppose I get a positive result with all my hard work. This is usually a result of me working 6-7 days most weeks.!

I don't perceive all business owners as rich. I just don't think they need to erode workers rights any further to make a fair go of it. As a small business owner, all you need to do is give one warning, and actually have a reason to dismiss someone. That seems pretty fair to me.

I just don't agree that Labor are sticking the knife to small businesses or that things would be much better under the Coalition.
\

Next time your in Coles buying your groceries and you see a couple of thier employees having a chat not working, just remember you are funding those employees retirement also!

I'm actually OK with that.

Also re:superannuation, wealthy people or those who can save to tip a bit more into their superannuation are already given tax benefits. I don't think it would be right to punish people who can't afford to save for their retirement.

 

[Tiger_Watto]

Wages are payment for Services provided by an individual.

Employer Funded Super is a means for the government to reduce its expenditure in the future, forced upon employers to make compulsory contributions… Spin it anyway you like, but its a TAX created by Paul Keating based on his assessment that Australians are poor savers of money, and the government doesn't want to fund peoples retirement in the future.

Don't be critical of me because I don't want to fund peoples retirements... I'm no different to the government your defending?!

[As a note, most business operators were pretty quiet at the 9% mark. The plan to increase it to 12% is the deal breaker.]

 

[Gary_Bakerloo]

Don't be critical of me because I don't want to fund peoples retirements… I'm no different to the government your defending?!

How am I defending a government? I am defending the superannuation system, a system both sides of politics endorse.

From wikipedia:

_The change came about through a **tripartite** agreement between the government, employers and the trade unions. The trade unions **agreed to forego a national 3% pay increase** which would be put into the new superannuation system for all employees in Australia. This was matched by employers contributions which were set to increase over time to a proposed 12%. Subsequent changes meant this has been capped at the lower employer rate of 9%._

Although, you are still fighting away….

_Though there is general widespread support for compulsory superannuation today, it was met with strong resistance by small business groups at the time of its introduction who were fearful of the burden associated with its implementation and its ongoing costs._

Further, almost every developed country has identical issues:

1\. Lack of private retirement funding, be it through low levels of defined contribution amounts and/or unfunded defined benefit schemes and;
2\. Lack of engagement of citizens and their retirement funding.

To state that it was introduced based on "Keating's assessment that Australians are poor savers" is completely naive. Australia has and continues to retain, one of the highest levels of engagement amongst its citizens for investing for retirement.

We are actually lucky enough to be further down the path of resolving pension shortfalls. Other countries such as say Europe for example, or in particular those with predominantly defined benefit schemes, are in much more trouble than Australia. Can only imagine how many kittens you would you have had if you had to pay defined benefits to your retired employees!

 

[Winnipeg]

Wages are payment for Services provided by an individual.

Employer Funded Super is a means for the government to reduce its expenditure in the future, forced upon employers to make compulsory contributions… Spin it anyway you like, but its a TAX created by Paul Keating based on his assessment that Australians are poor savers of money, and the government doesn't want to fund peoples retirement in the future.

Don't be critical of me because I don't want to fund peoples retirements... I'm no different to the government your defending?!

[As a note, most business operators were pretty quiet at the 9% mark. The plan to increase it to 12% is the deal breaker.]

where does the government get its cash from? tax. from us.

either pay now in super, or pay later in higher taxes. [or maybe shoot pensioners when they reach 70 or something]

don't forget the superannuation pool provides capital for investment

 

[Tiger_Watto]

Wages are payment for Services provided by an individual.

Employer Funded Super is a means for the government to reduce its expenditure in the future, forced upon employers to make compulsory contributions… Spin it anyway you like, but its a TAX created by Paul Keating based on his assessment that Australians are poor savers of money, and the government doesn't want to fund peoples retirement in the future.

Don't be critical of me because I don't want to fund peoples retirements... I'm no different to the government your defending?!

[As a note, most business operators were pretty quiet at the 9% mark. The plan to increase it to 12% is the deal breaker.]

where does the government get its cash from? tax. from us.

either pay now in super, or pay later in higher taxes. [or maybe shoot pensioners when they reach 70 or something]

don't forget the superannuation pool provides capital for investment

:laughing: 70 a bit tough… maybe 80?! :laughing:

 

[Winnipeg]

I know this is a bit more 'big picture' than what we've discussing, but I think it's a fairly telling graphic
\
\

 

[Kul]

An oldie, but a goodie:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ckcH0Wrmy74

Tony Abbott:"If you want to put a price on carbon why not just do it with a simple tax. Why not ask motorists to pay more?
Why not ask electricity consumers to pay more?

And then at the end of the year, you can take your invoices to the tax office and get a rebate on the carbon tax you paid.

It would be burdensome, all taxes are burdensome, but it would certainly change the price on carbon, raise the price of carbon without increasing in any way the overall tax burden."

lol :roll

 

[Winnipeg]

you are looking at our next Prime Minister [unless Rudd gets a few months :wink: ]

The public does not seem too concerned that he is a record breaking manure salesman.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-02-26/hockey-backtracks-on-carbon-tax-compensation/4540706

Abbott says:

"We believe in incentives. We don't believe in penalties,"

whereas his policy says:

"Businesses that undertake activity with an emissions level above their business-as-usual levels will incur a financial penalty."

 

[Winnipeg]

and then of course there is this

was this a broken guarantee from Greg Hunt, or a lie to begin with? or is he incompetent?


 

[cktiger]

and then of course there is this

was this a broken guarantee from Greg Hunt, or a lie to begin with? or is he incompetent?


China (one of the world's great polluters) will only be replacing its pollution tax with their version of the carbon tax .
They will charge the princely sum of $1.50 a tonne - ours is $23 a tonne.
Nice effort.