The official IR reform thread! (1 Viewer)

Rafy

Retired
Joined
Sep 30, 2004
Messages
10,718
Gender
Female
HSC
2005
Uni Grad
2008
There's a debate next thursday at usyd on the topic of WorkChoices.

http://www.juiko.net/wosoc/images/workchoices.jpg


Topic: WorkChoices: Better for All Australians

Speakers:
Joe Hockey, Minister assisting the Minister for Workplace Relations
Bill Shorten, National Secretary of the Australian Workers Union

Moderator: Prof. Ron McCallum, Dean of Law, University of Sydney.

Thursday 5th October, 1pm.
Manning Bar, Univeristy of Sydney
Cost: Free for the general public
 
Last edited:

Rafy

Retired
Joined
Sep 30, 2004
Messages
10,718
Gender
Female
HSC
2005
Uni Grad
2008
Ruling gives low paid $27 rise

More than 1.5 million low-paid workers across Australia will get pay rises of $27.36 a week under the first ruling of the new Australian Fair Pay Commission (AFPC).

The AFPC replaced the Australian Industrial Relations Commission (AIRC) as the arbiter of the nation's minimum wage, under the Howard government's industrial reforms.

Unions had called for a $30 a week increase in minimum wages, while a social welfare group said any rise had to be at least $18.90.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/ruling-gives-low-paid-27-rise/2006/10/26/1161749228070.html

Howard hails 'genius' decision

PRIME Minister John Howard today lauded a $27 pay rise for Australia's minimum wage earners as a decision of "genius" and slammed Labor for "dishonest" attacks on his industrial relations changes.

"The Fair Pay Commission has been true to its title," Mr Howard said during a tour of drought-hit properties in western NSW.

"It has been fair in its payments for low income people.

"They have been looked after but there has also been some incentive for enterprise bargaining once you get above $700 per week.

"That's what I think is the genius of the decision.

"It is very clever economically."

Mr Howard said the decision demolished the third in what he called a dishonest trilogy of opposition criticisms about the government's new IR laws.

"There were meant to be mass sackings but instead there have been mass hirings," he told reporters.

"We were meant to have mass industrial disputes but instead there have been record low industrial disputes.

"And it was meant to drive down wages and hurt the low income people.

"Quite the reverse has happened.

"The Labor Party and the unions should hang their heads in shame for the dishonest response they have delivered to our new laws." [...]
Full Article - The Australian
 
Last edited:

ZabZu

Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2004
Messages
534
Location
Sydney
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
The decsision by the Australian Fair Pay Commission to given low-income earners a $27 pay rise was a public relations stunt aimed to disfuse the criticism of WorkChoices.

It has allowed Costello and Howard to come out and say that the commission is independent. Even though they appointed its members and most of them share the government's free-market agenda for the labour market. Also, it has allowed the government to claim Labor and the unions were wrong in believing the commission would minimise wage increases.
 

Not-That-Bright

Andrew Quah
Joined
Oct 19, 2003
Messages
12,153
Location
Sydney, Australia.
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
The decsision by the Australian Fair Pay Commission to given low-income earners a $27 pay rise was a public relations stunt aimed to disfuse the criticism of WorkChoices.
In your world, the Liberals would always be wrong. If they didn't grant the large pay rise, you'd say this is proof that they don't care about bottom-income australia. Since they did, you say it's a PR stunt and they still don't care about bottom-income Australia. Either way they were doomed.


It has allowed Costello and Howard to come out and say that the commission is independent. Even though they appointed its members and most of them share the government's free-market agenda for the labour market.
As I understand... the AIRC appointments were done through the governor general, at the instruction of the government? As for the views of the members... even if they all had similar views to the liberals, that doesn't make them any less independant.

Also, it has allowed the government to claim Labor and the unions were wrong in believing the commission would minimise wage increases.
Well so far... they have been wrong.

Time will tell whether this trend will continue.
 

Rafy

Retired
Joined
Sep 30, 2004
Messages
10,718
Gender
Female
HSC
2005
Uni Grad
2008
High Court to rule on IR challenge

THE High Court will hand down its decision on the states' challenge to federal industrial relations changes next week.

The judgment will be released in Canberra on Tuesday morning.

Several state governments and unions have challenged the Federal Government's right to use the Constitution's corporations power to abolish state IR systems and create a unified national regime.

Opposition industrial relations spokesman Stephen Smith said parties in the case were advised today that the judgment would be delivered at 10.15am on Tuesday.

"So early next week we'll get a very clear understanding from the High Court about the full extent of the Commonwealth's power," Mr Smith has said on Sky News.

"But irrespective of what the High Court decides, we won't have a so-called single uniform system.

"There'll still be some people who will fall within state jurisdictions because the Commonwealth will have power to some extent over corporations, but you'll still have Australians who are employed by state governments or by unincorporated associations or partnerships or trusts.

"So we are still going to end up with a John Howard jurisdictional dog's breakfast."

Last month, ACTU secretary Greg Combet said that if the High Court challenge failed, unions would exploit the same powers to enact change.

The NSW, Western Australian, South Australian, Queensland and Victorian governments, as well as Unions NSW and the Australian Workers Union challenged the Work Choices laws in the High Court in a hearing last May.

The Tasmanian, ACT and Northern Territory governments made contributions to the case.

The Work Choices laws passed Parliament last December and came into effect in March this year.
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,20734789-1702,00.html

http://www.smh.com.au/news/National...own-IR-decision/2006/11/10/1162661885172.html
 
Last edited:

Rafy

Retired
Joined
Sep 30, 2004
Messages
10,718
Gender
Female
HSC
2005
Uni Grad
2008
Workers to cash in unused sick leave

WORKERS will be able to cash out unused sick leave under the second round of changes designed to soften the effect of John Howard's workplace laws before next year's election.
The Government will today announce a package of amendments - most of them to satisfy concerns raised by business - on the eve of a crucial High Court ruling tomorrow that will decide the legality of its industrial relations changes.

Under today's announced amendments, employees will gain the right to cash out sick leave or carers' leave - providing it leaves full-time employees at least 15 days still available.

Workplace Relations Minister Kevin Andrews said the changes would give workers the right to cash out entitlements and address the potential for business to incur increased costs.

Employers will benefit from new provisions allowing them to stand down workers without pay who are left idle due to industrial action or natural disaster.

Record-keeping rules for business will also be relaxed so that employers will not have to record all hours worked by employees. Changes will be made to rules on the accrual of annual leave and sick leave under new minimum standards so that paid leave does not accrue for time worked in addition to a 38-hour week.

Redundancy entitlements will also be clarified. They will be protected for 12 months when a workplace agreement is terminated - unless a new one is signed in its place.

[...]
 

_dhj_

-_-
Joined
Sep 2, 2005
Messages
1,562
Location
Sydney
Gender
Male
HSC
2005
Hopefully this is a catalyst for Australians to wake up and oust Howard.
 

Raginsheep

Active Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2004
Messages
1,223
Gender
Male
HSC
2005
The more interesting thing behind all of this would be the apparent death of federalisation due to this ruling according to some.
 

frog12986

The Commonwealth
Joined
May 16, 2004
Messages
641
Location
Sydney
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
walrusbear said:
why does howard have more cred when he openly lies?
And name a politician who doesn't... spin is the name of the game, and the most successful politicians master that trait..
 

leetom

there's too many of them!
Joined
Jul 2, 2004
Messages
845
Location
Picton
Gender
Male
HSC
2006
Captain Gh3y said:
He's never lied, he has clearly just made non-core promises. And I believe him.
What an affront to our pride as electors and a people the 'non-core' promise is. A brilliant politician he may be, but Howard mocks us as an electorate with his non-core promises and mid-term surprise major legislative reforms, and any person who can tolerate such outrages is a submissive and un-democratic person.
 

leetom

there's too many of them!
Joined
Jul 2, 2004
Messages
845
Location
Picton
Gender
Male
HSC
2006
Exphate said:
Howard v Beastly,

Howard wins easy. Beazley has NO cred whatsoever. Rudd or Gillard maybe, but I cant see Australia entrusting the running of the country to a man who has been outsted from the ALP leadership a number (2?) of times.

Thats my view at least.
Your view counts for nothing.

Beazley has never been ousted from the leadership. He has stepped down after two closely contested election defeats, and lost a leadership ballot once, but was never forcibly ousted from the leadership.

In what way is Beazley not credible? What difference would Rudd or Gillard make? Beazley is a senior politician and would make a fine Prime Minister. People like you just find it trendy to bag him because he's an easy target.
 

frog12986

The Commonwealth
Joined
May 16, 2004
Messages
641
Location
Sydney
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
leetom said:
In what way is Beazley not credible? What difference would Rudd or Gillard make? Beazley is a senior politician and would make a fine Prime Minister. People like you just find it trendy to bag him because he's an easy target.
A fine Prime Minister? I'll give Beazely the credit that he is a genuinely nice man, however it's his politics that detracts..

Trendy to bag him? I think not. The most trendy form of insult is to bag or hate John Howard..

I think your signature removes any credibility on your part to judge individuals and character..
 
Last edited:

myst

New Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2003
Messages
28
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
2004
Did anyone on this thread mentioned the fact that it was the Commonwealth LABOUR GOVERNMENT that started the industrial relations reform through the facilitation of the Industrial Relations Reform Act, 1993?
The liberal government continued this with the facilation of the Workplace Relations Act 1996

Details can be found here:
http://www.australianreview.net/digest/2005/09/baird.html

It's called 'Why the states matter in industrial relations'
by:

Marian Baird, University of Sydney
Bradon Ellem, University of Sydney
Chris F. Wright, University of Sydney


This was the start of decentralisation (included reduced union power etc).

So really both political parties have been responsible for the Industrial Relations Changes to date.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top