Gillard's IR laws - The Unions to rule again! (1 Viewer)

[Nebuchanezzar]

stfu 09

 

[impervious182]

No, it's balancing the relationship.

No it's not.

 

[Trefoil]

No it's not.

Greats argument there, Hans.

 

[impervious182]

Greats argument there, Hans.

lol. Well to be quite frank, I can't argue for or against on my own. The reason I believe that these new IR laws will unbalance the relationship between employer and employee, giving increased power to unions is because Gillard is an ex-union lawyer and many MPs used to run unions.

However essentially, the main reason why I feel this way, is because coalition lawyers (see the link in my first post), now report that it will 'allow pattern bargaining.' (article in the Australian)

Feel free to read through the 600 + page report if you wish to contradict me... but I've looked through and it's not entirely clear.

 

[Nebuchanezzar]

THESE THINGS ARE ALL INHERENTLY BAD

In conclusion communism

 

[ASNSWR127]

ah reds under the bed!!

which little scared scrotum came up with this thread?? you are so weak...

 

[Trefoil]

ah reds under the bed!!

which little scared scrotum came up with this thread?? you are so weak...

That would be alexdores.

 

[spiny norman]

The reason I believe that these new IR laws will unbalance the relationship between employer and employee, giving increased power to unions is because Gillard is an ex-union lawyer and many MPs used to run unions.

Well many Coalition MPs used to work for law firms that would often represent managers of large corporations in legal disputes, so who can you trust?

 

[impervious182]

Well many Coalition MPs used to work for law firms that would often represent managers of large corporations in legal disputes, so who can you trust?

Neither. I trust the relatively independent lawyers. Not so many vested interests as political parties.

 

[Trefoil]

Neither. I trust the relatively independent lawyers. Not so many vested interests as political parties.

lol.

 

[impervious182]

lol.

 

[chicky_pie]

It did not benefit employees in any way the liberal party may have sold it the way using the name Work "Choices", enterprise bargaining is the most balanced method of workplace negotiations as it allows equal representation at the bargaining table, the employer and the union.



You are not intelligent. Every time I dominate you with my superior logic and reasoning you come back with a silly statement, or you show you inability to comprehend my sophisticated articulation of argument by stating that I should reword everything in basic english.

Please, stop using jargon throughout your posts.

 

[jb_nc]

No it's not.

You also believe about 50 000 other crazy things so your opinion is worth as much as a hole in the head.

 

[impervious182]

You also believe about 50 000 other crazy things so your opinion is worth as much as a hole in the head.

Says the believer in a 9-11 conspiracy? Don't make me laugh.

It would also, probably be apt to remind you, that this isn't just my opinion. It is also the opinion of an independent group of lawyers (i.e. not in any party) who read over and interpreted the IR laws.

 

[jb_nc]

Says the believer in a 9-11 conspiracy? Don't make me laugh/

lol you're a fucking idiot

It would also, probably be apt to remind you, that this isn't just my opinion. It is also the opinion of an independent group of lawyers (i.e. not in any party) who read over and interpreted the IR laws.

AN

INDEPENDENT GROUP

OF

LAWYERS

WHO PRACTICE LAW

IN THE LEGAL SYSTEM

RELATING OR PERTAINING TO LEGALITY

TOLD ME THIS

you dumb cunt

 

[jb_nc]

FREEHILLS PTY LTD -
Urgent Release to the media Friday 5 December 2008 2 pm.

A GROUP of independent lawyers have reviewed and interpreted Ayn Rand's "Atlas Shrugged" and determined the content to be a salute to socialism and author to be a communist on the 'down low'.

More to follow soon.

 

[boris]

Erhm, it would be also, probably be apt, hrm, to remind you, that henceforth--*strokes neckbeard*--that this isn't just my opinion. It is also, heh, you may have read the article?? No, I didn't think so you uneducated swine-- the group of an independent lawyers who form part of Freehills (maybe you have heard of them, lol, probably not, they do all my work for me, heh) which don't have any, heh, vested interests whatsoever. Let me just reiterate what independent means for you stupid cunts who think "poors" or "faggots" should have "rights"; they are NOT in any political party. And they READ, yeah, that's right, some non-poors can read and INTERPRETED -- yeah, in the only way possible -- the IR laws.

*wildly smirks while hitting the post button*



*faggots*

Oh hi there Mr. Spack, who spacked over a spacky spack with the King of the Spacks, Mr Alexdore993.

 

[impervious182]

Erhm, it would be also, probably be apt, hrm, to remind you, that henceforth--*strokes neckbeard*--that this isn't just my opinion. It is also, heh, you may have read the article?? No, I didn't think so you uneducated swine-- the group of an independent lawyers who form part of Freehills (maybe you have heard of them, lol, probably not, they do all my work for me, heh) which don't have any, heh, vested interests whatsoever. Let me just reiterate what independent means for you stupid cunts who think "poors" or "faggots" should have "rights"; they are NOT in any political party. And they READ, yeah, that's right, some non-poors can read and INTERPRETED -- yeah, in the only way possible -- the IR laws.

*wildly smirks while hitting the post button*



*faggots*

Wow. I think that you should try using sentences. Also, I am verbose in nature, but your writing is so convolulted it's near impossible to understand.

Erm... and yeah they did read and interpret the IR laws. If you weren't aware, the laws are open to interpretation and it becomes difficult for those amongst us, who aren't lawyers, to accurately gauge the legal ramifications of a document, when we don't study law.

So why don't you just go to another thread - perhaps one on a 9-11 conspiracy - after all, you seem to have quite a strong opinion on that.

 

[jb_nc]

Wow. I think that you should try using sentences. Also, I am verbose in nature, but your writing is so convulted it's near impossible to understand.

Hey faggot, you spelt "convoluted" and "ramifications" wrong you dumb cunt.

Erm... and yeah they did read and interpret the IR laws. If you weren't aware, the laws are open to interpretation and it becomes difficult for those amongst us, who aren't lawyers, to accurately gauge the legal ramnifications of a document, when we don't study law.

One law firm, to make a DECISION, to decide them all relating to all the laws in the land.

So why don't you just go to another thread - perhaps one on a 9-11 conspiracy - after all, you seem to have quite a strong opinion on that.

YEAH

I REALLY BELIEVE IN A 9-11 CONSPIRACY

Do you have Asperger's Syndrome? U spergin son?

 

[boris]

When did this thread become slashdot?

who cares, it was a fucking fail thread anyway