The official IR reform thread! (1 Viewer)

[MoonlightSonata]

http://www.smh.com.au/ffximage/2005/05/27/cartsat_gallery__550x372,0.jpg

 

[Rafy]

The less regulation the better.

These reforms are long overdue. Flexibility is needed in the IR system.

btw Unions have had their day.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

http://www.smh.com.au/ffximage/2005/05/27/cartsat_gallery__550x372,0.jpg

interesting he picked chickens v fox,
a group of chickens v fox = bunch of dead chickens,
every chicken for its self = a few dead, a few alive.

 

[Aznpsycho]

This reform regarding the unfair dismissal laws might be alright for small businesses, as they tend to have disproportionally low profits compared to a larger business. However, considering how they changed the definition of a small business (from under 20 to under 100 employees), it sounds practically inefficient. After all, once you have about 100 people in your company, its hardly small, you'll have multimillion dollar turnovers Plus, this covers alot of businesses in Australia, so it's a huge amount of employees who have just lost rights they had previously.

I do not like this because of the even more pressures placed on employees (which has already endured economic rationalisation). Plus, it sounds too rather suss, if you're into the tinfoil hat-wearing community...

Please forgive any errors in this. I only did commerce up to year 10, and Legal Studies in year 11. I read around, and also hope that this thread doesn't get completely and utterly derailed.

 

[MoonlightSonata]

The less regulation the better.

These reforms are long overdue. Flexibility is needed in the IR system.

btw Unions have had their day.

Well that doesn't really say much. For example:

"The more regulation the better.

These reforms are not necessary. More flexibility is not needed in the IR system.

btw Unions have not had their day."

...doesn't add anything meaningful

 

[Generator]

I must say, in what way have the unions had their day? Are you trying to suggest that the employees of Australia are in no need of representation?

 

[Not-That-Bright]

Unions belong in large companies, mining, farming, etc...

Unions don't belong meddling around with small businesses.

 

[Generator]

Unions belong in large companies, mining, farming, etc...

Unions don't belong meddling around with small businesses.

So are those employees in no need of representation? Are they merely meant to work (and possibly suffer) at the whim of their employers?

We are all in need of representation, be you a student, small business worker or employer.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

I think that AWA's work good for small businesses, the only problem is that workers sometimes don't have the understanding/ability to negotiate this AWA and perhaps there should be some sort of body to help them with that.

 

[Sarah]

As to random firing, employees and employers still have contractual agreements. You can't just breach them on a whim. If there are discretionary termination clauses in the contracts then you will be aware of them before entering into them.

Well actually, not all employees are aware of their statutory and award rights. You'll find that employers change clauses in employment contracts offered to employees. Employees aren't aware of this because they assume the agreement complies with the award for the industry or they don't take time to research what their award entitles them.

 

[Sarah]

I think that AWA's work good for small businesses, the only problem is that workers sometimes don't have the understanding/ability to negotiate this AWA and perhaps there should be some sort of body to help them with that.

AWAs lodged go through the Office of the Employment Advocate. They means test it to the industry award to ensure the employee won't be disadvantaged (in comparison to the award) under the AWA.

 

[MoonlightSonata]

Well actually, not all employees are aware of their statutory and award rights. You'll find that employers change clauses in employment contracts offered to employees. Employees aren't aware of this because they assume the agreement complies with the award for the industry or they don't take time to research what their award entitles them.

Isn't that their own fault?

 

[Sarah]

Isn't that their own fault?

Who were you referring to? Employers or employees?

If your referring to whether it's the employees own fault that they don't know what they're entitled to, well you're right. But not all employees will go and investigate what their entitled to.

For example, i've been employed as a casual in customer service. I have only signed a letter of employment but i've never sought to find out what my award entitlements are and i havne't seen a copy of the award which covers my indyustry. I'm almost certain that none of my work mates have or will seek out what their award covers.

However, becuase it;s been publicised, i think more employees will now.

 

[Xayma]

Sarah: You can't cater for those who don't research their rights/responsibilities.

If I didn't look up a law for murder and committed it, the justice system shouldn't be set up in a way to protect me because I didn't know.

 

[Generator]

Sarah: You can't cater for those who don't research their rights/responsibilities.

If I didn't look up a law for murder and committed it, the justice system shouldn't be set up in a way to protect me because I didn't know.

What is it with this forum and extreme and often irrelevant examples?

You may not be able to cater for such people, but safeguards should exist (such as standardised awards and the like). Funnily enough, we all aren't that bright and/or worried about more than the rate of pay, and there is a need to ensure that such exploitation does not occur.

 

[Xayma]

What is it with this forum and extreme and often irrelevant examples?

You may not be able to cater for such people, but safeguards should exist (such as standardised awards and the like). Funnily enough, we all aren't that bright and/or worried about more than the rate of pay, and there is a need to ensure that such exploitation does not occur.

Standardised awards do partially do that, however, as sarah mentioned she has no idea what is in her award presently (and it is most likely standardised).

Thats the main benefit of unions I see is that, they can offer help in understanding awards. However the standardisation of awards disadvantages some.

Should people be exploited? Of course not. They should be paid what they and their employer believe is a fair price. Unions would often be able to help with what is a fair price, by offering an informed view.

But should other people be disadvantaged to ensure that those others are not exploited (I'm not talking about more expensive sweaters, or bosses having to pay more, but co-workers and the like)? Not necessairly.

 

[Monkey Butler]

You could say the same about all the issues in our country, but it's never that simple. If it was, there would be no cycle of poverty, because people would aspire to greater things, and would actually do something to get out of that cycle, rather than just squeezing out too many kids, pissing away their money and condemning their children, and their children's children to exactly the same fate. There has to be some level of protection.

 

[absolution*]

You could say the same about all the issues in our country, but it's never that simple. If it was, there would be no cycle of poverty, because people would aspire to greater things, and would actually do something to get out of that cycle, rather than just squeezing out too many kids, pissing away their money and condemning their children, and their children's children to exactly the same fate. There has to be some level of protection.

Geeeez mang, just wait til i get you on Today Tonight.

 

[Sarah]

Standardised awards do partially do that, however, as sarah mentioned she has no idea what is in her award presently (and it is most likely standardised).

Ok i'm aware of what pay rate i should be getting, when my breaks should be, what the expected hours of work are. I'm a casual so i don't get holiday leave, sick leave etc.

Thats the main benefit of unions I see is that, they can offer help in understanding awards. However the standardisation of awards disadvantages some.

How does it disadvantage some people?

Should people be exploited? Of course not. They should be paid what they and their employer believe is a fair price. Unions would often be able to help with what is a fair price, by offering an informed view.

But should other people be disadvantaged to ensure that those others are not exploited (I'm not talking about more expensive sweaters, or bosses having to pay more, but co-workers and the like)? Not necessairly.

That's why there's enterprise bargaining and AWA's.

 

[Generator]

Same rights, but it may cost more to keep. An interesting opinion piece written by a Sydney lawyer specialising in employment law.