PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Jet Blast (https://www.pprune.org/jet-blast-16/)
-   -   War in Australia (any Oz Politics): the Original (https://www.pprune.org/jet-blast/477678-war-australia-any-oz-politics-original.html)

Fliegenmong 30th Jan 2014 10:15

Now the precedence has been set by the government green lighting Toyota and SPC to re-negotiate their employees EBA's, it's only a matter of time until qantas cry foul and get the go ahead as well..

You wreck a company with poor decisions and terrible business ventures, but you can now directly blame the employees work conditions & pay and lower them.

What part of "agreement" is not being understood?

____________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________

Industry Minister Ian Macfarlane has described the decision as a "defining point" for the future of government assistance.
"I think it is a clear delineation of where this Government believes we need to go with industry policy," Mr Macfarlane said.
Mr Abbott has urged the company to renegotiate its workplace agreement, saying some aspects are "extremely generous" and need to be changed.
"The existing agreement contains conditions and provisions which are well in excess of the award," Mr Abbott said, pointing to the redundancy and sick leave provisions.
"This does need to be very extensively renegotiated if this restructure is to be completed.
"As SPC and Coca-Cola go about this renegotiation, they'll certainly have the support of government in doing so."

Ahhhh, what happened to the recent precedential breach of the Fair Work Act??????

Ahhhh, sh!t happens doesn't it, anyway, we wont give you any monetary assistance but we will help you nail the workers......

It may be timely to remind ourselves, a 3% p.a increase in remuneration is a real world pay freeze and ultimately a cut in Australia. Most Australians have had there wages frozen in real world terms since Howard was a boy.

____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ _____

Work Choices by stealth

Before the election Labor claimed (hysterically I thought at the time) that Abbott would re-institute a form of Work Choices. After Howard was dumped for W.C. I am astonished that the current government could be so tone deaf as to even opine on worker's pay and conditions.

I am glad that Coca-Cola is going to miss some of my tax dollars, but I am less than amused at this re-visiting of awards. I hope the unions require full forensic accounting and get to make public all salary, bonuses, expenses and other considerations of every board member, executive, manager etc.

As far as the twats that continue to claim that Australian airline employees are too generously paid...get out more and see what other airlines pay compared to what their tax rates and cost of living are. This is a high-cost country so living wages need to be correspondingly non-trivial.

And the fact that Jetstar pays less should not then define a new benchmark. Cobham pays less: should their rates become the new normal? I once flew (very briefly) with a guy who volunteered that he would do it for free. If they could only find another 1,600 like HIM we could all get some sleep.

Did that work that time??

Edited to say that yes it did appear to work that time..paste that is, without 16 images or whatever...

RJM 30th Jan 2014 10:31

500N and others..

500N mentioned the $600 million cost of keeping 20,000 asylum seekers on $250 per week for a year.

It is a vast sum, which could be spent elsewhere, but here are some more figures to put it in perspective.

The total value of goods and services generated each year (ie the gross domestic product) by Australia is 1,600,000 million dollars, ie 1.6 trillion, a trillion being a million millions.

The world's annual GDP is 73 trillion. The USA's GDP is 16 trillion; China is second with 8 trillion and we are 12th with our 1.6 trillion, with Canada ranked above us and Spain below.

Each year, the Australian federal government has about 400,000 million, or .4 of a trillion dollars, or one quarter of our GDP to spend, put aside or whatever. That sum is known as our annual budget. It works out to about $18,000 per head of population.

So the asylum seekers' $600 million is a bit less than 1/600th of the government's budget.

To put it another way, if you are earning $80,000 per year, or say $1,600 per week before tax, the asylum seekers' $600 million would be equivalent to $2.40 per week.

That's not to say $600 million isn't outrageous, but it does show why politicians, who see enormous numbers all day every day, shrug a bit at a 'mere' $600 million per year.

From the Left's point of view, it may even be cheap compared to the compassionate/S H-Y type votes it buys, if you want to be cynical.

To change the subject, don't shed any tears over the constant and deserved parodying and pillorying of S H-Y. Having been elected twice, she will hit the magic eight years and when she retires or gets the boot she will get half of her final base salary (presently $195,000 pa) indexed for life, putting her in the top 10% of Australian incomes - $2,000 a week - from a grateful nation without getting out of bed. With allowances, she's on about $300,000 pa now. Not bad for an ex-bank teller. I don't know who else would pay her anything like that for her 'skill set'. Thus a few terms in parliament is the fast track to a privileged life for the lucky players, including those of the socialist Left like S H-Y. 'To each according to their needs; from each...' I wonder if S H-Y will give up much of her retirement income to those more needy than herself?

SOPS 30th Jan 2014 10:34

RJM,your last paragraph has made me feel very ill.:yuk:

RJM 30th Jan 2014 10:42

I felt a bit crook writing it.

Ken Borough 30th Jan 2014 11:03


Didn't the super benefits for pollies change as a result of pressure applied to JWH by Mark Latham. I recall that recent entrants to the parliament have a Govt contribution of just 9% (or whatever is the compulsory contribution). As a result, the final benefit is quite meagre when compared with those who have infested the place for quite a while. I further recall that some of the younger ones made submissions to the Remuneration Tribunal for a larger salary increase as a result of the lower super payouts. Yes, it is enough to make you want to :yuk: for they have not the slightest vestige of shame!


Thanks. Everyone is blessed with the grey matter to attend University. Some do but shouldn't but many who should, don't - this is a great shame. The main thing is that one should be content and happy with their lot. During my professional life, I worked with many graduates. Some you really wouldn't want to feed while others were a sheer joy with whom to share knowledge etc. As I grew older, I found that the younger grads thought that they knew all that there was to know and were so full of themselves it wasn't funny. It will be interesting to see what mark they make on the world and the legacy they leave. As for me, I just say 'I did my best.'! I'll continue to occasionally add my two bob's worth and don't feel impugned by anyone here. After all, I've been insulted by experts in past lives. :p

Fliegenmong 30th Jan 2014 11:43

To change the subject, don't shed any tears over the constant and deserved parodying and pillorying of S H-Y. Having been elected twice, she will hit the magic eight years and when she retires or gets the boot she will get half of her final base salary (presently $195,000 pa) indexed for life, putting her in the top 10% of Australian incomes - $2,000 a week - from a grateful nation without getting out of bed. With allowances, she's on about $300,000 pa now. Not bad for an ex-bank teller. I don't know who else would pay her anything like that for her 'skill set'. Thus a few terms in parliament is the fast track to a privileged life for the lucky players, including those of the socialist Left like S H-Y. 'To each according to their needs; from each...' I wonder if S H-Y will give up much of her retirement income to those more needy than herself?

' I wonder if S H-Y will give up much of her retirement income to those more needy than herself?[/I]"

I don't expect anyone of the leaches would RJ....the 'skill set' is woeful on both sides, without the addition of oxygen (and cash!) thieves such as SHJ, Krudd, Or downer/ howard / costelllo / abbott / abetz / mirabella.........ok I'll stop!

Ethel the Aardvark 30th Jan 2014 12:48

Gawd you catering crew make me laugh, you pooh pooh climate change yet you are firm believers in wind farm syndrome. It appears the best remedy for wind farm syndrome is cash, when they get a large wad of money the illness seems to just disappear.
I hope you don't have ceiling fans, the low resonance sound waves will have you pushing up the daisies in no time :ugh:

Clare Prop 30th Jan 2014 13:42

I see quite a difference between having the Greens also vote to abolish the debt ceiling and the Greens making deals with Gillard to guarantee supply so she could form a minority government.

SOPS 30th Jan 2014 14:03

If the Greens, actually just had green policies, I could put up with them. Never agree with them, but put up with them.

The problem I have, is that they seem to think that unless we live in a country that is run ala Soviet Russia, we are all doomed.

But like the Soviets, those at the top are more than happy to milk the system, while enforcing their ideals on the rest of us.

Captain Sand Dune 30th Jan 2014 19:50

I wonder if S H-Y will give up much of her retirement income to those more needy than herself?
Indeed! As I've always said, I will listen to the S H-Y's of this country when I see one of them take in an illegal immigrant and support them from their own well lined pockets. Not holding my breath though.

Ken Borough 30th Jan 2014 23:58

Tobacco and cancer
This article is in today's Sydney Morning Herald. I wonder if our new Federal overlords will follow suit? I guess the IPA would have much to say on the matter.

Earlier this month the three giant cigarette corporations of America reached agreement with the US government on publishing nationwide ''corrective statements'' - in newspapers, on TV, on the internet and on cigarette packs.

The corrective advertising is to be prefaced by a statement that a federal court has concluded the defendant companies ''deliberately deceived the American public''.

That is another way of saying they lied, suppressed information about the health risks of tobacco, and knowingly conned the public.

Also to be disclosed are other details - that on average 1200 people a day die in the US from smoking (the equivalent figure in Australia is 41 a day). It kills more people than murder, AIDS, suicide, drugs, car crashes and alcohol - combined.

''Second-hand smoking'' also kills over 38,000 Americans a year - that too is required to be in the statement.

The agreement between the government and the Altria group (Philip Morris), R.J. Reynolds (Camel, Pall Mall) and Lorillard (Kent, Newport, Maverick) covers the look of the correctional material and its contents.

It requires each of the companies to publish full-page ads in the Sunday editions of 35 newspapers, on the newspapers' websites, and for five times a week on prime time television for a year.

Depending on the sort of website, the online campaign is to run for up to five years.

The consent order says that newspapers will carry five statements from the defendants under the heading ''here is the truth'', covering the adverse health effects of smoking, addictiveness of smoking and nicotine, the lack of significant health benefits from light cigarettes, a statement about the manipulation of cigarette design to enhance the delivery of nicotine, and a statement about second-hand smoke.

This agreement was filed in the US District Court in Washington on January 10. It runs for 25 pages and goes into fine detail about point sizes, fonts, spacing, colours, leading, readability and printability.

Like an addict who can't shake it, the cigarette boys have been in a lather of cold sweat about the agreement. Less than a fortnight after it was filed in court for signing-off by Judge Gladys Kessler, the industry now says it wants to appeal aspects of the working of the ads and test its ''free speech rights'' in court. By this, presumably, they mean their right to stay shtum about the life-destroying qualities of their products.

This is tobacco's long goodbye, the slow stub-out. The negotiations will drag on, the tobacco lawyers will keep fighting until all that is left is ash. The struggle against forced confessions and public shame and humiliation is not over yet, despite the fact that about 80 million pages of damning internal corporate documents have been released following the 1998 master settlement agreement.

Ultimately, the correction will be made.

The litigation was started by the Department of Justice under the Clinton administration in 1999 using the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organisations Act.

The RICO law was a product of the Nixon era and originally was designed to catch the Mafia. Since then its application has widened to a variety of rackets, including the Hells Angels, pro-life activists, a Ponzi scheme run by a lawyer and now the tobacco industry. There was even an attempt to use the law against Roman Catholic dioceses in relation to abuses against children.

RICO cases are often useful leverage because frequently defendants find themselves pleading guilty to lesser charges in order to get the racketeering and corruption elements dropped.

There are shadows of RICO in the Australian Crime Commission legislation, but we've yet to see the ACC launch a racketeering case against cigarette manufacturers and probably never will.

Judge Kessler ruled for the government in 2006 in USA v Philip Morris, finding that the companies deliberately concealed the dangers of smoking for decades.

The government had originally hoped to get an award of $280 billion from the corporations to pay for a quit smoking program. The amount was dropped to $14 billion, and later the judge said she could not force the manufacturers to pay for an anti-smoking campaign.

Out of this eventually came the order for correctional statements, and that was upheld on appeal.

Once the free speech question is determined, the ''we lied'' campaign probably won't begin until next year.

In 2012 Judge Kessler said the corrections would not violate the companies' right of free speech, because the wording is ''factual''.

Once ''deliberately deceived'' is stamped on packets of cancer sticks and splashed relentlessly across the media, what effect will there be on tobacco litigation, here and elsewhere?

The vast enterprise of ''document retention'', so artfully engineered by the defendants and their lawyers, is no longer an effective tool of denial. But to publicly announce you have lied to your consumers and deceived them about the appealing nature of your delicious products must have significant implications for tobacco-related litigation.

Mind you, this is not an apology. That seems to be a step too far. Simon Chapman, professor of public health at the University of Sydney, has blogged in the British Medical Journal that an apology should be the next step for these ''corporate pariahs''. A civilised society requires a full public acknowledgement of their misdeeds and harms, and to make good the damage done.

This week there was news that one of the Marlboro men, Eric Lawson, had died from respiratory failure and pulmonary disease.

He is the fifth rugged-man actor in cigarette ads to die from smoking-related diseases. As one person commented on The Washington Post website: ''Big tobacco claims another patron. Must be tough to be in a business that routinely kills the customer and the spokespersons.''

Airey Belvoir 31st Jan 2014 00:22

Wow! It seems the Americans are getting serious about big tobacco. Sure as hell trumps nasty pictures on plain packaging.

500N 31st Jan 2014 02:33

ABC Radio today, NO Asylum seeker boats had arrived in January !!!

They said it hasn't happened for 6 years or so.

A success ?

Also, a very interesting discussion on 621 in Melb (not sure of the name of the station) about the Freedom of the press, the left, the right etc. The guy on the
right was getting the upper hand over the lefty lady.

bosnich71 31st Jan 2014 05:59

Ethel .....thanks for the gen on ceiling fans. I've now switched mine off and am starting to feel better already. What's more I've told the Missus that my symptoms are not down to my rapid ageing as she has recently been stating.

Captain Sand Dune 31st Jan 2014 06:46

An interesting article in the local rag:


If you look at the characteristics of some of the most influential leaders in history you will find a collection of inspiring traits, that when lived out in actions, changed the world. Martin Luther King’s courage gave African Americans’ rights, William Wilberforce’s compassion abolished slavery. Winston Churchill’s dogged determination defeated Hitler.
Where are the leaders in our society today with these overpowering, history-changing convictions? The interesting thing is, we could have people with these hidden traits in our country right now, but our politically correct environment would push them into the shadows of mediocrity. Freedom of speech in a free society is the cornerstone for great leadership. The growing warning from many commentators across the Western world today is that freedom of speech is under threat, and so is leadership. People have been sacked, sued and their reputations dragged through the mud simply for having an unpopular opinion. Witnessing the drama unfold intimidates the rest of us to quietly fall in line with the unwritten code of political correctness.
I’m sure you’ve all heard the stories of political correctness gone mad: you aren’t a patriot if you fly the Australian flag – you are more likely to be a racist according to a University of Western Australia study. In the UK a government-backed booklet warns kindergarten teachers that playing musical chairs encourages aggressive behaviour. In San Francisco authorities have installed small plastic privacy screens on public library computers so that users can continue to watch pornography without children being directly exposed to it.
America’s top CEO coach and leadership columnist Mike Myatt wrote an interesting article in Forbes magazine about the impact of political correctness on leadership. He describes the institutionalisation of political correct thinking and how it has invaded the classroom, the media, the workplace, all tiers of government, the judiciary, the church and the military. He has identified it as one of the largest contributors to decreasing productivity in our workplaces and the moral and ethical decay in our societies. He believes political correctness has produced a generation of leaders who have forgotten that their first ethical obligation is to be correct, not politically correct.
Myatt says that when faced with difficult issues, real leaders would let the truth rise above the rhetoric and guide their actions. But in the face of conflict and controversy it is easier for most people to hide in the safety of the majority than to take on the risk of being outspoken, convicted, bold and truthful. All the traits of history’s great leaders listed above carried.
When public policy is shaped by political correctness our governments become ineffective and our society suffers. As British MP and conservative leader Michael Howard said in the press this week, “political correctness is a culture that offends our nations’ sense of tolerance, our sense of honesty, pour sense of balance. A culture which fails to distinguish between right and wrong in the name of equal ‘rights’ for all, is a distorted culture.”
Don’t accept political correctness as the cheap bureaucratic counterfeit for the human qualities of kindest, respect and decency. These qualities cannot be manufactures, packaged into a policy and forced upon the public. Australia and its leader must uphold the values that make this nation great: honesty, integrity, fairness, respect, vision, truth and a fair go for all.

bosnich71 31st Jan 2014 07:21

Ken ..... " I've been insulted by experts" ..... I once had a disagreement with a W.O. RAAF policeman at RAAF Edinburgh over an alleged motor cycle parking infringement.
After a lot of discussion about whether he or I was right or wrong I finally said, " I was in the Real Air Force and I've been pissed about by real experts".
The problem was eventually sorted out when he rang his Wing Commander boss who verified my innocence. Mind you there were quite a few speed radars operating on the road through the base after that. :=

Andu 31st Jan 2014 08:02

Captain SD, that article rings a lot of bells for me. David Cameron in the UK is my favourite example of this PC madness. He's a Conservative PM, but he's so PC, a disinterested observer could be forgiven for thinking he was Tony Blair's political and emotional heir.

I also cannot help but feel that here in Australia, post election, Tony Abbott, before he makes any move politically, has a team of political consultants examine that move for all eventualities, and whether that move is or is not PC features highly - far too highly in my opinion - in that decision making process.

I think we're well beyond Abbott upsetting his core voter base - by attempting to be all things to all men, he's done that already. His advisers have almost certainly told him that this early in his government's term, (and maybe even later in that term), he can afford to do that, for no matter how upset they may be with him, 99.9% of them will never vote Labor whatever he does.

Here's a bit of breaking news, Tony. 90% or more of those on the other side of politics - the people you're attempting to woo with this PC bullsh1t- will never vote Liberal whatever you do.

SOPS 31st Jan 2014 08:06

Could not agree more about Cameron, Andu, my vote is still out on Tony.

500N 31st Jan 2014 10:40


Agree re the bit about the other side won't vote for the other side,
regardless of what they do.

Not sure Abbott is getting it right with the review of the constitution.
A few interesting articles appeared including some from Aboriginals
stating the recognition is not going to do much in the long run.

What was also said was the demands are never ending. Saying "Sorry"
would end it, it didn't, then the next demand was for this to be done,
then they wanted this ......., it never ends.

Fliegenmong 31st Jan 2014 12:46

"Agree re the bit about the other side won't vote for the other side,
regardless of what they do."

Yep 100%!!......you forgot to mention that they will if they still think there is something in it for them...:rolleyes:

All times are GMT. The time now is 19:11.

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.