Abbott's silence on IR a problem

Date
    February 7, 2013

Michelle Grattan


If ever there was a case for Tony Abbott to get his industrial relations policy out sooner rather than later, Dave Oliver has made it.     :)

ACTU secretary Oliver went to Canberra on Wednesday to fire a barrage of shots against the Opposition Leader and, by the way, to lodge an ambit claim with the Gillard government.

The unions want the government to further enshrine penalty rates with legislation and to have a national scheme for portable entitlements.     :)


Both proposals infuriate employers; they were also brushed off by a spokesman for Workplace Relations Minister Bill Shorten who said: ''The government believes that penalty rates and other worker entitlements are adequately protected through the existing Fair Work regime.''

But it was Abbott in Oliver's sights. A major reason why Oliver replaced Jeff Lawrence was to strengthen the unions' muscle for a scare campaign.

He had plenty of questions for Abbott, starting with a challenge to guarantee he wouldn't attack workers' pay and conditions. He wasn't reluctant to play the man.

Abbott was ''still the same man who once said that a bad boss was like a bad husband - doing more good than harm''.     :(

The union movement is off and running. Industrial relations is a seriously hard issue for the Coalition to manage, but little is served by delaying joining the battle.

Abbott says his policy will address issues of flexibility, productivity and union militancy; it will be cautious and changes will be within the existing framework. WorkChoices has been ''cremated''. But until the flesh is put on the generalities, those running scares will have a first-mover advantage.

With Labor reeling under bad publicity, the opposition, which has indicated its IR blueprint will be out in the first half of the year, is reluctant to invite attention to itself. Delaying too long, however, can mean the right moment never comes.

If the policy is as balanced as Abbott says, he should get on the front foot.     ;)

Who knows, with all the scandal around, the main focus could remain on Labor.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/abbotts-silence-on-ir-a-problem-20130206-2dyvx.html#ixzz2KRK8Ck9Z

Business push for individual contracts would take Australian workplaces back to the dark ages
08 February, 2013 | Media Release Comparisons by business leaders of productivity between construction sites today and the building of the Empire State Building is absolutely unacceptable, says the ACTU.    

“What an unfortunate comparison. This highlights the inability of business leaders to come up with genuine solutions to productivity. As usual it’s the worker who cops the brunt,” said ACTU Secretary Dave Oliver.     :(

“Five people died during the building of the Empire State Building so pinning this as a model for the construction industry today highlights their lazy management style.

“Michael Chaney and his colleagues are proposing a return to the dark ages of industrial relations where scores of workers were injured or killed while at work.

“As usual they want to take the low road and ride on the backs of workers rather than the high road where innovation and infrastructure improve productivity.”

The National Australia Bank chairman and former president of the Business Council of Australia is claiming the whip should be cracked to get workers moving faster to boost productivity, comparing current construction to the Empire State Building which was built in 15 months.

He was also among business leaders calling for deregulation including a ‘restoration of the right to enter individual contracts’.     :(

“Regulations save lives and prevent injuries,” Mr Oliver said.

“Let’s be clear about this, when he mentions the word ‘rights’ he’s certainly not talking about workers, he’s talking about cutting corners and putting people’s lives at risk.”     :(

The unions want the government to further enshrine penalty rates with legislation and to have a national scheme for portable entitlements.    




And that crook is why there is a high mark up on wine in restaurants.


Both proposals infuriate employers; they were also brushed off by a spokesman for Workplace Relations Minister Bill Shorten who said: ''The government believes that penalty rates and other worker entitlements are adequately protected through the existing Fair Work regime.''



It is labor in power now crook so why aren't the unions going after Shorten?


But it was Abbott in Oliver's sights. A major reason why Oliver replaced Jeff Lawrence was to strengthen the unions' muscle for a scare campaign.


Looks to me the unions realise Gillard is gone come September so it's all stops to demonise Abbott.

is only the beginning, that asshole phony tony will
never be PM. ;D ;D ;D

Why would Abbott let the corrupt unions and their lapdogs the labor party, control the debate on anything let alone industrial relations. Abbott will smartly discuss IR when and how he feels the time is right for his party.

progressiveslol wrote on Feb 10^th, 2013 at 9:40am:

Why would Abbott let the corrupt unions and their lapdogs the labor party, control the debate on anything let alone industrial relations. Abbott will smartly discuss IR when and how he feels the time is right for his party.

so never?

John Smith wrote on Feb 10^th, 2013 at 9:46am:

progressiveslol wrote on Feb 10th, 2013 at 9:40am: Why would Abbott let the corrupt unions and their lapdogs the labor party, control the debate on anything let alone industrial relations. Abbott will smartly discuss IR when and how he feels the time is right for his party. so never?

So whenever he feels like it but it will come to his disadvantage not to talk about it at all before the election.

progressiveslol wrote on Feb 10^th, 2013 at 9:54am:

John Smith wrote on Feb 10th, 2013 at 9:46am: progressiveslol wrote on Feb 10th, 2013 at 9:40am: Why would Abbott let the corrupt unions and their lapdogs the labor party, control the debate on anything let alone industrial relations. Abbott will smartly discuss IR when and how he feels the time is right for his party. so never? So whenever he feels like it but it will come to his disadvantage not to talk about it at all before the election.

John Smith wrote on Feb 10^th, 2013 at 9:46am:

so never?

Abbott will bring up IR in the second week of the ACTUAL campaign once parliament has been dissolved.

One part of me hopes he says 'there will be no workchoices in a government I lead' the day before the election and a few days later announces WorkChoices 2.

he wont, but the irony would be delicious.

What the unions need to worry about is Abbott having a royal comission into union corruption and illegal behaviour. that could send dozens to jail and rob the ALP of a generation of new MPs!

John Smith wrote on Feb 10^th, 2013 at 10:35am:

progressiveslol wrote on Feb 10th, 2013 at 9:54am: John Smith wrote on Feb 10th, 2013 at 9:46am: progressiveslol wrote on Feb 10th, 2013 at 9:40am: Why would Abbott let the corrupt unions and their lapdogs the labor party, control the debate on anything let alone industrial relations. Abbott will smartly discuss IR when and how he feels the time is right for his party. so never? So whenever he feels like it but it will come to his disadvantage not to talk about it at all before the election. John Smith wrote on Feb 10th, 2013 at 9:46am: so never?

hey john _smith... just a note about your signature text. Howard paid of $96B not $56B and he left a surplus of $22B making an improvment of $118B. And lets not forget the $80B in the Future Fund making a grand total of $198B.

makes your signature look a little silly...

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 10^th, 2013 at 7:01pm:

John Smith wrote on Feb 10th, 2013 at 10:35am: progressiveslol wrote on Feb 10th, 2013 at 9:54am: John Smith wrote on Feb 10th, 2013 at 9:46am: progressiveslol wrote on Feb 10th, 2013 at 9:40am: Why would Abbott let the corrupt unions and their lapdogs the labor party, control the debate on anything let alone industrial relations. Abbott will smartly discuss IR when and how he feels the time is right for his party. so never? So whenever he feels like it but it will come to his disadvantage not to talk about it at all before the election. John Smith wrote on Feb 10th, 2013 at 9:46am: so never? hey john _smith... just a note about your signature text. Howard paid of $96B not $56B and he left a surplus of $22B making an improvment of $118B. And lets not forget the $80B in the Future Fund making a grand total of $198B. makes your signature look a little silly...

or it makes you look a little silly

John Smith wrote on Feb 10^th, 2013 at 7:27pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 10th, 2013 at 7:01pm: John Smith wrote on Feb 10th, 2013 at 10:35am: progressiveslol wrote on Feb 10th, 2013 at 9:54am: John Smith wrote on Feb 10th, 2013 at 9:46am: progressiveslol wrote on Feb 10th, 2013 at 9:40am: Why would Abbott let the corrupt unions and their lapdogs the labor party, control the debate on anything let alone industrial relations. Abbott will smartly discuss IR when and how he feels the time is right for his party. so never? So whenever he feels like it but it will come to his disadvantage not to talk about it at all before the election. John Smith wrote on Feb 10th, 2013 at 9:46am: so never? hey john _smith... just a note about your signature text. Howard paid of $96B not $56B and he left a surplus of $22B making an improvment of $118B. And lets not forget the $80B in the Future Fund making a grand total of $198B. makes your signature look a little silly... or it makes you look a little silly

Heh heh heh long weekend claims to be a finance wiz, heh heh heh. ;D ;D ;D

Grattan - Labor's biggest sledgehammer wants to know why the LIBs are so silent on IR

If the system is not broken - don't try to fix it

The Pacific Solution system was not broken until Labor tried to fix it

If KJT doesn't like paying for wine in a restaurant then she can go to a BYO.

Or, even better, get off her arse and cook a meal instead of eating takeaways all the time.

Seriously, Abbott has a huge problem with IR.

He wants Work Choices, so does most of his party and all of his boss mates. But the Aussie voters hate it.

So he has to pretend he isn't going to introduce it while trying to keep his big moneyed friends happy and putting dollars in the party coffers.

Good luck, Tony. You will need it.

It will be fun watching him squirm in front of the media

Peter Freedman wrote on Feb 10^th, 2013 at 9:51pm:

If KJT doesn't like paying for wine in a restaurant then she can go to a BYO. Or, even better, get off her arse and cook a meal instead of eating takeaways all the time.

WTF?  Off your psycho pills Freedman? Hope you are still taking the viagra. One day they may work.

KJT1981 wrote on Feb 10^th, 2013 at 10:55pm:

Peter Freedman wrote on Feb 10th, 2013 at 9:51pm: If KJT doesn't like paying for wine in a restaurant then she can go to a BYO. Or, even better, get off her arse and cook a meal instead of eating takeaways all the time. WTF?  Off your psycho pills Freedman? Hope you are still taking the viagra. One day they may work.

I have never ever seen you address the topic.

SOB

John Smith wrote on Feb 10^th, 2013 at 7:27pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 10th, 2013 at 7:01pm: John Smith wrote on Feb 10th, 2013 at 10:35am: progressiveslol wrote on Feb 10th, 2013 at 9:54am: John Smith wrote on Feb 10th, 2013 at 9:46am: progressiveslol wrote on Feb 10th, 2013 at 9:40am: Why would Abbott let the corrupt unions and their lapdogs the labor party, control the debate on anything let alone industrial relations. Abbott will smartly discuss IR when and how he feels the time is right for his party. so never? So whenever he feels like it but it will come to his disadvantage not to talk about it at all before the election. John Smith wrote on Feb 10th, 2013 at 9:46am: so never? hey john _smith... just a note about your signature text. Howard paid of $96B not $56B and he left a surplus of $22B making an improvment of $118B. And lets not forget the $80B in the Future Fund making a grand total of $198B. makes your signature look a little silly... or it makes you look a little silly

No, it just makes you look stupid and that you share the same inability to understand basic arithmetic like your hero, Wayne Swan...

Peter Freedman wrote on Feb 10^th, 2013 at 9:58pm:

Seriously, Abbott has a huge problem with IR. He wants Work Choices, so does most of his party and all of his boss mates. But the Aussie voters hate it. So he has to pretend he isn't going to introduce it while trying to keep his big moneyed friends happy and putting dollars in the party coffers. Good luck, Tony. You will need it.

Workchoices will be back under a new name:

Tony's Choices.

---

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 11^th, 2013 at 5:58am:

John Smith wrote on Feb 10th, 2013 at 7:27pm: longweekend58 wrote on Feb 10th, 2013 at 7:01pm: John Smith wrote on Feb 10th, 2013 at 10:35am: progressiveslol wrote on Feb 10th, 2013 at 9:54am: John Smith wrote on Feb 10th, 2013 at 9:46am: progressiveslol wrote on Feb 10th, 2013 at 9:40am: Why would Abbott let the corrupt unions and their lapdogs the labor party, control the debate on anything let alone industrial relations. Abbott will smartly discuss IR when and how he feels the time is right for his party. so never? So whenever he feels like it but it will come to his disadvantage not to talk about it at all before the election. John Smith wrote on Feb 10th, 2013 at 9:46am: so never? hey john _smith... just a note about your signature text. Howard paid of $96B not $56B and he left a surplus of $22B making an improvment of $118B. And lets not forget the $80B in the Future Fund making a grand total of $198B. makes your signature look a little silly... or it makes you look a little silly No, it just makes you look stupid and that you share the same inability to understand basic arithmetic like your hero, Wayne Swan...

what part was difficult for you? no arithmatic needed ... sell $76 billion of assets to pay $56 billion in debt ...do you need a calculator for that?

Abbott looks like Hitler:
http://www.rsvlts.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/10.-Adolf-Hitler-9869055-630x630.jpg

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 10^th, 2013 at 7:01pm:

John Smith wrote on Feb 10th, 2013 at 10:35am: progressiveslol wrote on Feb 10th, 2013 at 9:54am: John Smith wrote on Feb 10th, 2013 at 9:46am: progressiveslol wrote on Feb 10th, 2013 at 9:40am: Why would Abbott let the corrupt unions and their lapdogs the labor party, control the debate on anything let alone industrial relations. Abbott will smartly discuss IR when and how he feels the time is right for his party. so never? So whenever he feels like it but it will come to his disadvantage not to talk about it at all before the election. John Smith wrote on Feb 10th, 2013 at 9:46am: so never? hey john _smith... just a note about your signature text. Howard paid of $96B not $56B and he left a surplus of $22B making an improvment of $118B. And lets not forget the $80B in the Future Fund making a grand total of $198B. makes your signature look a little silly...

here you go looser .... took a while to find it ... for your benefit

http://www.marketeconomics.com.au/2095-more-facts-behind-the-howard-governments-debt-elimination

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 10^th, 2013 at 7:01pm:

John Smith wrote on Feb 10th, 2013 at 10:35am: progressiveslol wrote on Feb 10th, 2013 at 9:54am: John Smith wrote on Feb 10th, 2013 at 9:46am: progressiveslol wrote on Feb 10th, 2013 at 9:40am: Why would Abbott let the corrupt unions and their lapdogs the labor party, control the debate on anything let alone industrial relations. Abbott will smartly discuss IR when and how he feels the time is right for his party. so never? So whenever he feels like it but it will come to his disadvantage not to talk about it at all before the election. John Smith wrote on Feb 10th, 2013 at 9:46am: so never? hey john _smith... just a note about your signature text. Howard paid of $96B not $56B and he left a surplus of $22B making an improvment of $118B. And lets not forget the $80B in the Future Fund making a grand total of $198B. makes your signature look a little silly...

Wasn't the Last coalition surplus about $14B.

It was the 2008 result which was $22B.