Unions increase their minimum wages claim to 6%   :)
Media Release - May 14, 2026 ACTU.
Australian Unions will argue for a 6% Annual Wage Review increase for the country’s 3 million lowest paid workers as Trump’s war continues to tear into workers’ living standards.

Unions had been claiming a 5% increase in minimum wages but have bumped that up to 6%; after Tuesday’s Budget forecast inflation is expected to reach 5% by the middle of this year – or even higher if the war’s aftershocks drag on throughout the coming year.

The ACTU’s claim will increase the minimum wage to $26.45 per hour, lifting the weekly rate to $1,004.88.

Even before the conflict, Australian workers’ real wages were 4.5% lower than they were in March 2021 after the last prices spike due to COVID, according to ABS data.

The nation’s three million lower-paid workers need a 6% minimum wage rise that gets ahead of inflation, so they can meet everyday cost-of-living expenses, catch up on some lost wage growth and provide a buffer if the global situation does worsen.

The claim is also affordable. While the Middle East conflict is expected to reduce Australia’s economic growth slightly, it will still be above the post-pandemic average, according to Treasury forecasts.

The upcoming Annual Wage Review decision is due within weeks and directly impacts the wages of 3 million workers whose pay is set by awards. It also benefits all working Australians by setting a minimum wage floor underneath the national wages system that people bargain from.

Quotes attributable to ACTU Secretary, Sally McManus:

“The lowest paid workers in Australia should not go backwards because of Donald Trump’s war. They have the least capacity to cope with price increases, so their wages must keep up. Unions will argue for a wage rise of 6% because inflation is now expected to hit 5% and these workers are still behind where they were in 2021.

“When unions made our initial wage claim in March, inflation was only predicted to be 4.2% – now it’s expected to hit at least 5%. But the truth is no-one knows what will happen with oil prices and inflation could be even higher. The lowest paid Australians can’t be left short like they were during the post-Covid inflation spike.

“The lowest paid workers spend every cent they earn. No one can save when on minimum wages. When wages fail to keep up with rising costs, people have no option but to cut back on the essentials like food and doctors’ visits. This should be unacceptable to everyone.

“Employer groups always claim that just about any wage rise puts pressure on inflation but that is not grounded in reality. In fact, the total value of our revised 6% claim will only add 0.64% – or less than 1 percentage point – to the national wages bill.

“To put that in context, Rio Tinto alone could afford to pay for a wages bill twice the size of the ACTU’s 6% claim.

“In fact, each of the big four banks could pay for this claim out of their profits single-handedly and some would still have billions left over to send to shareholders.”

We need a good increase in the minimum wage.   :(

Unions create unemployment.

People have a right to belong to a union.   :)

People also have a right to crap on their own plate.

Still doesn't make it a good idea.

freediver wrote on May 15^th, 2026 at 12:45pm:

Unions create unemployment.

Why would they want to do that?

whiteknight wrote on May 15^th, 2026 at 11:44am:

“To put that in context, Rio Tinto alone could afford to pay for a wages bill twice the size of the ACTU’s 6% claim.

And everyone knows that Rio Tinto is the poorest of the employers. ::)

greggerypeccary wrote on May 15^th, 2026 at 6:28pm:

freediver wrote on May 15th, 2026 at 12:45pm: Unions create unemployment. Why would they want to do that?

It's an inherent part of their business model. They prefer not to talk about it.

freediver wrote on May 15^th, 2026 at 12:45pm:

Unions create unemployment.

I can predict that many unskilled people will lose their jobs
as it just gets too expensive to employ people.
The ones left over will have to work twice as hard to make up for the loss of labour
putting huge stress on them - burning them out.

The payroll taxes don't help either -
more Labor taxes causing unemployment.    ::)

Bobby. wrote on May 15^th, 2026 at 7:30pm:

freediver wrote on May 15th, 2026 at 12:45pm: Unions create unemployment. I can predict that many unskilled people will lose their jobs as it just gets too expensive to employ people.

8-)

Bobby can see through the union propaganda.

freediver wrote on May 15^th, 2026 at 7:35pm:

Bobby. wrote on May 15th, 2026 at 7:30pm: freediver wrote on May 15th, 2026 at 12:45pm: Unions create unemployment. I can predict that many unskilled people will lose their jobs as it just gets too expensive to employ people. 8-) Bobby can see through the union propaganda.

I know what goes on at the higher levels in companies.
the bosses sit around a table at least once a year and work out how they
can retrench people to lower staff numbers.
They point out productive people and take away their human resources.
That way they can get one person to do the job of 2 or more people.


In my last job I had at times up to 5 people helping me
but after more than 5 years they had all been slowly retrenched.
Even 2 people in the inwards/outwards goods area - the store -
were retrenched too -
so I had to handle all inwards and outwards shipping of whatever related to me.
3 secretaries in the company were retrenched too so I had to
do at least a day per week of such duties.
The MD kept his secretary.
The engineers who provided technical help were also retrenched
as they didn't have their main projects anymore - cancelled -
and I did a lot of technical documentation - another day per week for me.
We had two IT specialists and they both left due to stress -
the company hired one person to replace both of them -
he ended up working late every night
and often on the weekends - all free overtime for the company -
but he had a wife, kids to support and a mortgage to pay -
so he didn't complain.

Companies work on a skeleton staff and then retrench more people.
Everyone is under stress and you can't meet the deadlines they set
so you are set up for failure due to lack of staff.

Meanwhile the managing director gets a pay rise
as he has reduced the wage bill.

I spoke to an accountant at a company before that and he
said there were over 20 taxes that the company had to pay -
including payroll tax and land tax.
It was just so expensive to employ anyone.

freediver wrote on May 15^th, 2026 at 7:23pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on May 15th, 2026 at 6:28pm: freediver wrote on May 15th, 2026 at 12:45pm: Unions create unemployment. Why would they want to do that? It's an inherent part of their business model. They prefer not to talk about it.

The argument that paying fair wages leads to less employment is stale. It was never the truth. The argument is based on the false theory that employers will out of the goodness of their heart employ people they don't need if wages are low and that they will employ less people than they need if wages increase. This argument extends to the conclusion that employers will aim for lower production and less profit when wages are fair. In other words it is a old theory built on pure economic hogwash.

Dnarever wrote on May 15^th, 2026 at 8:12pm:

freediver wrote on May 15th, 2026 at 7:23pm: greggerypeccary wrote on May 15th, 2026 at 6:28pm: freediver wrote on May 15th, 2026 at 12:45pm: Unions create unemployment. Why would they want to do that? It's an inherent part of their business model. They prefer not to talk about it. The argument that paying fair wages leads to less employment is stale. It was never the truth. The argument is based on the false theory that employers will out of the goodness of their heart employ people they don't need if wages are low and that they will employ less people than they need if wages increase.

That is not what the argument is based on. Bobby Understands the economics. You can too. Employers do not "need" employees. No particular number. If they can double the size of their business by doubling the number of employees, they will. But only if it is profitable. If it is no longer profitable to employ anyone, they will go bankrupt and every employee will be out of a job.

You need to start thinking rationally about it, instead of thinking in terms of idiotic union slogans like "goodness of their heart" or "less than x, which is the exact number of employees they need, because the economy is some kind of fixed, unchanging machine".

freediver wrote on May 15^th, 2026 at 7:35pm:

Bobby. wrote on May 15th, 2026 at 7:30pm: freediver wrote on May 15th, 2026 at 12:45pm: Unions create unemployment. I can predict that many unskilled people will lose their jobs as it just gets too expensive to employ people. 8-) Bobby can see through the union propaganda.

Yes the CEO's get a bonus for retrenching people. The more they retrench, the bigger the bonus ;(

Sir lastnail wrote on May 15^th, 2026 at 10:27pm:

freediver wrote on May 15th, 2026 at 7:35pm: Bobby. wrote on May 15th, 2026 at 7:30pm: freediver wrote on May 15th, 2026 at 12:45pm: Unions create unemployment. I can predict that many unskilled people will lose their jobs as it just gets too expensive to employ people. 8-) Bobby can see through the union propaganda. Yes the CEO's get a bonus for retrenching people. The more they retrench, the bigger the bonus ;(

I know what's going on -
I've seen it with my own eyes.

Yes well said Sir lastnail and how right you are.  Then they wonder why people join unions.  Go figure.   :(   

Sir lastnail wrote on May 15^th, 2026 at 10:27pm:

freediver wrote on May 15th, 2026 at 7:35pm: Bobby. wrote on May 15th, 2026 at 7:30pm: freediver wrote on May 15th, 2026 at 12:45pm: Unions create unemployment. I can predict that many unskilled people will lose their jobs as it just gets too expensive to employ people. 8-) Bobby can see through the union propaganda. Yes the CEO's get a bonus for retrenching people. The more they retrench, the bigger the bonus ;(

I have actually seen retrenchments get so bad that whole, good,
profit making sections of a company have been closed down
as they were so nobbled they couldn't function anymore.
The company lost money and the workers lost their jobs -

such was the eagerness to retrench people.

Bobby. wrote on May 15^th, 2026 at 11:07pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on May 15th, 2026 at 10:27pm: freediver wrote on May 15th, 2026 at 7:35pm: Bobby. wrote on May 15th, 2026 at 7:30pm: freediver wrote on May 15th, 2026 at 12:45pm: Unions create unemployment. I can predict that many unskilled people will lose their jobs as it just gets too expensive to employ people. 8-) Bobby can see through the union propaganda. Yes the CEO's get a bonus for retrenching people. The more they retrench, the bigger the bonus ;( I have actually seen retrenchments get so bad that whole, good, profit making sections of a company have been closed down as they were so nobbled they couldn't function anymore. The company lost money and the workers lost their jobs - such was the eagerness to retrench people.

Or like a lot of aussie companies do in australia is to employ MBA dickheads to run a technical department where they have no comprehension of the underlying products or services :(

Sir lastnail wrote on May 15^th, 2026 at 11:11pm:

Or like a lot of aussie companies do in australia is to employ MBA dickheads to run a technical department where they have no comprehension of the underlying products or services :(

Yes - that's what I saw in a few places.

MBA dickheads destroyed good profit making businesses.

whiteknight wrote on May 15^th, 2026 at 11:03pm:

Yes well said Sir lastnail and how right you are.  Then they wonder why people join unions.  Go figure.   :(

That's the thing. People don't join unions. Membership has been going down for decades. People don't want to hand over their hard earned money to an organisation whose only achievement at the end of the day might be to make them unemployed.

freediver wrote on May 16^th, 2026 at 6:21am:

whiteknight wrote on May 15th, 2026 at 11:03pm: Yes well said Sir lastnail and how right you are.  Then they wonder why people join unions.  Go figure.   :(    That's the thing. People don't join unions. Membership has been going down for decades. People don't want to hand over their hard earned money to an organisation whose only achievement at the end of the day might be to make them unemployed.

Dear FD,
many blessings.

If you read my posts I have provided proof that it is high taxes from Govts.
and relentless unfair practices of companies retrenching and ruining
even good profit making parts of their own businesses that are the real culprits -
not unions.

Are you saying there is only one cause of unemployment?

freediver wrote on May 16^th, 2026 at 7:51am:

Are you saying there is only one cause of unemployment?

No - 2 main causes:

unfair taxes,

stupid companies wrecking their own businesses.

What percentage of unemployment does each cause? And what percentage does union action cause?

If a company goes bankrupt through it's own stupidity alone, will a competitor take up the slack?

freediver wrote on May 16^th, 2026 at 8:03am:

What percentage of unemployment does each cause? And what percentage does union action cause? If a company goes bankrupt through it's own stupidity alone, will a competitor take up the slack?

It depends on the company.
Philips is a case in point.
It could have been a $trillion company but now it's only tiny.
How many people lost their jobs?


Google AI:

Based on the provided search context, Philips could potentially have become a trillion-dollar company by retaining ownership and control over the semiconductor entities it incubated, specifically ASML and NXP, and by commercializing its early innovations in digital media like the MP3 format.

Semiconductor Spin-offs
Philips played a pivotal role in creating two of the world’s most valuable technology companies but divested them, missing out on their exponential growth:

ASML: Philips co-developed lithography technology with ASM, leading to the establishment of ASML as an independent entity in 1988. Today, ASML is Europe’s most valuable technology company with a market capitalization of $266 billion,
holding a monopoly on the machines required to manufacture the most advanced semiconductor chips.


NXP: Philips’ semiconductor business was spun off as NXP in 2006. NXP now specializes in chips for automotive and industrial applications and has a market capitalization four times larger than Philips’ current valuation.


TSMC: Philips also provided crucial financial support and technology to kick-start Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC), which has become a global foundry giant, though Philips exited the industry before TSMC achieved its massive scale.

Quote:

Philips is a case in point. It could have been a $trillion company but now it's only tiny.

You could have started your own company and grown it into a trillion dollar business Bobby. Does your failure to do so mean that you are responsible for the loss of millions of jobs?

freediver wrote on May 16^th, 2026 at 8:22am:

Quote: Philips is a case in point. It could have been a $trillion company but now it's only tiny. You could have started your own company and grown it into a trillion dollar business Bobby. Does your failure to do so mean that you are responsible for the loss of millions of jobs?

Yes - I should have been the owner of a $trillion business.    :)

https://blogs.tradefxp.com/the-rise-and-fall-of-philips-a-tale-of-mismanagement-and-failed-innovation


The Rise and Fall of Philips: A Tale of Mismanagement and Failed Innovation

Once a global electronics giant, Philips' story is a cautionary tale of missed opportunities and failed innovation.
Explore their meteoric rise and dramatic fall, from humble beginnings to a forgotten brand.

Dec 12, 2023


Introduction

Phillips used to be a really big and smart company that made fancy technology stuff and came up with new ideas. But now, it's not as good as it used to be and doesn't have much going on. In 2010, the person in charge of Philips said that their company was not considered a high-tech company anymore. This means that what the person said was correct and on purpose. The company decided to stop focusing on making electronics and sold their different parts of the business.

Bobby, how many jobs do you think were destroyed when Philips allowed AMSL to take over that technology?

freediver wrote on May 16^th, 2026 at 9:17am:

Bobby, how many jobs do you think were destroyed when Philips allowed ASML to take over that technology?

Maybe 20,000 jobs - not sure -

Google AI:
ASML employs approximately 44,175 people worldwide as of 2025,
with more than half of its workforce located at its headquarters in the Netherlands.


However those jobs were still available with ASML in the Netherlands
so some employees may have left Philips and got a job at AMSL.  :)

Quote:

However those jobs were still available with ASML in the Netherlands so some employees may have left Philips and got a job at AMSL.

So how many jobs were destroyed?

How many jobs have been created because of union.  Now before you answer have a think.   :(

whiteknight wrote on May 16^th, 2026 at 10:28am:

How many jobs have been created because of union.  Now before you answer have a think.   :(

Zero. Unions destroy jobs.

whiteknight wrote on May 16^th, 2026 at 10:28am:

How many jobs have been created because of union.

only those employed by the union. ::)

Yet here is something to think about.  Unions help improve peoples wages and conditions.  Now remember less money that people have means less spending power.  More spending power means consumers can afford to buy more.  So yes unions help create jobs.   :)   

whiteknight wrote on May 16^th, 2026 at 1:24pm:

Now remember less money that people have means less spending power.  More spending power means consumers can afford to buy more.

And more spending power means the cost of goods those workers make, goes up. Workers don't work in a vacuum. That decreases the profit, that puts prices up. ::)

whiteknight wrote on May 16^th, 2026 at 1:24pm:

Yet here is something to think about.  Unions help improve peoples wages and conditions.  Now remember less money that people have means less spending power.  More spending power means consumers can afford to buy more.  So yes unions help create jobs.   :)

It doesn't work like that WK. If it did, the government would magically create jobs by insisting everyone gets paid a million dollars a year, which they then spend, creating ever more jobs. This is the sort of magical thinking that union mentality is built on. It is also why union membership has been steadily declining for decades, as people wise up to their mindless BS. At the end of the day, you can't eat money. Our wealth is the consequence of the work we do, not the numbers in our bank account.

Unions destroy jobs. The jobs that they destroy in turn destroy other jobs by undermining the economy as a whole.

Unions see workers get a fair go.  Not in a union?.  Then you are out in the woods on your own.   :(

freediver wrote on May 16^th, 2026 at 9:55am:

Quote: However those jobs were still available with ASML in the Netherlands so some employees may have left Philips and got a job at ASML. So how many jobs were destroyed?

I don't know.
ASML is also a special case.
Jobs lost at Philips here went overseas along with the factory.
240 Aussies lost their jobs here at Philips.
( Clarinda road Clayton, Victoria)


What about what I wrote?

Reply #10 - Yesterday at 8:02pm

Quote:

We had two IT specialists and they both left due to stress - the company hired one person to replace both of them - he ended up working late every night and often on the weekends - all free overtime for the company - but he had a wife, kids to support and a mortgage to pay - so he didn't complain.

Is it fair that many people work unpaid overtime?
Also he was doing the job of 2 people so one person didn't get a job as a result.
As part of "staff" he wasn't in a union.   ::)

Bobby. wrote on May 16^th, 2026 at 1:47pm:

Is it fair that many people work unpaid overtime?

No. But he has the opportunity to go to the employers and say "I am working long hours of overtime, it is not sustainable. I need another worker, I need a home life."

Or he can quietly look for another job.

lee wrote on May 16^th, 2026 at 2:07pm:

Bobby. wrote on May 16th, 2026 at 1:47pm: Is it fair that many people work unpaid overtime? No. But he has the opportunity to go to the employers and say "I am working long hours of overtime, it is not sustainable. I need another worker, I need a home life." Or he can quietly look for another job.

That is not always possible - jobs don't grow on trees.

Also - I know at job interviews I was often told -
"this job is for "staff" who don't join unions -
you could be expected to work longer hours sometimes for no extra pay -
is that OK? "

What did you say when you're desperate for a job?

Bobby. wrote on May 16^th, 2026 at 2:12pm:

What did you say when you're desperate for a job?

You tell them your views, if they don't hire based on what you say, you keep looking. Don't forget you still have the other job in the interim.

Why should people work unpaid overtime.  Also if its overtime, what about the penalty rates?.   :(

whiteknight wrote on May 16^th, 2026 at 3:23pm:

Why should people work unpaid overtime.  Also if its overtime, what about the penalty rates?.   :(

Hi Sir Crook,
all the companies just use people up and then discard them when
the latest MBA dickhead takes over the management.
I'm glad to be out of it now - I was sick of being exploited.

whiteknight wrote on May 16^th, 2026 at 1:35pm:

Unions see workers get a fair go.  Not in a union?.  Then you are out in the woods on your own.   :(

Unions take you hard earned money, and in return, they just might take your job. They spend all your money on frantically telling everyone how wonderful they are and taking credit for the sun coming up in the morning. You are better off on your own. It's like having two Labor governments in power.

freediver wrote on May 17^th, 2026 at 3:50pm:

whiteknight wrote on May 16th, 2026 at 1:35pm: Unions see workers get a fair go.  Not in a union?.  Then you are out in the woods on your own.   :( Unions take you hard earned money, and in return, they just might take your job. They spend all your money on frantically telling everyone how wonderful they are and taking credit for the sun coming up in the morning. You are better off on your own. It's like having two Labor governments in power.

Dear FD,
many blessings.

The Unions have had most of their power taken away by Govts. of both sides.
They can no longer strike without permission -
or they suffer draconian punishments.

That's why they can't do much really.   :-[

Bobby. wrote on May 17^th, 2026 at 4:09pm:

freediver wrote on May 17th, 2026 at 3:50pm: [quote author=stillcrook link=1778809498/37#37 date=1778902520]Unions see workers get a fair go.  Not in a union?.  Then you are out in the woods on your own.   :( Unions take you hard earned money, and in return, they just might take your job. They spend all your money on frantically telling everyone how wonderful they are and taking credit for the sun coming up in the morning. You are better off on your own. It's like having two Labor governments in power.

Dear FD,
many blessings.

The Unions have had most of their power taken away by Govts. of both sides.
They can no longer strike without permission -
or they suffer draconian punishments.

That's why they can't do much really.   :-[/quote]

Also, their membership is declining. Less income. Less political support. Less chance of a strike being successful. People value the right to work and reject the unions right to threaten workers with violence, call them scabs etc. They don't want to pay the unions to take their jobs away.

The unions wanted to be standover thugs who create a privileged elite who had well paying union jobs at the expense of everyone else who was denied a job. They were rightly told to f off.

freediver wrote on May 17^th, 2026 at 7:27pm:

Bobby. wrote on May 17th, 2026 at 4:09pm: freediver wrote on May 17th, 2026 at 3:50pm: [quote author=stillcrook link=1778809498/37#37 date=1778902520]Unions see workers get a fair go.  Not in a union?.  Then you are out in the woods on your own.   :( Unions take you hard earned money, and in return, they just might take your job. They spend all your money on frantically telling everyone how wonderful they are and taking credit for the sun coming up in the morning. You are better off on your own. It's like having two Labor governments in power. Dear FD, many blessings. The Unions have had most of their power taken away by Govts. of both sides. They can no longer strike without permission - or they suffer draconian punishments. That's why they can't do much really.   :-[/quote] Also, their membership is declining.

Trade union membership in Australia is increasing, marking its first growth in over a decade. Total union membership grew significantly to 1.6 million, pushing national union density up from 12.5% to 13.1%. This upswing is primarily driven by young workers and the tangible benefits of collective bargaining agreements.

Quote:

Trade union membership in Australia is increasing, marking its first growth in over a decade.

Going down in 9 out of (more than) 10 years is not increasing Greg. Unless you are a union spin doctor using members money to come up with creative ways to make unions look useful.

https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/labour/earnings-and-working-conditions/trade-union-membership/latest-release

---

freediver wrote on May 17^th, 2026 at 7:44pm:

Quote: Trade union membership in Australia is increasing, marking its first growth in over a decade. Going down in 9 out of (more than) 10 years is not increasing Greg. Unless you are a union spin doctor use members money to come up with creative ways to make unions look useful. https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/labour/earnings-and-working-conditions/trade-union-membership/latest-release

English - do you read it?

Trade union membership in Australia is increasing, marking its first growth in over a decade. Total union membership grew significantly to 1.6 million, pushing national union density up from 12.5% to 13.1%. This upswing is primarily driven by young workers and the tangible benefits of collective bargaining agreements.

New figures show union membership grew substantially – by almost 200,000 members – from 2022 to 2024, powered by growth among young workers. This is a 12.5 per cent increase.

They say a picture can speak a thousand words Greg.

http://www.ozpolitic.com/album/forum-attachments/union-membership.png

freediver wrote on May 17^th, 2026 at 7:46pm:

They say a picture can speak a thousand words Greg.

They say 2024 is more recent than 2022.

Trade union membership in Australia is increasing, marking its first growth in over a decade. Total union membership grew significantly to 1.6 million, pushing national union density up from 12.5% to 13.1%. This upswing is primarily driven by young workers and the tangible benefits of collective bargaining agreements.

New figures show union membership grew substantially – by almost 200,000 members – from 2022 to 2024, powered by growth among young workers. This is a 12.5 per cent increase.

Yes Greg. I can read. That is an interesting way to spin it, don't you think? How many hard work Aussie's membership dues do you think were frittered away coming up with that little bit of spin doctoring?

http://www.ozpolitic.com/album/forum-attachments/union-membership.png

freediver wrote on May 17^th, 2026 at 7:27pm:

Bobby. wrote on May 17th, 2026 at 4:09pm: freediver wrote on May 17th, 2026 at 3:50pm: [quote author=stillcrook link=1778809498/37#37 date=1778902520]Unions see workers get a fair go.  Not in a union?.  Then you are out in the woods on your own.   :( Unions take you hard earned money, and in return, they just might take your job. They spend all your money on frantically telling everyone how wonderful they are and taking credit for the sun coming up in the morning. You are better off on your own. It's like having two Labor governments in power. Dear FD, many blessings. The Unions have had most of their power taken away by Govts. of both sides. They can no longer strike without permission - or they suffer draconian punishments. That's why they can't do much really.   :-[/quote] Also, their membership is declining. Less income. Less political support. Less chance of a strike being successful. People value the right to work and reject the unions right to threaten workers with violence, call them scabs etc. They don't want to pay the unions to take their jobs away. The unions wanted to be standover thugs who create a privileged elite who had well paying union jobs at the expense of everyone else who was denied a job. They were rightly told to f off.

But it used to be that it was the right of every man to withdraw his labor.

By the way - did you know that Hitler abolished unions? 

Stop living in the past, FD.

February 27, 2025

Union membership now stands at 1.58 million, up from 1.4 million, based on ABS data showing the biggest increase in union membership since the ABS collected this data.

Quote:

But it used to be that it was the right of every man to withdraw his labor.

It still is Bobby. Absolutely. No man is a slave.

All that has changed is the right for union thugs to break your legs for turning up to work when they think you should be at home joining their effort to send your boss broke.

greggerypeccary wrote on May 17^th, 2026 at 7:50pm:

Stop living in the past, FD. February 27, 2025 Union membership now stands at 1.58 million, up from 1.4 million, based on ABS data showing the biggest increase in union membership since the ABS collected this data.

Are you on the union payroll Greg? Or just drinking the koolaid? You have to be particularly dedicated to self delusion to attempt to portray membership trends as anything but a disaster for the union movement.

http://www.ozpolitic.com/album/forum-attachments/union-membership.png

freediver wrote on May 17^th, 2026 at 7:53pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on May 17th, 2026 at 7:50pm: Stop living in the past, FD. February 27, 2025 Union membership now stands at 1.58 million, up from 1.4 million, based on ABS data showing the biggest increase in union membership since the ABS collected this data. Are you on the union payroll Greg? Or just drinking the koolaid? http://www.ozpolitic.com/album/forum-attachments/union-membership.png

Does 2025 come after 2022?

I'm curious.

freediver wrote on May 17^th, 2026 at 7:52pm:

Quote: But it used to be that it was the right of every man to withdraw his labor. It still is Bobby. Absolutely. No man is a slave. All that has changed is the right for union thugs to break your legs for turning up to work when they think you should be at home joining their effort to send your boss broke.

No - it's illegal to go on strike without permission.



Google AI:

In Victoria, Australia, it is not illegal to go on strike without permission if the action is classified as protected industrial action.  Under the Fair Work Act 2009, employees are legally entitled to engage in strikes to bargain for a new enterprise agreement, provided they have followed specific procedural steps such as holding a successful secret ballot and giving proper notice to their employer.

However, strikes that do not meet these legal criteria are considered unprotected industrial action and are effectively unlawful.  Key restrictions include:

Timing: Protected action cannot be taken before the nominal expiry date of an existing enterprise agreement.
Ballot Requirement: The strike must be authorized by a protected action ballot order from the Fair Work Commission.
Purpose: The action must be related to bargaining for an agreement; strikes over general grievances unrelated to enterprise bargaining are not protected.

If employees engage in unprotected industrial action without permission or proper procedure,
they may face serious consequences, including dismissal, disciplinary action, or personal fines.

Quote:

No - it's illegal to go on strike without permission

.

You are still allowed to withdraw your labour Bobby. It's called resigning.

freediver wrote on May 17^th, 2026 at 8:03pm:

Quote: No - it's illegal to go on strike without permission . You are still allowed to withdraw your labour Bobby. It's called resigning.

OK - with 2 weeks notice.   :-/

Bobby. wrote on May 17^th, 2026 at 8:11pm:

freediver wrote on May 17th, 2026 at 8:03pm: Quote: No - it's illegal to go on strike without permission . You are still allowed to withdraw your labour Bobby. It's called resigning. OK - with 2 weeks notice.   :-/

No-one is going to whip you if you don't turn up for those two weeks Bobby. Or don't try very hard. If you really don't want to be there, your boss won't want you there either.

freediver wrote on May 18^th, 2026 at 7:54am:

Bobby. wrote on May 17th, 2026 at 8:11pm: freediver wrote on May 17th, 2026 at 8:03pm: Quote: No - it's illegal to go on strike without permission . You are still allowed to withdraw your labour Bobby. It's called resigning. OK - with 2 weeks notice.   :-/ No-one is going to whip you if you don't turn up for those two weeks Bobby. Or don't try very hard. If you really don't want to be there, your boss won't want you there either.

But do you think that it's correct that the Fair Work Commission
decides on when a strike is legal or not
and can impose draconian punishments?

I'm curious.

Bobby. wrote on May 18^th, 2026 at 1:00pm:

freediver wrote on May 18th, 2026 at 7:54am: Bobby. wrote on May 17th, 2026 at 8:11pm: freediver wrote on May 17th, 2026 at 8:03pm: Quote: No - it's illegal to go on strike without permission . You are still allowed to withdraw your labour Bobby. It's called resigning. OK - with 2 weeks notice.   :-/ No-one is going to whip you if you don't turn up for those two weeks Bobby. Or don't try very hard. If you really don't want to be there, your boss won't want you there either. But do you think that it's correct that the Fair Work Commission decides on when a strike is legal or not and can impose draconian punishments? I'm curious.

I assume you mean fair. This is more an issue of collusion - the same principle that gets invoked when coles and woolies get accused of colluding on the price of eggs, and fined if found guilty. Companies are meant to compete against each other and try to undercut each other on the price of goods they sell. It's the same with salaries. Companies are supposed to compete against each other in their efforts to get good staff. It is illegal for them to collude to keep salaries low.

Strikes are an exception to this general rule. The general rule would say that employees are not allowed to collude on salary either, which is essentially what a strike is. If the strike is industry wide, then the unions are essentially forcing competing companies to collude on salary in their response to the strike. That is why the whole thing is so heavily regulated, and I support that, for several reasons:

1) Collusion on salaries, as discussed above. This is not a restriction on your right to withdraw your labour, but your right to collude with others in doing so.
2) Raising salaries above what a competitive market would settle on inevitable creates unemployment and denies people the right to work.
3) Union behaviour is generally unethical, particularly for the well known 'militant' unions. They work themselves into such an ideological frenzy on this that they convince themselves that it is OK to commit acts of violence and intimidation against "scabs".
4) The broader impact on the economy is generally negative, through two primary mechanisms - increasing unemployment and increasing costs of goods produced by people on union wages. The waterfront unions are the worst offenders here. They essentially hold the entire economy to ransom by gaining monopoly control over labour at importation bottlenecks, then deliberately reducing productivity so as to push up prices, and they pocket the difference.

It used to be that every trade was 100% unionised. You were only allowed to make beer barrels if you were part of the barrel makers guild. If you weren't, they would break your arms. They restricted productivity to push prices up, making it lucrative for them, but the only way to get in was if your father was in the guild. The entire economy used to run like this - centuries ago of course. Breaking up these guilds contributed significantly to the explosion of western economies.

There is one industry that still does this - medicine. The number of doctors is restricted by restricting the number of medical degrees. The downside is fairly obvious - there is still plenty of work to do, so graduate doctors end up doing 12 hour shifts, falling asleep on the job, killing patients etc. And because most of their jobs are in the public sector, they don't actually get paid a whole lot more for it.

Dear FD,
many blessings.

You seem to view unions in a very negative light.

Could you ever view them as people who don't want to see
their members being exploited from unscrupulous bosses?

Remember how Gina said she'd like to be able to employ
workers for $2 per day?    :-/

Bobby. wrote on May 18^th, 2026 at 5:52pm:

Remember how Gina said she'd like to be able to employ workers for $2 per day?

So would everybody. Of course in Australia it will never happen. If you lowered the wages bill, you could lower the sales price of goods. ::)

lee wrote on May 18^th, 2026 at 5:55pm:

Bobby. wrote on May 18th, 2026 at 5:52pm: Remember how Gina said she'd like to be able to employ workers for $2 per day?  So would everybody. Of course in Australia it will never happen. If you lowered the wages bill, you could lower the sales price of goods. ::)

Everything is too expensive these days - especially hiring a worker.

Just try to get your lawns mowed nowadays?
Even if you have only a tiny lawn that can be mowed in 3 minutes
they will charge you $50 to mow it -
and that's without a catcher - so the clippings blow around
and block up your storm water drains -
leaving you with a monster plumber's bill one day
to get them hydro jetted out.  ::)
When I was a kid you could get your lawns mowed for $2
and that was even if it was a 1 hour job with a catcher.   ::)

Bobby. wrote on May 18^th, 2026 at 5:52pm:

Dear FD, many blessings. You seem to view unions in a very negative light. Could you ever view them as people who don't want to see their members being exploited from unscrupulous bosses?

How about viewing them as the people who established the 8-hour day, universal superannuation, penalty rates, meal breaks, and mandated leave entitlements?

greggerypeccary wrote on May 18^th, 2026 at 6:45pm:

Bobby. wrote on May 18th, 2026 at 5:52pm: Dear FD, many blessings. You seem to view unions in a very negative light. Could you ever view them as people who don't want to see their members being exploited from unscrupulous bosses? How about viewing them as the people who established the 8-hour day, universal superannuation, penalty rates, meal breaks, and mandated leave entitlements?

FD never read a Charles Dickens novel.   ::)

freediver wrote on May 16^th, 2026 at 8:22am:

Quote: Philips is a case in point. It could have been a $trillion company but now it's only tiny. You could have started your own company and grown it into a trillion dollar business Bobby. Does your failure to do so mean that you are responsible for the loss of millions of jobs?

It failed because they put MBA dickheads in charge who had zero vision and either run the business into the ground or sell off profitable businesses for a quick fistful of dollars to appease brain-dead shareholders, which is exactly what they do here.

ASML is a case in point.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WE58YisgFeQ

Sir lastnail wrote on May 18^th, 2026 at 7:17pm:

freediver wrote on May 16th, 2026 at 8:22am: Quote: Philips is a case in point. It could have been a $trillion company but now it's only tiny. You could have started your own company and grown it into a trillion dollar business Bobby. Does your failure to do so mean that you are responsible for the loss of millions of jobs? It failed because they put MBA dickheads in charge who had zero vision and either run the business into the ground or sell off profitable businesses for a quick fistful of dollars to appease brain-dead shareholders, which is exactly what they do here. ASML is a case in point. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WE58YisgFeQ

Philips was a tragedy all caused by MBA dickheads.

Bobby. wrote on May 18^th, 2026 at 5:52pm:

Dear FD, many blessings. You seem to view unions in a very negative light. Could you ever view them as people who don't want to see their members being exploited from unscrupulous bosses? Remember how Gina said she'd like to be able to employ workers for $2 per day?    :-/

You can't force people to accept $2 a day Bobby. I have no idea what Gina was smoking that day, but it is irrelevant to unions.


greggerypeccary wrote on May 18^th, 2026 at 6:45pm:

Bobby. wrote on May 18th, 2026 at 5:52pm: Dear FD, many blessings. You seem to view unions in a very negative light. Could you ever view them as people who don't want to see their members being exploited from unscrupulous bosses? How about viewing them as the people who established the 8-hour day, universal superannuation, penalty rates, meal breaks, and mandated leave entitlements?

Like I said, the unions would take credit for the sun coming up in the morning if they thought they could get away with it. You have seen their efforts at putting a positive spin on union membership rates.


Quote:

Philips was a tragedy all caused by MBA dickheads.

The only people that Philips was a tragedy for are the shareholders.

FD,

Quote:

You can't force people to accept $2 a day Bobby. I have no idea what Gina was smoking that day, but it is irrelevant to unions.

Maybe she had an extra glass of wine after dinner?

In vino veritas ?     :-/


FD,

Quote:

The only people that Philips was a tragedy for are the shareholders.

Also for workers chucked out on the street and  forced to accept
whatever job they could get to pay their bills.   :(
They once employed 350,000 workers.

Bobby. wrote on May 18^th, 2026 at 8:19pm:

FD, Quote: You can't force people to accept $2 a day Bobby. I have no idea what Gina was smoking that day, but it is irrelevant to unions. Maybe she had an extra glass of wine after dinner? In vino veritas ?     :-/ FD, [quote]The only people that Philips was a tragedy for are the shareholders.

Also for workers chucked out on the street and  forced to accept
whatever job they could get to pay their bills.   :(
They once employed 350,000 workers.[/quote]

And how many of them actually lost their jobs Bobby? When Philips spun off all those companies, the employees mostly went with the sold off companies.

And what does this have to do with unions?

freediver wrote on May 18^th, 2026 at 8:22pm:

And how many of them actually lost their jobs Bobby? When Philips spun off all those companies, the employees mostly went with the sold off companies. And what does this have to do with unions?

No - many of the Philips places were closed down and moved overseas
so local people all lost their jobs.

Unions? - maybe it was the unions that helped Philips get the idea to move overseas
where they could exploit workers for a bowl of rice per day for their pay?