You wonder why it costs so much to do any type of construction in this country when the system is so shonky, third world standards for first world costings. Who's getting the money?

Unions don't make workers safe. Nor do government workcover insurances. Nor do governments. The blokes on the job keep themselves safe. An induction will never make a worker safe.

If a builder is dodgy in the first place then no one is safe. Get them out of the industry. It is government wanting the lowest price every time which contributes to industry trying to cut corners to make the economics work.

It looks like this raises more questions than answers.   It appears a lot of the workers on this site were getting cash in hand payments,  causing uncertainty about entitlements.  They were vulnerable to not having things like superannuation,  and most importantly workers compensation.

Philby wrote on Sep 7^th, 2010 at 10:07am:



Absolutely clueless, another right wing extremist taking absolute pride in their position of uninformed ignorance.
Is anyone surprised at that?

Now if you had pointed to weaknesses in how unions, workcover, or indeed governments, perform some of their duties, then everyone would happily agree with you, but no, you take the position of the idiotic fanatic, that safety is all down to individuals, which is such a laughably ignorant position.
Because of that, it is a bit hard to know just how basic an explanation would be required for you to comprehend the enormity of your error.

So let's start with a little history, prior to unionisation, workers were horribly exploited, and safety was only ever considered from the point of view of cost minimisation fro the business owner, meaning if it it was cheaper to have workers suffer and die, than implement systems that would improve their safety, then that is what happened.

Over time, both unions, and governments got involved, and safety standards were first demanded , and set by unions, then later on, legislation was introduced which made safety a responsibility that all employers had to consider.

This changed the equation, because punitive damages could be applied if employers were found to be negligent in their safety protocols, and so safer worksites became more cost effective work sites.

In the aussie building industry alone, this has saved many thousands of lives, and if it is carried across all industries, many, many more.

I have had my share of disagreements with petty, ignorant bureaucrats, including some from workcover, and so I do understand the frustration of trying to work with public servants who have little concept about productivity, and the need to maintain it, or go out of business, but it has not made me ignore the most important aspect of providing a safe and healthy worksite.

Unions back in the late 1970's through to the early 1990's destroyed the credibility and reputation of the union movement, when self interested thugs ran their unions along the lines of personal fiefdoms, but that does not mean we should ignore the work done by previous generations, or the improvements they delivered that have benefited us all.

Yes perhaps you are right, sometime unions could be seen as overstepping the mark.  (As so do some employers).  People have every right to belong to a union, and to be represented by a union if they wish.  Oh yes it can work both ways, not all employers are angels either.