A.W.A "s ARE THEY REALLY NEGOTIABLE ?? like the govt says ???

[MO]

4vman you are nothing but a capitalist lackey..gcfordchick you are borderline

remember this about the Howard laws "if you work for 1hr per week you are considered to be in full time employment"...gee why are the unemployment stats so low?????????

There is a recession in progress right now..most ppl on the land are in a depression..there are more suicides and ppl walking away from the land than ever before and before anyone gets on there high horse yes the drought has a lot to do with this as does the Howard govt's lack of support for the land.

Wake up ppl the only way forward is Labour..where everyone will benefit.

I did say in another thread last year when everyone was saying how good work choices will be..."it will not be as good as the Libs say"

I told you so is getting closer!!!!!

[Outbackjack]

Originally Posted by GCFordChic

YES - Ability to negotiate if the employer is hiring on an AWA.
NO- Negotiation on a collective agreement.

I think this is a case of a collective agreement being offered.

We have been told to hate AWAs. We have been told the 'little people' will get screwed because they are not able to look after themselves and negotiate. The unions have told us that collective agreements will be thrown out the window for unfair AWAs. I believe in this situation a collective agreement was on offer which had detailed, previously negotiated, sections.

It seems those against Howard and Workchoices and the union-worshippers should all be praising this employer for continuing to offer the 'fair' un-negotiable collective awards. Instead your view is being clouded by the fact the thread starter included AWA in the title (and I believe, mistakenly, assumed all employers hire on AWAs now and if they don't want to negotiate it is just unfair).

I am not a union worshipper. But I do remember a time when unions were a necessity. I have never been a union member. The AWA in foce may well be only a year or two into a 3 year term. Hence the generous employer not wanting to negotiate.

It is work choices phase two that we should be really concerned about. If the current administration get back in, Howard will see a mandate to bring on what the business council of Australia really wanted. Then the cat in the pigeons will really be geting fat.

[GCFordChic]

Ugh I give up....

All I am saying is pre-workchoices this would not have been an issue. It would be accepted because many collective agreements are negotiated by unions and accepted by the public.

Post-workchoices every work related problem is the result of evil Howard... be it directly or remotely, apparently everything is the fault of workchoices.

Either way, apparently we all being brainwashed by the union's ads or the government's. Some people, like me, use ad time to go to the toilet, get a drink or look at the telly guide to see what else is on and miss all the commotion.

Originally Posted by MO

Wake up ppl the only way forward is Labour..where everyone will benefit.

: : :

When the "Labour" party is created I will look into their policies :P

You make them sound like super heroes!

P.S I don't actually throw my support behind either party, nor any other Australian political party for that matter. Neither of the main ones have all the answers, all of them are made up of politicians and none of them really give a crap about the future, only their term in office.

[MO]

4vman and gcfordchick...awas are negoitable are they?

Lets look at our national netball team two members did not agree to sign the current awa..which had no areas for maternity leave etc.

they have been suspended..where's the negoitiation.

howard is on the nose and WILL not get back in for another term..LABOUR will be in for the next ten to fifteen years.

[robs_ls1]

Originally Posted by 4Vman

we're experiencing the country's lowest unemployment rates that i can remember....

This is a common misconception, with thanks to a "special" definition of "employment".

Unemployment figures: lies, damned lies and statistics

"The second set of unemployment figures, "Persons not in the Labour Force" - also produced by the Commonwealth-appointed Australian Statistician and staff, and based on an actuarial or real survey - shows that we currently have a (real) two million, or 20 per cent, level of unemployment, chasing around 155,000 job vacancies, advertised and not advertised."

"Currently 400,000 Australians work between 1-14 hours a week. They are counted as being "employed", but in many other countries would be counted as unemployed. The person who works an hour a week in Australia has the same status in the employment statistics as one who works 40 hours! Consequently, unemployment comparisons between countries are largely illusory."

"Secondly, there are 1.75 million unemployed Australians on one of the five or six different "dole" or unemployment benefits, one of these being the disability support pension (DSP). This alone makes a mockery of the monthly figure. Moreover, since March 1996, every dole recipient who has found a job, or given up looking for one, has been offset by an extra person becoming eligible for the disability support pension or the single parenting payment."

"But wait. Like the perennial steak knives offer, there's more! Around 800,000 Australians recently told Census-takers that they wanted a job but couldn't take one during the survey week, or in the three weeks immediately after the survey week (owing to such things as lack of child care or short-term medical problems). As a result they were not counted as unemployed."

"The Commonwealth Statistician from the ABS, Mr. Dennis Trewin, is quoted as saying that "the official measure of unemployment does not reflect the true jobless rate". Why then would people disagree with him rather than listen to what he has to say?"

Interesting, eh?

[Casper]

Originally Posted by MO

Wake up ppl the only way forward is Labour..where everyone will benefit.

Well done MO, thread killed! You know it wont be tolerated becoming a political thread..