# Pacific Brands sackings/executive pay increases



## Buddy (27 February 2009)

OK, let's have a chat about Pacific Brand. You know, the sackings and the Exec pay rise.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/02/27/2502698.htm?section=business


Maybe they should give the media liason officer in P.Brand a pay rise. How would you like that job, explaining this most immoral behaviour to the media and public?

Funny thing is, P Brand is a very badly run company. Too many piss weak brands that do not make money.  If I were running that company I would get rid of the crap brands, limit the number of products made, concentrate on quality and the inevitable cost savings & profit increase resulting from rationalising the products. It strikes me as very strange, giving an obscene pay rise to Execs of a company that is probably going down the gurgler.  But I guess thats the way companies are run these days by the execs - short term avarice and greed, and take as much dosh as you can before sticking it up the shareholders.

Maybe the board of PB should have a look at the way R.M. Williams is run.

As an aside, I wonder if the quality of their stuff made in China will be as good as the Aussie made stuf. Actually I have always bought some of their stuff (eg, Jocks & Yakka) because of the quality, not the price.  If their Chinese made stuff matches other companies stuff made in China, ie generally it is crap, then I will be sticking their jocks up their bum. So to speak.


----------



## vincent191 (27 February 2009)

Buddy, the Chinese are very capable of manufacturing top quality stuff but are the buyers willing to pay for quality?

People want cheap imports therefore you get lesser quality. I have inspected some of the Chinese textile factories and their equipment and manufacturing processes leave Australia far behind.

PB management like you still think of the Chinese factories as sweat shops with thousands of lowly paid workers working in third world conditions couldn't be further from the truth!!! They can produce first class goods if you are prepared to pay for it.


----------



## Fatcat (27 February 2009)

A step in the right direction would be canning the endorsement contract of that overrated / overexposed clown Michael Clarke.


----------



## dalek (27 February 2009)

vincent191 said:


> Buddy, the Chinese are very capable of manufacturing top quality stuff but are the buyers willing to pay for quality?
> 
> People want cheap imports therefore you get lesser quality. I have inspected some of the Chinese textile factories and their equipment and manufacturing processes leave Australia far behind.
> 
> PB management like you still think of the Chinese factories as sweat shops with thousands of lowly paid workers working in third world conditions couldn't be further from the truth!!! They can produce first class goods if you are prepared to pay for it.




You are absolutely correct. The Chinese are more than capable of producing premium quality goods. They make according to the specifications of their customer. Unfortunately we Australian buyers go there only to buy the cheapest possible product. We get what we are prepared to pay for and conditioned to believe.
From my own experience the danger is often in paying too little and under specifying the manufacturing requirements.


----------



## Buddy (27 February 2009)

vincent191 said:


> Buddy, the Chinese are very capable of manufacturing top quality stuff but are the buyers willing to pay for quality?
> 
> People want cheap imports therefore you get lesser quality. I have inspected some of the Chinese textile factories and their equipment and manufacturing processes leave Australia far behind.
> 
> PB management like you still think of the Chinese factories as sweat shops with thousands of lowly paid workers working in third world conditions couldn't be further from the truth!!! They can produce first class goods if you are prepared to pay for it.




Vince, you are probably correct. I just havn't seen any quality chinese made stuff. At least, that I know about. I have been known to go down to the local hardware store and buy cheap tools (generally chinese made) but they really are crap.  I am quite happy to pay for quality when I need it (e.g. power tools that have a life greater than 5 hours use ).  

But back on the topic............ I guess the media, unions, polies, blah blah, are all getting hot under the collar about the timing of the sackings and exec pay rises. I mean, if you were planning a public relations disaster, I think this would be a really good case study. Whether it has any lasting impact on the profitability of P.B., only time will tell.  But if the exces continue managing this company same as they have been, then I would not like to be a shareholder.


----------



## vivazebull (27 February 2009)

Agreed. Take Ralph Lauren's Polo shirts for example.
Very high quality, and consequently highly priced garments from an American designer with, what a surprise, Made in China on the tags.
People still pay for a) brand recognition and wankyness and
b) Top quality manufacturing of the garment as opposed to the $10 tops one could buy from local chain stores, etc.


----------



## Happy (27 February 2009)

dalek said:


> ..
> The Chinese are more than capable of producing premium quality goods. They make according to the specifications of their customer.
> ..




Correct and not so correct.

If you deal with company that produces your goods there is no guarantee that that particular company actually does it all the time.

They happily use sub-contractors and sometimes they cut corners themselves, after all if they produce something cheaper then there is bigger chop for them without renegotiating the final price.


----------



## dalek (27 February 2009)

Happy said:


> Correct and not so correct.
> 
> If you deal with company that produces your goods there is no guarantee that that particular company actually does it all the time.
> 
> They happily use sub-contractors and sometimes they cut corners themselves, after all if they produce something cheaper then there is bigger chop for them without renegotiating the final price.




That's true, it's  important in buying goods from China that you establish a proper ongoing Quality Control  procedure and that fairly regular factory visits are made.


----------



## sam76 (27 February 2009)

Apparently Chinese milk is the ducks guts.


----------



## vincent191 (27 February 2009)

If you paid for a beer, don't expect a glass of champagne. But let us get back onto the topic. I guess the management in PB is not very good. In their latest report they have identified many areas whereby they can improve the profitability of the business.

My question is "why did they wait until they hit an iceberg before thay start building the lifeboats? what the hell were they doing all these years?"

One area PB management had identified is that they had too many brands (something like 600) and by consolidating the number of brands they can save significant costs. 

Now surely they should have done this before the ship starting sinking. PB's style of management is what I call "management by disaster". I will be unloading my shareholdings. I have losted faith in this mob.


----------



## Jikx (27 February 2009)

One has to ask, how does one get these multi-million dollar director jobs? Pacific brands is the epitome of the badly run company, not so bad that they go completely broke, but bad enough that they've been on life support for a decade...


----------



## Buddy (27 February 2009)

Even Malcolm thinks it is poor form.....

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25114243-12377,00.html

Maybe a solution is to make shareholder voting on renumeration binding by law. That would certainly scatter a few cats amongst boardrooms, eh?


----------



## Julia (27 February 2009)

Jikx said:


> One has to ask, how does one get these multi-million dollar director jobs? Pacific brands is the epitome of the badly run company, not so bad that they go completely broke, but bad enough that they've been on life support for a decade...



That's right.  They've had many millions apparently in taxpayer funds.
I don't often agree with Sharan Burrow from the ACTU but did today when she said:   "Corporate Australia has lost its way".


----------



## nomore4s (27 February 2009)

Buddy said:


> Vince, you are probably correct. I just havn't seen any quality chinese made stuff. At least, that I know about. I have been known to go down to the local hardware store and buy cheap tools (generally chinese made) but they really are crap.  I am quite happy to pay for quality when I need it (e.g. power tools that have a life greater than 5 hours use ).




Most of the higher quality brands are now made in China as well (I used to work for one of those brands and visted factories in China) and the quality is just as good as products out of any of the other factories around the world.

On the subject of PB, I find it amusing that they can justify sacking 1000's of people but still put the hand out for excessive pay packets, its not like they are doing a excellent job - slowly sending the company broke any mug could do that.


----------



## Buddy (27 February 2009)

Julia said:


> That's right.  They've had many millions apparently in taxpayer funds.
> I don't often agree with Sharan Burrow from the ACTU but did today when she said:   "Corporate Australia has lost its way".




More on the issue from Swan..................
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25114290-601,00.html

You, maybe it's about time the gummint made companies more accoutable for the funds in brown paper bags that they hand out.  What's the point in giving money to a dog run company like P Brand, when all they do is pee it up against the wall?  There should be performance indicators, etc, attached to the funds.... and accountability from the boards.  That it, we cut off your goolies if you stuff up!

And.........this is particularly topical at the moment with all the money being dished out to car companies.  And....whilst I am at it, how about some accountability from the great unwashed receiving their handouts.


----------



## trading_rookie (27 February 2009)

> Funny thing is, P Brand is a very badly run company. Too many piss weak brands that do not make money. If I were running that company I would get rid of the crap brands, limit the number of products made, concentrate on quality and the inevitable cost savings & profit increase resulting from rationalising the products.



Sorry to bust your bubble Buddy – but isn’t that what PBG is doing? Selling or ceasing the existence of those brands that under perform? The irony is this too can result in job loses. For example, if they decide to cease the manufacturing of Dunlop foam for bedding.



> Maybe the board of PB should have a look at the way R.M. Williams is run.




You mean, PBG should follow RM Williams?….

_
*R.M. Williams moves to China* 
Bootmaker and Australian icon R.M. Williams has broken with 60 years of tradition by shifting manufacturing offshore. But the outfitter to bushmen and the fashion-conscious alike stressed that it would import only lower-cost items such as logo-bearing T-shirts, a few other shirts, and baseball caps. Concerned about defending the brand identity of the 60-year-old company, chief executive Hamish Turner said all design and development would continue in Australia. He said the decision to move some manufacturing to China came down to the fact that "the prices of the offshore produced items will be more competitive". (Source: SMH). 
_

Also, don't forget RM Williams rival Bludstone moved manufacting offshore not long ago.

If anything, both the RM Williams and Bludstone examples, solidifiy Morphett’s claims that PBG was one of the last Australian manufacturing companies to remain in Oz. And as RM Williams claims design and development will remain here in Oz…so too for PBG and why most of the job cuts are blue-collar and not white.



> PB management like you still think of the Chinese factories as sweat shops with thousands of lowly paid workers working in third world conditions couldn't be further from the truth!!! They can produce first class goods if you are prepared to pay for it.




Considering PBG have ppl on the payroll in China and all over Asia and have distribution centres there, I’d say Vince that’s a pretty dumb statement to make. 75% of Bonds' products comes from China already. 

The problem for PBG is their contracts are in US not AUD, and the AUD has slipped considerably. One wonders in hindsight if the acquistions of Yakka, Sheriden, and some of Globe International brands like Mossimo and Stussy were the right ones considering the debt it has put PBG in.



> My question is "why did they wait until they hit an iceberg before thay start building the lifeboats? what the hell were they doing all these years?"




They didn’t, they’ve been planning to move manufacturing offshore for sometime. It’s just the governments have been giving them a handout to keep jobs here, and the economic crisis has intensified.



> One area PB management had identified is that they had too many brands (something like 600) and by consolidating the number of brands they can save significant costs.




Not 600 – 200. They’re not consolidating, brands like Repco and Malvern bicycles, and Dunlop Sport are on the market for sale. Others will just cease production.



> But if the exces continue managing this company same as they have been, then I would not like to be a shareholder.




As a peeved off shareholder, I find it sad, that Oz once a strong textile producing country is a shadow of it’s former self. I find it hilarious and amusing that both sides of government are having a go at PBG for sacking workers yet both will jump on their soapboxes and sing the praises of free markets….those same free markets that have seen textile, clothing, and footwear jobs over the last 40 years disappear to cheaper workers in Asia to keep margins increasing  – afterall, there’s no such thing as a jock and sock bubble like there was in property that would see ppl paying $40 for a pack of socks. 

One then can hardly blame PBG who accepted government handouts to keep ailing industry jobs afloat as long as they have in the name of politics - as in no job losses means happy unions and voters. Now they're the scape goats for wanting to try and become profitable again.

Blame free markets, If anything, PBG have themselves to blame for not getting rid of non-performing brands a long time ago rather than waiting to hear what their consultants reported. 

Their  business model, to dominate the market in  low, middle, and high cost brackets of an industry worked well during the boom economic times…sadly, not now. For example, Grosby in the low-end market to Julius Marlow in the high-end of footwear industry.

Oh, and ask the banks if they want to provide credit to the textile, clothing, and footwear manufacturers in Oz. By all accounts, ANZ is the most hostile to the idea. 



> Take Ralph Lauren's Polo shirts for example.
> Very high quality, and consequently highly priced garments from an American designer with, what a surprise, Made in China on the tags.
> People still pay for a) brand recognition and wankyness and
> b) Top quality manufacturing of the garment as opposed to the $10 tops one could buy from local chain stores, etc.




Spot on. Walk into a DJ’s and look at the polo shirts they sell and tell me there worth the $70- $80 they’re asking for? The quality looks no different to that found in Lowes or Best&Less. It’s just an embroided logo you’re paying extra for. 

Recall the DVD player craze of the early noughties. I remember spending 3 months researching a $300 China model compared to that of the $700-$1K models from Sony, Panasonic, etc. And found to my amazement the $300 unit had the same OEM as Panasonic, yet was considerably cheaper. Infact, it was even region-free, Sony was asking an extra $100 to pop in a CD that would make their units region-free - the cheapies came packaged region-free! 

Years later someone who worked for Strathfield Car Radios told me how on a trip to Taiwan he went to the factory that produced the DVD players for all the competing brands – the well known and not so well known, and they were basically all on the same production line, just that the branding and casings were different…so then, why would you pay hundreds of dollars for a Sony when an Omni (at the time) was a better alternative. My reason for going down this path, was because I got burnt  buying supposed best brand home entertainment technology that ended up being crap.


----------



## Julia (27 February 2009)

Buddy said:


> And.........this is particularly topical at the moment with all the money being dished out to car companies.  And....whilst I am at it, how about some accountability from the great unwashed receiving their handouts.



Oh Buddy!  Wash your mouth out!!   You cannot possibly be suggesting any "infringement of individual rights".   Just say that anywhere near the Left and be prepared to be crucified for being judgmental and elitist.
Maybe just buy some shares in Aristocrat Leisure et al or whoever makes the poker machines.


----------



## johenmo (28 February 2009)

Does anyone truly think that (as a general rule) that senior execs & boards have the shareholders in mind?  A few execs/boardmembers do have shareholders in mind, but they are employees doing a job and getting paid (often with incentives) and #1 priority is to maximise return to themselves.  Sounds cynical but is close to the truth.

The company I work for is doing OK.  Profits are down but still relatively healthy but we are doing all the things others are doing - freezing staff numbers, zero overhead growth etc etc.  And the directors have forgone salary increases (more of a directive than by choice, I think).  And I don't believe the rest of us are immune from a freeze.  WE'll see how 2009 goes.

PB just wanted to squeeze something out before it gets worse - may not be able to get a rise in 1 - 2 years!!!


----------



## Aussiejeff (28 February 2009)

johenmo said:


> *Does anyone truly think that (as a general rule) that senior execs & boards have the shareholders in mind?  A few execs/boardmembers do have shareholders in mind, but they are employees doing a job and getting paid (often with incentives) and #1 priority is to maximise return to themselves.  Sounds cynical but is close to the truth.*
> 
> The company I work for is doing OK.  Profits are down but still relatively healthy but we are doing all the things others are doing - freezing staff numbers, zero overhead growth etc etc.  And the directors have forgone salary increases (more of a directive than by choice, I think).  And I don't believe the rest of us are immune from a freeze.  WE'll see how 2009 goes.
> 
> PB just wanted to squeeze something out before it gets worse - may not be able to get a rise in 1 - 2 years!!!




IMO I suspect you are spot on, johenmo.

The board of Pac Brands have simply "sucker played" the gummint into forking out about $17 Million to them so they could give themselves a big pay rise. Why not? The stoopid gummint rules allow it to happen, so who wouldn't vote themselves a massive pay rise if everyone else is doing it?

On top of that, they have obviously seen a big opportunity to cut and run to China, where once they are behind the Great Wall and paying peanuts for near-as-damn-it slave labour, they can cut the wages bill by a massive amount and consequently vote themselves yet another huge pay rise. Why not? THE RULES ALLOW IT. Every other capitalistic company in competition with Chinese manufacturing probably wants to do the same if they have half the chance!

The gummint has to alter Australian company rules and regulation or the game won't stop.

I agree with Tony Abbott. The KRudd gummint could easily change shareholder voting power rules to "binding" - currently, shareholder votes are "non-binding" on directors remuneration, which has led to this ridiculous mess in the first place.

I know, I know - often the greatest percentage of shareholders in companies ARE the very same directors - who are voting for themselves! But surely the gummint could introduce rules whereby board members & directors votes DON'T COUNT when company directors / ceo's remuneration votes are taken?


aj


----------



## johenmo (28 February 2009)

Aussiejeff said:


> I know, I know - often the greatest percentage of shareholders in companies ARE the very same directors - who are voting for themselves! But surely the gummint could introduce rules whereby board members & directors votes DON'T COUNT when company directors / ceo's remuneration votes are taken?aj




Agree Aussiejeff.  Smells like conflict of interest if you can vote on yr own pay rise.  I know mine would have been higher over the years if I'd had a say!!

In an ideal world, bonuses shouldn't be needed as people should be remunerated and doing their best anyway.  That's the basic of doing a job.  But since people are inherently selfish (read the book "When customers think we don't care" by Richard Buchanan to understand what I mean, rather than take it at face value) it's a fantasy to think some won't. (DISC: I am on an incentive scheme, but tend to disregard it as it is influenced by many things beyond my control).

And if PB goes under, I bet some of the faces will pop back to the surface in some other company, ready to wield the mighty sword of shareholder wealth destruction.

Wow - I do sound bitter and twisted!!  Must need breakfast.


----------



## cashcow (28 February 2009)

Interesting to note in many of the links already posted on this story that the unions (in particular the TWU) is planning some kind of boycott/picket.  Given that their constituents would be customers of some of the high profile brands (King Gee/Yakka, et al), I wonder if the executive at PB took this kind of backlash into account.

No good offshoring if the "benefits" are eroded by customer boycott.


----------



## xyzedarteerf (28 February 2009)

Buddy said:


> Maybe a solution is to make shareholder voting on renumeration binding by law. That would certainly scatter a few cats amongst boardrooms, eh?




not that easy i have voted a couple of times in these shareholder meetings , and these selfish directors usually use there majority share holding to vote themselves consecutive pay rises and bonuses anyway.


----------



## Mofra (28 February 2009)

cashcow said:


> No good offshoring if the "benefits" are eroded by customer boycott.



You would hope that any exec worth their salt woudl have priced a backlash into their projections; having said that, does anyone know how Blundstone are fairing now they too are a "importer" with no manufacturing presence in Australia?


----------



## Aussiejeff (28 February 2009)

xyzedarteerf said:


> not that easy i have voted a couple of times in these shareholder meetings , and these selfish directors usually use there majority share holding to vote themselves consecutive pay rises and bonuses anyway.




Which is why I suggested regulations should be introduced that _prevent_ director / ceo share holdings from being counted at meetings where "ordinary" shareholders are being asked to vote on options, preference shares or remuneration for said directors / ceo's.

You know it makes sense.  

But can the gummint see it?

There could be a cutoff point for size of company I suppose (since in some very small companies the ceo, directors and board members make up most of the shareholders!). I'm totally guessing here, but, say, companies with more than 10 employees and/or more than 10 shareholders should be restricted in that way?


----------



## GumbyLearner (28 February 2009)

Aussiejeff said:


> Which is why I suggested regulations should be introduced that _prevent_ director / ceo share holdings from being counted at meetings where "ordinary" shareholders are being asked to vote on options, preference shares or remuneration for said directors / ceo's.
> 
> You know it makes sense.
> 
> ...




The gummint probably can't see it.

Here is an interesting press release from the Greens today.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25118535-12377,00.html

*Pay umpire should rein in CEOs: Greens*

THE Rudd government's new industrial umpire should be given the power to curb excessive executive salaries, the Greens say.

Greens Leader Bob Brown says they will look to amend the Fair Work bill currently before parliament in an effort to rein in fat cats' pay.

"Under the Greens' proposal, the Fair Work Australia commission would review executive salaries before ordinary workers are made redundant,'' Senator Brown said.

"The commission would require a company to explain why high executive salaries should not be lopped in preference to jobs.''


----------



## Wysiwyg (28 February 2009)

GumbyLearner said:


> *Pay umpire should rein in CEOs: Greens*
> 
> THE Rudd government's new industrial umpire should be given the power to curb excessive executive salaries, the Greens say.
> 
> ...




That`s a nice call by Mr. Brown.Somewhere in history an imbalance occured with pays for work.The people on the floor doing the physical get the least and the figureheads give themselves shares, options, salary increases and wealth the people on the floor will never see in their lifetime.
Poor company sales and production always gets felt by the lowly paid worker as each level of command abdicates responsibility to the one below.
It`s a system of thinking that needs to be reworked so we have more respect at all levels.

At the moment the quote "ordinary worker" (an insult in itself) is forced to knife the other "ordinary worker" in the back to keep their job if someone has to go.Dirty tricks but that`s what they do to keep their job.


----------



## Wysiwyg (28 February 2009)

Another thing. I know of a company that pumped a wildcat oil/gas well so big that it shot the share price through the roof 500 to 600%.A director unloaded a parcel of shares at near the peak and then ... you guessed it ... the well was a fizzer, the hydrocarbon "shows" were less than first thought and production tests proved a small flow rate.
The terminolgy they used was extremely sensationalised but because everyone trusts company announcements to be factual, it was believed to be true.
Now that is very suspect.


----------



## GumbyLearner (28 February 2009)

Wysiwyg said:


> Poor company sales and production always gets felt by the lowly paid worker as each level of command abdicates responsibility to the one below.
> It`s a system of thinking that needs to be reworked so we have more respect at all levels.
> 
> At the moment the quote "ordinary worker" (an insult in itself) is forced to knife the other "ordinary worker" in the back to keep their job if someone has to go.Dirty tricks but that`s what they do to keep their job.




All great points wysiwyg.

One can only hope that the way the banks and big business have been sticking it to the little guy for so long will eventually elevate the consciousness of the average joe blow during this downturn. If you put in the effort you should be rewarded. Failure should not be a pre-condition for huge executive bonuses. There is no "I" in team. 

I agree. Respect at all levels is very important.


----------



## GumbyLearner (28 February 2009)

Wysiwyg said:


> Another thing. I know of a company that pumped a wildcat oil/gas well so big that it shot the share price through the roof 500 to 600%.A director unloaded a parcel of shares at near the peak and then ... you guessed it ... the well was a fizzer, the hydrocarbon "shows" were less than first thought and production tests proved a small flow rate.
> The terminolgy they used was extremely sensationalised but because everyone trusts company announcements to be factual, it was believed to be true.
> Now that is very suspect.




I think there could be some merit in a model like this one. Don't think the CEO's in Australia would like it though. But it appears to have worked very well for this company. More jobs, more profits and more success.

*Semco SA - Brazil*

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ricardo_Semler

After dramatic restrictions on liquidity instituted by Brazilian president Fernando Collor de Mello to combat hyperinflation in 1990, Brazil's economy went into a severe downturn, forcing many companies to declare bankruptcy. Workers at SEMCO agreed to wage cuts, providing their share of profits was increased to 39%, management salaries were cut by 40% and employees were given the right to approve every item of expenditure.

Performing multiple roles during the crisis gave workers greater knowledge of the operations and more suggestions on how to improve the business. Reforms implemented during that time led to 65% reduction in inventories, a marked reduction in product delivery times and a product defects rate that fell to less than 1%. As the business climate improved, Semco's revenues and profitability improved dramatically.

As of 2003, SEMCO had annual revenue of $212 million, from $4 million in 1982 and $35 million in 1994, with an annual growth rate of up to 40 per cent a year. It employs 3,000 workers in 2003, as opposed to 90 in 1982.


----------



## tigerboi (28 February 2009)

*Re:eternal shame ive got imported blundstones*



Mofra said:


> does anyone know how Blundstone are fairing now they too are a "importer" with no manufacturing presence in Australia?




sheesh mofra ya got me outa my seat in a flash onto the verandah to check out my blundstones.

..."australia since 1870" i bought in 2001 & wore them out & only use them for mowing the lawn these days.

the next set i got in about 2004 but i never use them much as i wear runners & masuers on interstate.they dont have the australian since 1870 words under the sole.enough said(i didnt notice til now!)

anyway back to these scabs pac brands my transport brothers down at botany have slapped a ban on these dogs taking out any gear to china as the people have paid for them.what about the ceo has she got more front than grace bros. or what ill take x3 you workers can have the sack.bitch

reckon get a syndicate together to short their ar5es to -1c


----------



## GumbyLearner (28 February 2009)

*Re: eternal shame ive got imported blundstones*



tigerboi said:


> sheesh mofra ya got me outa my seat in a flash onto the verandah to check out my blundstones.
> 
> ..."australia since 1870" i bought in 2001 & wore them out & only use them for mowing the lawn these days.
> 
> ...




Yep another quality Aussie product sacrificed. Started wearing "Blundies" 25 years ago and the steel caps while working in Transport. What a real shame another irreplacable, second-to-none product bites the dust. 

They started selling those "Redback" boots (I think that was the name) years ago. But the quality of the workmanship in the boot was crap in comparison. Soft quality Australian leather, durable soles and excellent comfort was what you got with Blundstones. Elle Mac was a big fan of them too. Could also claim them as a protective clothing item on the Taxpack once a year. Now we are supporting sub-standard overseas trash. IMHO!


----------



## robots (28 February 2009)

hello,

i use Oliver work boots, the AT 45-639, lace up mid boot alloy cap they use, made in Ballarat i believe

http://www.oliver.com.au/asp/show_products.asp?CatId=2

wouldnt mine getting a pair of the high boot AT's, fantastic for the streets 

one company will go and another will pop up, not much changes really

thankyou
robots


----------



## GumbyLearner (28 February 2009)

robots said:


> one company will go and another will pop up, not much changes really
> 
> thankyou
> robots




Jobs


----------



## cashcow (28 February 2009)

robots said:


> hello,
> 
> i use Oliver work boots, the AT 45-639, lace up mid boot alloy cap they use, made in Ballarat i believe
> 
> ...




Now that's voting with your feet.  Well done, robots. 

Seriously, though, I do try to support local businesses when I possibly can too.


----------



## robots (28 February 2009)

cashcow said:


> Now that's voting with your feet.  Well done, robots.
> 
> Seriously, though, I do try to support local businesses when I possibly can too.




hello,

thanks, always out there trying to my best for the country

wore all the other brands but these offer superior support, cushioning etc

about $160/pair, normally get about 12-16mths from a set (extreme use)

these are serious walking shoes and for the walkers out there try on a pair before going to the outdoor shops if in the market for some hiking boots

thankyou
robots


----------



## GumbyLearner (28 February 2009)

robots said:


> hello,
> 
> thanks, always out there trying to my best for the country
> 
> ...




I suppose this was KRudd's fault too. Even though he wasn't the PM at the time. That great little Aussie Battler John Howard could bail out *National Textiles* and his brother *Stan Howard *but not so for Blundstone.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blundstone_Footwear

In January 2007, Blundstone Australia announced, due to increased costs, that it would shift production and manufacturing activities from Hobart and New Zealand to Thailand and India within the year, resulting in *360 job losses.*

Hypocrisy at it's finest!


----------



## Nyden (28 February 2009)

robots said:


> hello,
> 
> thanks, always out there trying to my best for the country
> 
> ...




I agree. I wear Oliver shoes as well, I love them. Oh, and yes - they're made in Ballarat.


----------



## Wysiwyg (28 February 2009)

GumbyLearner said:


> I suppose this was KRudd's fault too. Even though he wasn't the PM at the time. That great little Aussie Battler John Howard could bail out *National Textiles* and his brother *Stan Howard *but not so for Blundstone.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blundstone_Footwear
> 
> ...




So does this mean that Aussie taxes and wages are too high for companies to continue doing business in Australia?Surely the material costs aren`t the only reason.


----------



## tigerboi (1 March 2009)

*Re: eternal shame ive got imported blundstones*



GumbyLearner said:


> Yep another quality Aussie product sacrificed. Started wearing "Blundies" 25 years ago and the steel caps while working in Transport. What a real shame another irreplacable, second-to-none product bites the dust.
> 
> They started selling those "Redback" boots (I think that was the name) years ago. But the quality of the workmanship in the boot was crap in comparison. Soft quality Australian leather, durable soles and excellent comfort was what you got with Blundstones. Elle Mac was a big fan of them too. Could also claim them as a protective clothing item on the Taxpack once a year. Now we are supporting sub-standard overseas trash. IMHO!




heres the 2 versions of my boots gumby,excuse the size as i didnt want to crop them so you can see the lot, if i could find a good aussie made pair i would pay good $$$.

never wear them unless i got to load at toll or linfox as they carrying on like good sorts if you lob in runners so i just toss them in the bunk,check the pics out cying shame all down to our spineless politicians...TB

aussie version 2001







made in china 2004


----------



## GumbyLearner (1 March 2009)

*Re: eternal shame ive got imported blundstones*



tigerboi said:


> heres the 2 versions of my boots gumby,excuse the size as i didnt want to crop them so you can see the lot, if i could find a good aussie made pair i would pay good $$$.
> 
> never wear them unless i got to load at toll or linfox as they carrying on like good sorts if you lob in runners so i just toss them in the bunk,check the pics out cying shame all down to our spineless politicians...TB
> 
> ...




I wholeheartedly agree tigerboi.
Canberra is full of jellybacks and rubbernecks who haven't
done a hard days work in their life.


----------



## theasxgorilla (2 March 2009)

Buddy said:


> It strikes me as very strange, giving an obscene pay rise to Execs of a company that is probably going down the gurgler.  But I guess thats the way companies are run these days by the execs - short term avarice and greed, and take as much dosh as you can before sticking it up the shareholders.




It used to be that the way to become extraordinarily wealthy was to be an entrepreneur.  Probably still is.  But I would estimate that the last 10-15 years it has been a lot more efficient (with the exception of dotcom), in terms of effort required, to gain control of a company from the inside and extract wealth from it through extravagant salaries and bonuses.  Yes you kill the goose that was laying the golden eggs, but how many golden eggs does one senior management team and board of directors need to be set up for life?


----------



## prawn_86 (2 March 2009)

theasxgorilla said:


> It used to be that the way to become extraordinarily wealthy was to be an entrepreneur.  Probably still is.  But I would estimate that the last 10-15 years it has been a lot more efficient (with the exception of dotcom), in terms of effort required, to gain control of a company from the inside and extract wealth from it through extravagant salaries and bonuses.  Yes you kill the goose that was laying the golden eggs, but how many golden eggs does one senior management team and board of directors need to be set up for life?




Agree here G. Obviously either route is not 'easy' but to me it seems to have less risk to try and work ones way up a corporate ladder and hopefully get to those massively paid roles, than take a lot of risks starting ones own co, which you have no initial wage etc etc


----------



## tigerboi (2 March 2009)

*Re:gutless politicians is our problem*

Here i cropped the tb booties i think its a graphic illustration of how the numnuts we elect do not act in our interests by signing agreements with others who couldnt give a rats about our manufacturing industries,why should our workers go on the dole so overseas workers get a job?.

we the people should be having a referendum on such important matters of so called free trade both sides lib/nat & labour have acted against the national interests.

we cant compete with indentured slavery in these countries & shouldnt have to,the gutless politicians should slap a ban on any company importing anything from overseas such as pac brands intends to do,if we had pollies with balls these companies wouldnt do it.

if the people dont stand up then all we will be left with is us doing each others ironing...my rant over...tb


----------



## numbercruncher (2 March 2009)

Good to see more and more people recognising Globalisation as the failure that it is ......

Whats even worse in a welfare state like Australia is we are borrowing from the very nations taking our jobs to pay our unemployed ..... if it wasnt so serious you would think its a joke.


----------



## tigerboi (2 March 2009)

numbercruncher said:


> Good to see more and more people recognising Globalisation as the failure that it is ......
> 
> Whats even worse in a welfare state like Australia is we are borrowing from the very nations taking our jobs to pay our unemployed ..... if it wasnt so serious you would think its a joke.




yep the rest of the world trying to get here must think,what about those aussies are they dumb or what...welfare is 42% of gubment spending.i reckon we are getting set up for a rise in the gst to 15%.

cant wait for the treason trials...

john button(cancer caught up with this grub) minister in the hawke years took all the tariffs off & a senator to boot...unrepresenative swill a la keating,what happens when we run out of things to sell?

the only way out is to bring home the future fund(national scandal that our money is not used here) build the ord dam & pipe the water to parts of nsw,qld,sa,nt to turn us into the food bowl of the world,build an airport,already got the railway.great for the road transport industry as well,this is what our generation should give to the next .

now just need a politician with backbone & vision??someone like henry parkes or bradfield the harbour bridge builder,well ahead of his time that fellow as he built 10 lanes on the bridge,70 year later we got numbskulls who cant build a 3 lane highway both ways...tragic...TB


----------



## theasxgorilla (2 March 2009)

numbercruncher said:


> Good to see more and more people recognising Globalisation as the failure that it is ......




Failure?  Ho ho ho and a bottle of rum.  It was inevitable.  It's here.  It's not going anywhere.


----------



## theasxgorilla (2 March 2009)

prawn_86 said:


> Agree here G. Obviously either route is not 'easy' but to me it seems to have less risk to try and work ones way up a corporate ladder and hopefully get to those massively paid roles, *than take a lot of risks starting ones own co*, which you have no initial wage etc etc




And what it wreaks of to me isn't just greed but desperation.  I think a lot of these old fatcats know that a decent standard of living in retirement, all 20-30 years of it, is going to require a lot more money than most people have.  And so they're making desperate grabs for capital where it still exists, while they still can.

The world is frooted.


----------



## prawn_86 (3 March 2009)

numbercruncher said:


> Good to see more and more people recognising Globalisation as the failure that it is ......




How has globalisation failed? The banking systems have failed due to greed, but there is a lot wider choice of products for consumers now, if the gov wants to sell of the farm/mine thats their problem. Globalisation would work evewn better if all countries had the same rules/regulations.

I would rather live in a globalised worl than have to rely on everything been produced (at probably a worse quality) more expensively in Aus


----------



## tigerboi (4 March 2009)

*Re:Australian made goods are some of the best in the world*



prawn_86 said:


> I would rather live in a globalised worl than have to rely on everything been produced (at probably a worse quality) more expensively in Aus




How do you arrive at that assumption?i would like to see this probably worse quality.what australian made product is worse quality than the imported cheap variety?the reason to go off shore is to cut labour costs & use inferior products to lower the price.

the reason goods manufactured in austraila are more expensive are because the quality is second to none & the workers get paid real wages.not indentured slavery.

maybe you should conduct your own globalisation survey by buying aussie made goods & the cheap imported brands give them a thrashing & see which one lasts the longest.

whats better a $5 chinese made hi vis work shirt that lasts 6 months or a $20 aussie made shirt that lasts for years?

costs 3/4 less lasts 10 times less...work it out

im going out to find this outrageous less australian quality!


----------



## sinner (7 March 2009)

Hi guys,

Here is your 4am update.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25150808-2702,00.html

*Pacific in push for $7m grant*


> PACIFIC Brands is pressing ahead with a contentious plea for millions of dollars in extra taxpayer assistance, and the Rudd Government appears largely powerless to stop the company from getting most of the funding despite the loss of 1850 jobs.
> 
> In a move branded as "shameless" by unions, Pacific Brands yesterday offered to provide at least $1 million to help retrain its redundant workers, while confirming it was pursuing about $7 million in government grants.
> 
> ...


----------



## Aussiejeff (7 March 2009)

sinner said:


> Hi guys,
> 
> Here is your 4am update.
> 
> ...




Re: PacBrands pushing for a further $7 Million and the apparent _impotence_ of the gummint to stop it, this response by the said _impotent_ gummint says it all - how utterly PATHETIC our Oz gummint laws and controls are when it comes to accountability for public money spent ... 



> A spokeswoman for Industry Minister Kim Carr said *the grants process was "not a process the Government controls" and was "done at arm's length"*.




 

Cheeses wept.... :angry:


----------



## Aussiejeff (23 March 2009)

[SIZE=+2]IT'S ALL OUR FAULT!!![/SIZE]

Apparently, according to head honcho Ms Morphet, Oz consumers are a snivelling bunch of tightwads.



> *AUSTRALIAN consumers are partly to blame for the demise of 1850 jobs at Pacific Brands, the company's chief executive says.*
> 
> Sue Morphet last month announced the job cuts at the clothing company, which makes iconic brands Bonds, Berlei and King Gee, and the shift of some local manufacturing to China.
> 
> ...




Stupid me. I could have helped save all those jobs if only I had rushed out and bought another 1,000,000 pairs of Jocks! 

So, jail me....


----------



## MrBurns (23 March 2009)

I reckon she's right, those jobs would still be there if all the whingers bought Pacific Brands instead of the cheaper Chinese product, the only reason they're still in Australia at all is the Govt grants, otherwise why on earth would you produce a T shirt for $3 when you can get it done in China for 
20c ?

Same goes for GMH it will happen one day.

The Media calling her the most hated woman in Australia what a bunch of absolute pimps and liars, most people know why this has happened, I mean they buy Chinese products dont they ?


----------



## nomore4s (23 March 2009)

She does have a point though.

What amuses me is the lady on 60min last whinging she had been betrayed most probably buys other brands that have moved production overseas without a thought to the Australian jobs lost.


----------



## MrBurns (23 March 2009)

nomore4s said:


> She does have a point though.
> 
> What amuses me is the lady on 60min last whinging she had been betrayed most probably buys other brands that have moved production overseas without a thought to the Australian jobs lost.




Precisely.


----------



## GumbyLearner (23 March 2009)

Aussiejeff said:


> [SIZE=+2]IT'S ALL OUR FAULT!!![/SIZE]
> 
> Apparently, according to head honcho Ms Morphet, Oz consumers are a snivelling bunch of tightwads.
> 
> ...




I have been buying chesty bonds singlets and jocks for decades. 
So have have others in my family for generations.

Sue Morphett is an arrogant retard.


----------



## nomore4s (23 March 2009)

GumbyLearner said:


> Sue Morphett is an arrogant retard.




Why? Because she made a hard decision for the benefit of her company?

What's she meant to do, let the company lose profitability and risk losing more Aussie jobs? She also has share holders to answer to as well.

It's easy to critise from this side of the fence, but to me at least it looks like they explored every avenue to try to keep production here in Aus but the numbers just didn't stack up.


----------



## MrBurns (23 March 2009)

GumbyLearner said:


> Sue Morphett is an arrogant retard.




No ...no, you're confused. 

Keven Rudd is an arrogant retard. 

Sue Morphett on the other hand is a very smart woman running a huge company and has to protect it. 

If all her competitors are off shore what is she supposed to do ?, sorry Gumby but you just dont use enough jocks to make up for the losses they incur by staying in Australia.

To expect any company to set up shop simply to give Australians jobs is naive and stupid.

If it can be done better elsewhere tough..........they don't run a charity.


----------



## GumbyLearner (23 March 2009)

nomore4s said:


> Why? Because she made a hard decision for the benefit of her company?
> 
> What's she meant to do, let the company lose profitability and risk losing more Aussie jobs? She also has share holders to answer to as well.
> 
> It's easy to critise from this side of the fence, but to me at least it looks like they explored every avenue to try to keep production here in Aus but the numbers just didn't stack up.




She is an arrogant retard because it is her responsibility to market the products of the company. Consumers are a pretty fickle bunch these days and unless you market something and introduce new products or novel ways to adapt your products, Consumers will simply not buy them. 

That arrogant retard should take some responsibility for the demise of her own company including the years of assistance it received from the taxpayer.

I stand by what I said earlier.
Sue Morphett is an arrogant retard!

http://business.theage.com.au/business/goodman-learns-tough-lessons-20090322-95pa.html

FOR Peter Margin, managing director of food group Goodman Fielder, there are lessons to be learnt from Pacific Brands. *The clothing manufacturer and retailer got itself into a position where several brands had low sales and a few main brands brought in most of the revenue.*

For Mr Margin, managing brands is crucial. *"You can't afford to have sub-scale brand equity out there," he said. "In two years, you should have 20-25 per cent of revenue from new products. You have to turn over the products pretty rapidly. Consumer tastes change pretty quickly. You've got to be able to respond."*


----------



## MrBurns (23 March 2009)

GumbyLearner said:


> She is an arrogant retard because it is her responsibility to market the products of the company. Consumers are a pretty fickle bunch these days and unless you market something and introduce new products or novel ways to adapt your products, Consumers will simply not buy them.
> 
> That arrogant retard should take some responsibility for the demise of her own company including the years of assistance it received from the taxpayer.
> 
> ...




ROFL............hahahahaha ok buy these jocks at $8 and dont buy the exact same ones next to them made in China for $5, wow market your way out of that one smarty pants.

The only reason they are in Australia at all is Govt grants, wake up.


----------



## GumbyLearner (23 March 2009)

MrBurns said:


> ROFL............hahahahaha ok buy these jocks at $8 and dont buy the exact same ones next to them made in China for $5, wow market your way out of that one smarty pants.
> 
> The only reason they are in Australia at all is Govt grants, wake up.




Mr.Burns if that's as clear-cut as you say, then why are we indirectly paying these retards millions in executive remuneration. 
Wake up


----------



## Struzball (23 March 2009)

The 60 minutes interview last night was one of the worst interviews I've ever seen.  She forced words into Morphets mouth and clearly sided with the factory worker who lost her sewing job.  

I say congratulations to Morphet for being forward thinking to keep the company (and thousands of jobs) alive.


----------



## MrBurns (23 March 2009)

GumbyLearner said:


> Mr.Burns if that's as clear-cut as you say, then why are we indirectly paying these retards millions in executive remuneration.
> Wake up




We arent paying them the company is, if you pay peanuts you get monkeys , look at the PM, it's not easy running a company like that it actually takes brains and hard work. If she wasnt being paid $1M plus bonuses she'd go elsewhere and you can be sure he whole comopnay would fail and the 7000 remaining workiers in this country would be out of work also.

We pay the grant to keep them here, much better for them to go elsewhere and who says they haven't got the right to do just that.


----------



## MrBurns (23 March 2009)

Struzball said:


> The 60 minutes interview last night was one of the worst interviews I've ever seen.  She forced words into Morphets mouth and clearly sided with the factory worker who lost her sewing job.
> 
> I say congratulations to Morphet for being forward thinking to keep the company (and thousands of jobs) alive.




The sewing worker who lost her job is an idiot, I dont know why 60 minutes would let her on the show she's more suited to This Day Tonight and other low grade crap offerings.


----------



## Struzball (23 March 2009)

MrBurns said:


> If she wasnt being paid $1M plus bonuses she'd go elsewhere and you can be sure he whole comopnay would fail and the 7000 remaining workiers in this country would be out of work also.




I had to laugh at all the old ladies milling around the factory 'protesting'.
Seriously, what were they hoping to acheive?  The only thing stopping them from going and starting their own clothes making factory was having a $1M plus salary woman to manage them, i.e. the person who gave them a job in the first place.


----------



## GumbyLearner (23 March 2009)

MrBurns said:


> We arent paying them the company is, *if you pay peanuts you get monkeys* , look at the PM, it's not easy running a company like that it actually takes brains and hard work. If she wasnt being paid $1M plus bonuses she'd go elsewhere and you can be sure he whole comopnay would fail..




I see what your saying about the PM.

What about this guy? Is he a monkey? Or just taking one for the TEAM?


----------



## MrBurns (23 March 2009)

GumbyLearner said:


> I see what your saying about the PM.
> 
> What about this guy? Is he a monkey? Or just taking one for the TEAM?




Yeah thats the Japanese way and if they went broke he would probably fall on his sword..........literally.

I dont begrudge execs their salary after all it;s a private company they can do what they like but if they get a BAILOUT different story you get sweet FA till you pay the money back. Pac Brands wasnt a bailout it's an ongoing subsidy to keep them in the country, believe it or not $2M pa is not a lot to run a company that size.


----------



## aleckara (23 March 2009)

numbercruncher said:


> Good to see more and more people recognising Globalisation as the failure that it is ......
> 
> Whats even worse in a welfare state like Australia is we are borrowing from the very nations taking our jobs to pay our unemployed ..... if it wasnt so serious you would think its a joke.




What we have is not globalisation. We have a semi form of it which China has been willing to exploit for its own benefit. It's dirty dollar to me is the only reason why the world is taking its manufacturing there. That's a monetary system statistic not a product of real world dealings.

In a protected society yes we would have inferior products. But we would improve the quality of products at a pace that we can afford without borrowing. The market would grow with our real GDP, not just with our debt. As the market grows competitors will come in. The process will take longer, but still happen more sustainably.

Globalisation is meant to share wealth across the planet. I wonder if everyone had the same wealth how poor each person would be? I assume everyone would be starving - we don't have the resources to produce for the worlds population.


----------



## nomore4s (23 March 2009)

MrBurns said:


> Yeah thats the Japanese way and if they went broke he would probably fall on his sword..........literally.
> 
> I dont begrudge execs their salary after all it;s a private company they can do what they like but if they get a BAILOUT different story you get sweet FA till you pay the money back. Pac Brands wasnt a bailout it's an ongoing subsidy to keep them in the country, believe it or not $2M pa is not a lot to run a company that size.




Exactly. She would do alot of hours and put her heart and soul into that company. I have worked for larger type companies and the CEOs normally work thier butts off and have for a number of years to get to that position.
The people complaining about the salary they are paid would probably never put in the hours these people have put in.

There is also alot of pressure that comes with running any sort of company and it is easy for people to sit back and bag out people like Morphet but I doubt any of them could do a better job - in fact I doubt many of them could even do the job.


----------



## MrBurns (23 March 2009)

nomore4s said:


> Exactly. She would do alot of hours and put her heart and soul into that company. I have worked for larger type companies and the CEOs normally work thier butts off and have for a number of years to get to that position.
> The people complaining about the salary they are paid would probably never put in the hours these people have put in.
> 
> There is also alot of pressure that comes with running any sort of company and it is easy for people to sit back and bag out people like Morphet but I doubt any of them could do a better job - in fact I doubt many of them could even do the job.




It takes a raft of skills, financial through to people skills, at the highest level, it's a huge responsibility, very few are up to it.


----------



## nomore4s (23 March 2009)

Struzball said:


> The 60 minutes interview last night was one of the worst interviews I've ever seen.  She forced words into Morphets mouth and clearly sided with the factory worker who lost her sewing job.
> 
> I say congratulations to Morphet for being forward thinking to keep the company (and thousands of jobs) alive.




I agree, was as bad as the storm one. Very biased and one sided.

60 min has turned into nothing more than an extended version of ACA imo. They just jump on the side of the story that will pull on the most heart strings and caters for the popular view.


----------



## GumbyLearner (23 March 2009)

aleckara said:


> What we have is not globalisation. We have a semi form of it which China has been willing to exploit for its own benefit. It's dirty dollar to me is the only reason why the world is taking its manufacturing there. That's a monetary system statistic not a product of real world dealings.
> 
> In a protected society yes we would have inferior products. But we would improve the quality of products at a pace that we can afford without borrowing. The market would grow with our real GDP, not just with our debt. As the market grows competitors will come in. The process will take longer, but still happen more sustainably.
> 
> Globalisation is meant to share wealth across the planet. I wonder if everyone had the same wealth how poor each person would be? I assume everyone would be starving - we don't have the resources to produce for the worlds population.




Imagine if Pac Brands started sourcing cotton from Gins in Tajikistan and not from the Darling Downs. That would cause an outrage. But then again I'm sure the World Bank wouldn't mind.


----------



## Glen48 (23 March 2009)

Notice when some Servo gives  a discount cars line up for miles just to save 2/3 bucks I know any one walking up the isle would buy the cheaper brand over quality and PB moving to China has no choice in this World with a level playing field which has a big Cliff in the middle.
As for Name brands I think any one would buy them as long as you could see the logo and allow others to admire you, the strange part about advertising is other people have to know the name for it to work when in China I saw a bloke with Nike thongs ( on his feet) he was living in poverty but he had at name under his feet were you could not see the brand maybe he got the vibes from the Logo to make him feel better.???
What sort of a CV would you need to run PB?


----------



## MrBurns (23 March 2009)

Glen48 said:


> What sort of a CV would you need to run PB?




Mere mortals need not apply


----------



## trading_rookie (23 March 2009)

> What's she meant to do, let the company lose profitability and risk losing more Aussie jobs? She also has share holders to answer to as well.



Spot on – all this anti-Pacbrands hysteria brought on by unions who seem to have more venom than brains is impacting on the jobs of nearly 7000 more employees of the company.  

@GumbyLearner –  Goodman Fielder; could you have at least used a note worthy company instead of one that regularly disappoints year in year out. A stock price that has too much negative sentiment attached. An edible oils division (Medow Lea etc) that’s under threat from a global player, not to mention NZ dairy farmers that shows too much ‘sub-scale brand equity’. The market according to analysts is more interested in baked breads like Bakers Delight than ready-packed breads – let’s see what GF does to combat this.

Further, the chairman of Goodman Fielder also happens to be on the board of PacBrands. ProtÃ©gÃ© Margin (when the chairman and CEO were both at Natfoods) would be well advised to keep such comments to himself – especially when he’s comparing food to cloth –  I’m sure ppl are more concerned about what they put into their bodies than what they put on it. 



> You have to turn over the products pretty rapidly. Consumer tastes change pretty quickly. You've got to be able to respond."



Maybe Margin should ask his GF chairman for a tour of Pacbrands and see what the R&D dept is up to before opening his mouth. He should also compare his advertising campaign – including both television and print with that of Pacbrands if he thinks the company just rests on it’s laurels – Pacbrands uses well known Aussie celebs to promote it’s products, who is Margin using to flog Medow Lea? 

When it’s all done and dusted – it’s too expensive to be manufacturing textile, clothing and footwear in Oz. It’s that simple, our governments have reduced tariffs for cheap imports (I believe this year it's a further 3%) and Oz publicly-listed companies can’t be paying ppl  increases in salary as the cost of living increases while they try and make a profit. 

Cochlear (like Pacbrands an offshoot of PacDunlop) who manufactures an innovative ear-hearing implant with most manufacturing in Oz, is feeling pressured to move overseas since the unions feel the workers aren’t being paid enough. So much for Rudd’s spiel about supporting Oz innovation – his posse of union thugs will force them abroad.

As for Morphett and remuneration, it’s only natural that someone who for many years headed a Pacbrands company division and got promoted to CEO be given a pay rise. A pay rise that is SUBSTANTIALLY less than the outgoing CEO received.  Compared with what Ralph Norris and Sol Trujio are paid, she’s on ‘peanuts’. This should also answer the CV question.


----------

