ACTU Unionists Target Employers

[The Mint Man]

I’m sure all of you have seen snips of that video going around in the media of the CFMEU's recent illegal strike on a building site. I’ve been trying to find the whole thing but so far the below link is the best I could come up with, probably because the unions don’t want us seeing what they are really like.

After listening to this it will be no surprise as to why I left this union about 3-4 years ago and never looked back. After the **** I went through with them Ill never belong to a union again.... they are all tard with the same brush IMO

I suppose this is what Labor calls increasing productivity and securing jobs for working Australians like myself
Its not a good look, which is why Rudd is taking action against them but I for one seriously question if he is just doing it to limit the damage to his bid to become PM....is a vote for Labor still a vote for the Unions? Probably!

Listen to this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cYVJkbnHmzE

Taken from 'TheAustralian' this video/audio shows exactly why Australian's can not afford to have the ACTU and the Labor party in control of Australia. They will bully every employer and employee who is part of the workforce and drive businesses overseas in droves, and just push for their own political aspirations. In this video. The Manager was just asking the Union officials for their ID's and they were telling him to "get $@!# you maggot" also he told them at one stage not "to smoke on site" for safety reasons, and they told him to get $!@# on that also. Listen with Disgust guys.

Cheers.

 

[Kauri]

Mint Man
Seen this one yet???
http://thewest.com.au/ ..

 

[Sprinter79]

As a strong union man myself, I've said it many times.... there are a few bad apples that undo the good that most of the union officials do quietly in the background. These few people do not represent the Unions, but unfortunately, only these ones get the media attention because they reinforce the union 'heavyweight' stereotype.

 

[spartn]

Even though I am a loyal liberal voter and always will be, Im am happy that labour (if they come to power) will do something about these illegal strike because in the end it helps absolutely no one.

My father works at Cadbury Schweppes in Ringwood, Vic. When the first major protect about the IR laws happened in late 2005, the company offered to fully pay 25 workers a days pay to go and protest about it in the city, but even then the union wasn't happy they wanted all factory workers on every shift to go around 800 employees in total, and that would have mean't $100,000 if not millions of dollars in lost production.

In the end it doesn't matter who comes into power, the time of the unionist movement is finshed and thank god for it.

Spartn

:viking:

 

[Sprinter79]

Re: CFMEU Unionists Target Employers

Without starting a massive slanging match, there are more employees in the world than employers, and at the end of the day, sometimes the only way employees can get initiate change (ie pay issues, OHS issues) is to withdraw their labour. Yes, i agree that strikes have been used in the past for frivolous and political ends, but removing the right to strike for better conditions isn't the way things should be done. In my experience, withdrawing labour should only be used as a last resort, and there are many avenues that can be explored before it gets to that point.

 

[Duckman#72]

As a strong union man myself, I've said it many times.... there are a few bad apples that undo the good that most of the union officials do quietly in the background. These few people do not represent the Unions, but unfortunately, only these ones get the media attention because they reinforce the union 'heavyweight' stereotype.

Hi Sprinter

I have to totally disagree. The past couple of media incidents don't just involve "a few people". They have been union officials in high positions of power within their respective organisations. How can you possibly write "these people do not represent the unions"????? They are the union heavies, the powerbrokers - you ask them - they'll tell you they represent the unions alright!!! They are front and centre - whether you like it or not.

Duckman

 

[2020hindsight]

must admit unfair dismissal laws sure got out of hand in the old days.
Was speaking to a mate the other day - machine shop employing about 15 blokes - he mentioned in the old days he was taken to industrial commission for $30K - the bloke finally agreed to accept $700 instead !!
except that it cost him more than $20K in legal fees - and that was to his account.

no way can that be acceptable - but then again, surely there has to be a middle road where "the blind lady holds a more level balance" than current.

Fairness test whatever - both parties seem to be heading there.

 

[wayneL]

In the end it doesn't matter who comes into power, the time of the unionist movement is finished and thank god for it.

I'm no fan of militant unionism and used to sit on the other side of the table to them... Right b@stards they are.

But think back to why unions started and evolved. It was because workers were really being exploited. Do we want to possibly go back to those days? I think not.

There should be some reasonable balance. I've also sat on the other side to a reasonable union and things worked out just fine and to mutual satisfaction.

The demise of unions altogether would be a bad thing IMO.

 

[billhill]

I'm no fan of militant unionism and used to sit on the other side of the table to them... Right b@stards they are.

But think back to why unions started and evolved. It was because workers were really being exploited. Do we want to possibly go back to those days? I think not.

There should be some reasonable balance. I've also sat on the other side to a reasonable union and things worked out just fine and to mutual satisfaction.

The demise of unions altogether would be a bad thing IMO.

Well said. Too much power to either employer or employee is going result in one side being screwed by the other. Balance is the key.

 

[Sprinter79]

Hi Sprinter

I have to totally disagree. The past couple of media incidents don't just involve "a few people". They have been union officials in high positions of power within their respective organisations. How can you possibly write "these people do not represent the unions"????? They are the union heavies, the powerbrokers - you ask them - they'll tell you they represent the unions alright!!! They are front and centre - whether you like it or not.

Duckman

The people who represent the Unions as a whole are those who sit in the ACTU and organisations like UnionsWA. Reynolds and McDonald represent the workers in the CFMEU, no-one else. They don't represent me, and they don't represent the majority of union members. Reynolds has run for positions in UnionsWA, and was not voted in (good outcome in my mind). I agree that 'militant unionism' isn't the way of the future, and unless that culture changes, unions as a whole (and therefore employees) will loose out. But, as I'm sure you are aware, changing culture in the construction industry is like banging your head up against a brink wall. Hopefully, the recent incidents will serve as a warning, and help bring an end to 'militant unionism.'

 

[moXJO]

The people who represent the Unions as a whole are those who sit in the ACTU and organisations like UnionsWA. Reynolds and McDonald represent the workers in the CFMEU, no-one else. They don't represent me, and they don't represent the majority of union members. Reynolds has run for positions in UnionsWA, and was not voted in (good outcome in my mind). I agree that 'militant unionism' isn't the way of the future, and unless that culture changes, unions as a whole (and therefore employees) will loose out. But, as I'm sure you are aware, changing culture in the construction industry is like banging your head up against a brink wall. Hopefully, the recent incidents will serve as a warning, and help bring an end to 'militant unionism.'

They are right bastards in the construction industry.Many a job Ive seen them come to blows with employers.And have seen sites shutdown on the most stupid things.Not only that but they will lie to you to get their way.They just need to be brought out of the 80's.

 

[Rafa]

I posted this article in another thread... its probably appropriate here too...
Its from the Australian... who are certainly not friends of the Union.

Mike Steketee: Scare tactics conveniently ignore history

So much for the Liberal charge that unions could run the country under Labor rule
June 21, 2007

GREG Combet said it only once but the Howard Government has replayed it countless times: "I recall we used to run the country, and it wouldn't be a bad thing if we did again."

It was a year ago at a union rally and the ACTU secretary raised a laugh, which was the idea. But it was not the humour that tickled the Government's fancy but rather the comment's potential to feed straight into the mother of all scare campaigns against Labor.

Admittedly, the Combet scenario is pretty frightening. Look at what happened when unions previously ran the country. This bleak period started in 1983, with the election of union boss Bob Hawke as prime minister. The horrors that were visited on us included slashing tariffs that were protecting manufacturing jobs; floating the dollar; deregulating the financial system, including allowing foreign banks into the country to compete with home-grown ones; and, to add insult to injury, privatisation of the Commonwealth Bank, together with other icons such as Qantas.

The unions, or most of them, opposed all of these measures, but don't be fooled by that. They wielded real power when the government made them partners in the Accord. And guess what they did with it? They slowed wages growth by accepting rises in the "social wage" - tax cuts, superannuation and government spending in areas such as health and welfare - as a substitute for part of their wage claims.

It was a successful prescription, given there was a centralised industrial relations system that had allowed wages and inflation under the Fraser government - with John Howard as treasurer - to rise rapidly as successful claims in one industry flowed to others. The Accord allowed profit levels to recover, encouraging investment, faster growth and ultimately higher employment.

These days, Howard delights in contrasting the higher real wages growth under his Government with that under Labor. The reason for the difference is that by the time he was elected in 1996, the profit share had risen, giving scope for wages to start increasing again. They are still rising after inflation but not as fast as profits, which are at record levels.

Of course, we know there are some nasty union leaders just waiting for Labor to get back into power before they run rampant. Just look at what happened when union bosses such as Norm Gallagher, secretary of the Builders Labourers' Federation, were given their heads. If you haven't heard much about the BLF for a while, that is because it was put out of business in 1986 - by the Hawke government in Canberra and the Cain Labor government in Victoria.

Gallagher and the boys were famous for the ways in which they made employers sit up and take notice, by walking off the job in the middle of concrete pours, which did not do wonders for productivity, let alone profits.

Gallagher was an ardent communist (Maoist wing) but he was broadminded enough to stick his hand out for some fat developers' commissions that allowed him to build a nice little beach house. When police had the effrontery to charge him, solidarity demanded the BLF slap bans on Melbourne building sites to force the state government to drop the charges. It didn't, Gallagher went to jail and the Hawke and Cain governments legislated to deregister the BLF, meaning it could no longer represent its members before industrial tribunals. For good measure, the Cain government ordered police to raid BLF headquarters and seize its assets.

It was the Hawke government, too, which in 1989 broke the domestic pilots strike and destroyed their union by using military aircraft, foreign pilots and international airlines to carry passengers. Some claimed Hawke was doing the bidding of his friend Peter Abeles of Ansett. But that could not be right, because Hawke was a union boss.

Former Federated Municipal and Shire Council Employees' Union junior official Paul Keating was in thrall to the union bosses as well. Just look at what he cooked up, once he became prime minister, with then ACTU secretary Bill Kelty. They introduced enterprise bargaining, which sounded the death knell for centralised wage fixing. It also led to a substantial increase in labour productivity, more than the Howard Government's favoured Australian Workplace Agreements are likely to produce. That is because there is more scope to find ways to work more efficiently when an employer negotiates collectively with employees than when he or she reaches agreements with individual workers.

What accounts for such unfriendly behaviour by union bosses-turned-politicians? Believe it or not, once they have managed to claw their way in to office, they want to get re-elected, and being seen to govern for only one part of the community is not the best way to do it.

That is not to say Rudd government legislation would not be more favourable to unions. Given the Howard Government has stripped them of most of their rights, it could hardly be tougher on them. But as someone who did not come up through the unions, Rudd is even less likely to see eye-to-eye with them on many issues than did Labor leaders of the past. He would have the authority of an election win to stand up to rogue unions.

Sure, Combet and former ACTU presidents Martin Ferguson and Simon Crean would play a part in his government, but they would be no more successful in wrecking the economy than was Hawke.

When the Prime Minister says, as he did last week, that Rudd is the "patsy, the proxy, the delegate, the surrogate of the union movement", you'd better believe it. And that goes for his Workplace Relations Minister Joe Hockey as well when he asks, as he did on Sunday: "Does anyone seriously think that the Labor Party is going to stand up to the trade union bosses when it comes to the construction industry? They've got no history of doing it."

Doubting these assertions would require looking back over a longer period than the past three months, and there's no time for that in an election year.

Mike Steketee is The Australian's national affairs editor.

 

[billhill]

Interesting article rafa. Didn't know alot of that stuff before.

 

[Sprinter79]

The problem is, is that the population has a short memory (doof doof doof) sh...oo....rrr....ttttt memory

 

[2020hindsight]

I posted this article in another thread... its probably appropriate here too...
Its from the Australian... who are certainly not friends of the Union.

yep , top post Rafa

 

[The Mint Man]

Mint Man
Seen this one yet???
http://thewest.com.au/ ..

Yes thats the one I was talking about on TV, not very good picture quality though. I did have a link here directly to it but it didnt work properly.... just go there and search Joe Mcdonald if you want to see it.
I think its funny how Joe Mcdonald says to one of the guys 'you'll be working in burger king when Im finished with you' or something to that effect.... mate, your the one with the famous last name!

Im am happy that labour (if they come to power) will do something about these illegal strike because in the end it helps absolutely no one.

Ditto, but how can you be sure this will happen? Theres not much to stop them.

surely there has to be a middle road where "the blind lady holds a more level balance" than current.
Fairness test whatever - both parties seem to be heading there.

I agree but would labor deliver that?
The thing about the fairness test is that it dosn't have to involve the union's, suits me!....
If I were in a decent paying job with a union I would be scared of that. It could mean my job if people don't see the need to give the union some of their hard earned every week. No wonder they are hell bent on going against it.

They are right bastards in the construction industry.Many a job Ive seen them come to blows with employers.And have seen sites shutdown on the most stupid things.Not only that but they will lie to you to get their way.They just need to be brought out of the 80's.

Yes. Couldn't agree more, however you left one bit out... they are also bastards to employees too. dont start me.

The problem is, is that the population has a short memory (doof doof doof) sh...oo....rrr....ttttt memory

No we dont, heres proof:

This is a parody of U.S Soldiers by midnight Oil, whose ex-front man Peter Garrett (The guy with a shaved head) is now a member of the Australian Labor Party whose left-wing policies are now becoming more right wing..more like the Liberals who are currently in power.

The Chaser - U.S Bases Midnight Oil parody

Click Here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BrPGe6WO8p8

Someone once said to me that there is truth in every joke...in this case, How true is that!!

Cheers

 

[Sprinter79]

This seems as good a place as any to post some key points from an advertorial in the Hire & Rental Journal (Nov 2006). This advertorial uses the term 'collective agreement' to make reference to an AWA: (Direct quotes from the journal)

*The 'collective agreement' can exclude or modify all award conditions

*The 'collective agreement' can be tailored to meet your business needs and circumvent paying penalties, allowances and shift loadings prescribed by the relevant awards

*The 'collective agreement' sets clear parameters of work and employers have a choice as to whether overtime is paid at loaded rates or at flat hourly rates

*Can be designed to exclude the payment of severance pay, allowances and penalty rates

*Inclusion of a clear notice provision to avoid claims for reasonable notice

*Employers can select additional terms in order to suit their businesses (without consultation with employees)

*Public holiday penalty rates can be excluded or modified

No mention is made of what trade-offs should be offered to the employees for the watering down of their conditions in this add.

Now, tell me where the balance is here....

 

[Rafa]

i think that saying about short term memory should be modified to...
short term memory when it suits our point of view

that article in the Oz pretty much separates the facts from the hearsay and propaganda peddled by the libs and their supporters like mint man.

whilst at this stage, my vote is with labour, i withhold the right to change to the libs, in case labour policy is swings completely pro union!

So far, there is no reason to think that, both based on past performance by Hawke and Keating, as well as the rhethoric of the present Labor leadership group.

I don't intend to be sucked in by cunning baseless fear tactics!

 

[The Mint Man]

Please explain what part of my initial post is 'propaganda'? The unions, in this case the CFMEU, put their foot in it all the time. I think alot more of this type of stuff could make the news if it were recorded or more people came forward with such material.
I would also like you to explain to me how the recent events are 'hearsay'?

I actually tried to be as fair as I could be considering my past dealings with the CFMEU.... worst $230 (yearly membership fee) I ever spent!!!!

Sprinter79 is right in saying that the CFMEU gives the unions a bad name however this type of rubbish is not limited to the CFMEU.


On a lighter note... I noticed that there are some subliminal messages in the Chasers Vid that I posted above... I managed to pause and copy them as it was bugging the **** out of me trying to read them, they flashed up way to quick to read.
here they are:

Quite clever. The last one explains it all

Cheers

 

[Rafa]

This...

I suppose this is what Labor calls increasing productivity and securing jobs for working Australians like myself
Its not a good look, which is why Rudd is taking action against them but I for one seriously question if he is just doing it to limit the damage to his bid to become PM....is a vote for Labor still a vote for the Unions? Probably!

there is no evidence to suggest this is the case, to say this is to simply tow the govt line...