10 point employment standards and unemployment

[moXJO]

While less confusing there will be a significant impact on unemployment levels in the next few years. High levels of debt, uncertainty over the mining boom and employers ducking for cover over the added costs of employing people. Top it off soon with unfair dismissal laws. I don’t think the unemployment rates will stay low for long. While labor didn't cause the total mess, are they fueling the fire with their workplace policy?

 

[Whiskers]

While labor didn't cause the total mess, are they fueling the fire with their workplace policy?

Given the overwhelming endorsement of Labour and the abolition of Work Choices last election, I can't imagine many people endorsing this sentiment.

What are you getting at... the reintroduction of another defacto Work Choices?

Personally, I think if your business is dependant on those sort of policies you have a pretty weak business and a lot to learn about good HRM.

 

[moXJO]

Given the overwhelming endorsement of Labour and the abolition of Work Choices last election, I can't imagine many people endorsing this sentiment.

What are you getting at... the reintroduction of another defacto Work Choices?

Personally, I think if your business is dependant on those sort of policies you have a pretty weak business and a lot to learn about good HRM.

Mmm yes nice attempt at a partial flame

I think you underestimate the costs that a lot of smaller business will wear. Not to mention the uncertainty of whether to hire particular age ranges to dodge maternity. While work choices pushed to far in one direction I'm hoping Labor doesn’t go to far back in the past with their policies.
Business is greatly affected by whatever idiot schemes the government comes up with. It has nothing to do with being dependant on them or not. In the end the employee will cop it through larger unemployment. I think the unfair dismissal laws were a joke and are a throwback to the bad old days

 

[Whiskers]

Mmm yes nice attempt at a partial flame

I think you underestimate the costs that a lot of smaller business will wear. Not to mention the uncertainty of whether to hire particular age ranges to dodge maternity.

While not employing anyone just at the moment, I have always paid women above award wages, to at least equate with the male wage, and men just award wages... because I've found women tend to be more reliable in turning up for work and in the quality of their work.

Is there something in current law or being proposed that concerns you about maternity leave, in small business?

 

[It's Snake Pliskin]

Women have a right for maternity leave. If Europe can do it why cant we?

 

[moXJO]

Women have a right for maternity leave. If Europe can do it why cant we?

yes they do, but in hard times maternity with 24 months parental (12 months per mother/father)leave could see smaller business employers shying away from certain age groups(both sexes).I'm not saying its right at all. It also depends on what else is going to pop up in new legislation and how the costs will be shifted. Also if the states will implement them into their current IR.

Currently it’s not much of an issue while the mining boom chugs along. My main gripe is employer flexibility not being watered down to much.

 

[nioka]

Women have a right for maternity leave. If Europe can do it why cant we?

Not at a cost to me thanks. I reared my own at my expense. They can have maternity leave - at their own expense. Europe has a lot of things we don't have, most of them we wouldn't want. Let the women wanting paid maternity leave have their kids in Europe. Employers will just stop hiring women of child bearing age.

 

[It's Snake Pliskin]

Not at a cost to me thanks. I reared my own at my expense. They can have maternity leave - at their own expense. Europe has a lot of things we don't have, most of them we wouldn't want. Let the women wanting paid maternity leave have their kids in Europe. Employers will just stop hiring women of child bearing age.

That is a sad reply.

Perhaps you would like to look at the social consequences of mothers working.

 

[--B--]

That is a sad reply.

Perhaps you would like to look at the social consequences of mothers working.

you say women have a right to maternity leave and then refer to Europe so im guessing youre suggesting women have a right to PAID maternity leave?

if so, id like to hear how you justify this "right"?

why on earth is it an employers responsibility to subsidise a womens decision to have a child?

 

[--B--]

and with regards to the thread in general, im with moXJO. This labor policy will do nothing to increase employer confidence.

while much of it remains no different to the provision under workchoices, some of the differences incl. unfair dismissal are terrrible news for small business

 

[Trembling Hand]

I think its not sad at all for a business owner to stand up and say my families money will not be used to fund someone else's family. What is wrong with that? Business owners provide plenty of social benefits to their community why should they have to pay the cost of social consequences? That's the burden of society not individuals.

A small business owner cannot/does not worry about the social consequences. They worry about survival. With a low level of unemployment this will be fine as staff are a rare commodity but you have to wonder about unintended incentives/consequences.

 

[finnsk]

Women have a right for maternity leave. If Europe can do it why cant we?

I do understand where you are comming from but who is going to pay for this?
If Australia goes down that road, which it properly will, you will see an increased cost in labour which in turn will push up cost of every day prices like food and petrol ect.
Dont know if you have been to Europe but it is not cheap to live there.

TH I agree totaly

 

[Whiskers]

I would agree with TH's concern of virtually picking up the social security bill to support families, but how much maternity leave are we talking about and how much is paid leave?

For me, it should be considered in a wage/salary/benifits bundle as a whole. For example I wouldn't have any issue with unused sick leave being accumulated and go towards maternity leave. I think the amount of maternity leave should be tied to length of service like everything else.

If we're only talking about 2 or 3 or 4 months full leave I suspect many women could accumulate that over time with unused sick leave and cover the rest with annual or long service leave.

If we're talking about full paid maternity leave for 6 month or more on top of everything else, then it's probably getting a bit rich for small business.

 

[Happy]

Government should come to party here, as some businesses simply cannot afford such expenditure.

 

[rub92me]

Government should come to party here, as some businesses simply cannot afford such expenditure.

Exactly; the generous schemes in Europe are subsidised to a large degree through empoyer insurance and/or government subsidy. Of course taxpayers will have to cough up the latter.

 

[Spaghetti]

I would say that over the past 5 years or so I have had major stress dealing with small business that I do not recall having previously. Recently had an issue with one operator and cancelled the job but had to wait 4 months to get my deposit back. When trying to find another operator to do the job I lost faith totally in putting a deposit with anyone due to 5 years of this type of issue.

To be able to give employees some workplace standard then small business needs standards as well. Perhaps we need to get rid of so many that are very poor operators. The good ones then will be able to hire better staff by offering better conditions due to the reduced competition.

Everyone happy except those that should never have been in business and employees that need a good kick up the rump.

If left be though the reduced standards of business will have a very negative effect, especially when peopel are more choosy where their money goes.

Good business will not have to worry, maybe even do better for it.

 

[disarray]

i support paid maternity leave because it encourages the "right" people to breed. rubbish policy like the baby bonus hands out wads of cash to any old scumbag who gets knocked up, when what we really want is to make it easy for more useful people to breed. we need to reward productive and useful members of society over and above those who are dependent on welfare.

for society to improve we need the productive to breed more and the useless to breed less. targetted policy like paid maternity leave for working families facilitates this.

 

[Whiskers]

i support paid maternity leave because it encourages the "right" people to breed. rubbish policy like the baby bonus hands out wads of cash to any old scumbag who gets knocked up, when what we really want is to make it easy for more useful people to breed. we need to reward productive and useful members of society over and above those who are dependent on welfare.

for society to improve we need the productive to breed more and the useless to breed less. targetted policy like paid maternity leave for working families facilitates this.

Yes, well... that's the straight to the point no bullsh!t version of what I was trying to get at.

Definately, cut the baby bonus and incorperate that money into the incentive/reward for working families.

 

[It's Snake Pliskin]

I am sorry that I caused any discomfort by suggesting women should have paid maternity leave. I didn't specify how, which I don't have the answers for. I am quite happy to say I don't know.

 

[moXJO]

Thank God it was 12-24 months unpaid parental leave. I can happily live with that. And after finally finding the standards all my fears were put to rest.There doesn’t seem to be any big surprises so all is good.

Brief rundown can be found here http://www.smartcompany.com.au/Free-Articles/The-Briefing/20080617-Labors-new-employment-standards-explained.html