Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Is Shorten PM material?

Is Shorten PM material?

  • Yes

    Votes: 6 16.2%

  • No

    Votes: 31 83.8%
  • Total voters
    37
Jump to new
noco said:
Is Bill Shorten Prime Minister material?

Not according to past Labor stalwart and union leader Michael Costa.....


http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...ments/michael_costa_bill_shorten_is_finished/

“Shorten, like recently departed UK Labour leader Ed Miliband, is a creature of an out of touch and unrepresentative union movement that not only dominates the political structures of Labor but more and more forces an ideological straitjacket on Labor’s economic policy formulation,” he said…

“Special-interest politics has pushed Labor further and further away from the political centre. The Labor left now firmly controls Labor’s policy agenda.”
Click to expand...

This has become a huge problem for Labor, the highly unionised therefore highly paid, highly secure jobs are diminishing.

Much more of the workforce is now covered by, a paid by ability culture, which conflicts with Labors ethos.
 
Is Billl Shorten Prime minister material??????

Well, if he was to look after the working Mums and Dads of Australia like he looks after the AWU union members, I cannot see how he could possibly win that award......He just might be looking for a new job next week....The only bloke Shorten looks after is himself...What a grub.

He has ripped of the cleaners and denied them their penalty rates on weekends all in the name of power to bolster his own standing with increased union membership.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...393871486?sv=57e71743eaf110cd744e37164278b28c

The Opposition Leader yesterday provided his strongest comments yet in response to claims he presided over an arrangement under which building company *Winslow Constructors paid his former union hundreds of thousands of dollars in members’ dues.

Documents provided to the trade union royal commission show the AWU Victorian branch invoiced Winslow Constructors for $38,228.68 to pay for 105 union memberships in 2005.

Further documents indicate the payments continued the next financial year and there were claims the practice helped to bolster AWU membership numbers and Mr Shorten’s factional power.

Mr Shorten refused to comment on the integrity of having companies pay members’ dues but defended his record and left open the door to appearing before the royal commission.
 
Shorten says he always looked after the union members.

Being paid $18/ hour is a lot better than being paid $45/ hour.
 
The man is a compulsive liar......He says he only thinks of fairness for the AWU union members and then documentary evidence turns up to prove the contrary.
The agreement with Cleanevent was engineered by Shorten and then extended by his successor.

Am looking forward to the next poll to see who would make the better Prime Minister and the the next two party preferred poll.....We might yet see a DD before Xmas.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...shortens-bluster/story-fnkdypbm-1227393710291
 
I think Mr.Shorten is digging a hole so deep for himself that he may find it hard to clamber out of it.....He keeps contradicting himself for what he stands for and what he has actually done.



http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...395538954?sv=31d227765fb9b7a33255b3405c10a82f

TEN QUESTIONS FOR BILL SHORTEN

1) Can you guarantee that under your leadership of the AWU, the union did not take a cheque from an employer for union dues without signed application forms from workers, as you told the Cole Royal Commission in 2002, and that the
workers knew they were being signed up and were happy for the employer to pay their dues?

2) Can you guarantee that no worker was worse off as a result of your leadership of the AWU given: 1. Former Cleanevent HR manager Michael Robinson has given sworn evidence the 2006 enterprise bargaining agreement was “extremely favourable to Cleanevent” (allowing its workers to be paid $18 an hour in some circumstances compared with $45 for
competitors); 2. Cesar Melhem has agreed this was a poor deal for workers; and 3) the AWU’s admission to the Fair Work Commission yesterday that it was in workers’ interests for the 2006 EBA to be terminated?

3) You signed off on the 2004 Cleanevent EBA which formed the basis of the
2006 EBA and in turn the controversial 2010 EBA. At the time of the 2004
EBA or at any time of your AWU tenure did Cleanevent make payments to the
AWU for any purpose , including that of paying union fees for employees?

4) Do you agree with current AWU secretary Ben Davis that deals where
employers pay for union memberships weaken the union’s industrial position?

5) Do you regret signing Cesar Melhem’s preselection form?

6) Under your leadership were you aware of any instances of different
names or entries on invoices being given to payments by companies for AWU
memberships , for example cases where membership fees were labelled
“training” fees ?

7) Under your leadership were you aware of any instances of the practice whereby
the AWU signed up members without their knowledge?

8) Did the netballers who became AWU members as a result of the alliance with the
Australian Netball Players Association know they were being signed up and did
they pay individually or did the ANPA pay their dues?

9) When the AWU first negotiated an arrangement
with the Australian Jockeys Association when you
were secretary, did any money change hands
and, if so, what for?

10) Did jockey s including Peter Mertens,
Greg Childs, Steven King, Kerrin McEvoy
agree to becoming AWU members or know
they had been signed up?
 
noco said:
I think Mr.Shorten is digging a hole so deep for himself that he may find it hard to clamber out of it.....He keeps contradicting himself for what he stands for and what he has actually done.



http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...395538954?sv=31d227765fb9b7a33255b3405c10a82f

TEN QUESTIONS FOR BILL SHORTEN

1) Can you guarantee that under your leadership of the AWU, the union did not take a cheque from an employer for union dues without signed application forms from workers, as you told the Cole Royal Commission in 2002, and that the
workers knew they were being signed up and were happy for the employer to pay their dues?

2) Can you guarantee that no worker was worse off as a result of your leadership of the AWU given: 1. Former Cleanevent HR manager Michael Robinson has given sworn evidence the 2006 enterprise bargaining agreement was “extremely favourable to Cleanevent” (allowing its workers to be paid $18 an hour in some circumstances compared with $45 for
competitors); 2. Cesar Melhem has agreed this was a poor deal for workers; and 3) the AWU’s admission to the Fair Work Commission yesterday that it was in workers’ interests for the 2006 EBA to be terminated?

3) You signed off on the 2004 Cleanevent EBA which formed the basis of the
2006 EBA and in turn the controversial 2010 EBA. At the time of the 2004
EBA or at any time of your AWU tenure did Cleanevent make payments to the
AWU for any purpose , including that of paying union fees for employees?

4) Do you agree with current AWU secretary Ben Davis that deals where
employers pay for union memberships weaken the union’s industrial position?

5) Do you regret signing Cesar Melhem’s preselection form?

6) Under your leadership were you aware of any instances of different
names or entries on invoices being given to payments by companies for AWU
memberships , for example cases where membership fees were labelled
“training” fees ?

7) Under your leadership were you aware of any instances of the practice whereby
the AWU signed up members without their knowledge?

8) Did the netballers who became AWU members as a result of the alliance with the
Australian Netball Players Association know they were being signed up and did
they pay individually or did the ANPA pay their dues?

9) When the AWU first negotiated an arrangement
with the Australian Jockeys Association when you
were secretary, did any money change hands
and, if so, what for?

10) Did jockey s including Peter Mertens,
Greg Childs, Steven King, Kerrin McEvoy
agree to becoming AWU members or know
they had been signed up?
Click to expand...


For answers see Gillard responses in previous Union Corruption investigations (bit of a pattern here??).

Either,

1. I know nothing (Schultz defence)

2. I can't recall (lose of memory defence)

3. I have already answered these questions extensively previously (Gillard defence)

Any or all of these can be used for any one of those questions.
 
dutchie said:
For answers see Gillard responses in previous Union Corruption investigations (bit of a pattern here??).

Either,

1. I know nothing (Schultz defence)

2. I can't recall (lose of memory defence)

3. I have already answered these questions extensively previously (Gillard defence)

Any or all of these can be used for any one of those questions.
Click to expand...

I think in the Bill Shorten case, the Royal Commission has has signed documentary evidence....Shorten's signature is very clear on the agreement with Cleanevent and that agreement is certainly not favourable to the employees.
It also disadvantaged Clearevent's competitors who had to pay their employees $27 to $28 per hour in comparison to Clearevents payment to their employees of $18 per hour.

I find it will be hard for Shorten to use the Gillard tactic.....Gillrad was a lot more clever than Shorten.
 
Bill Shorten's predicament

Bill Shorten yesterday gave a defiant press conference.

Reporters asked inconvenient questions about alleged sweetheart deals with bosses and Shorten replied confidently: “I can guarantee, about any of the matters, that we always improved workers’ conditions, full stop.”

Shorten may come to regret this bluster. I wonder how many people were, within 10 minutes of its being made, downloading deals he signed and getting out their *calculators.

The 2004 Cleanevent enterprise agreement is signed by Shorten. It is a document that benefits the employer and disadvantages some workers.

The agreement allows for a cheap way for the employer to work staff around the clock, for up to 12 hours at a time, and up to 60 hours a week, without award penalties or loadings.

People from the union movement are constantly reminding us that low-paid workers rely on their penalties and loadings to get by. Loadings and penalties, when a person is on low wages, often make up a third of a person’s pay packet.

GRAPHIC: Shorten’s Cleanevent EBA 2004

We know many low-paid workers need to work very long hours just to get by.

Many of the Cleanevent workers would have been better off staying on the minimum wage and receiving penalties as prescribed under their award than working under Shorten’s enterprise bargaining agreement.

Any union official would have known workers would likely experience losses under the deal. Indeed, a special clause says where employees feel they have “reasonable grounds” for believing they have suffered “overall disadvantage in comparison to the award” an audit will occur and the employee can “consult” with the union and the company about it.

Although this clause appears to protect people, it is actually sinister, a red flag to the experienced eye. There should be no cause or reason to even put a clause like this in an agreement.

Who determines whether the person’s feeling is reasonable? Where does a person turn if the union won’t help? If any worker summoned the courage to speak up, this clause suggests the only option is to keep the complaint in-house, with the company and the union having the final say rather than the appropriate authorities.

A cursory analysis of the agreement disproves Shorten’s claim that he *“always improved workers’ conditions”.

Worse, when it expired, it was replaced under his leadership by a deal that fully exploited Work Choices to remove an alleged further $2 million a year in penalties from workers’ pay packets.

http://m.theaustralian.com.au/opini...shortens-bluster/story-fnkdypbm-1227393710291
 
The legacy of Kevin's leadership rules are that anyone now elected by the rank and file feels far too secure, whereas in the past the knife in the back kept the pace moving and assertive.

Bill is a pipe and slippers kind of guy, who portrays himself as the calm in a tempestuous sea. I'd rather see him spit and vitriol like a Keating, if only for the entertainment value; for instance promising a sham royal commission into Liberal members and their political nurseries (including the beloved Northshore Catholic diocese), same as the propaganda witch hunt forced on Gillard, Rudd, Bligh and the Labor Party in general, using out taxpayer monies once again. John Howard with his lies on Iraq, children overboard, etc could be the first in the cauldron.
 
Fairfax press December 13 last year,

Eyes on the prize: would-be PM Bill Shorten
Click to expand...

1418180110895.jpg

http://www.theage.com.au/good-weekend/eyes-on-the-prize-wouldbe-pm-bill-shorten-20141212-11xjqv.html

Fairfax press today,

Bill Shorten's union took hundreds of thousands from building company
Click to expand...

The following at the bottom of the article reads like the last rites,

Bill Shorten - Australia's alternative Prime Minister - is one of Australia's best known faces but least defined characters. Fairfax reporters Royce Millar and Ben Schneiders have dug deep to investigate the Opposition Leader's past and present, exploring his character, his politics, his allegiances, and the deals that have put him so close to power. The explosive results of that investigation will be revealed over the next four days.
Click to expand...

http://www.smh.com.au/victoria/bill...ds-from-building-company-20150617-ghq5si.html
 
Bill Shorten last week "The Government must come clean on paying people smugglers"

Bill Shorten this week "It was common for companies to make payments (to unions) for things like occupational health and safety training and trade training"

Bill Shorten next week "Et tu, Brute"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Tell your story walking mister Shorten....

BILL Shorten's future depends on how he performs at the unions royal commission, says a senior Labor figure.
THE federal opposition leader has agreed to front the inquiry on July 8 during parliament's winter break, rather than August or September as previously scheduled.
Former Queensland premier Peter Beattie said it would be an important test for Mr Shorten.
"If at the end, under oath, he can't answer the questions then he is politically finished. No doubt about it," Mr Beattie told the Seven Network on Friday.
Click to expand...

http://www.news.com.au/national/bre...-union-questions/story-e6frfku9-1227405158161
 

Similar threads

Garpal Gumnut
Bill Shorten For PM
2
Replies
33
Views
1K
Garpal Gumnut
Garpal Gumnut
bigdog
Bill Shorten: High Flying Fake Or The Worker's Friend
Replies
5
Views
2K
Investoradam
Investoradam
Top