Why is "near enough, good enough"?

[tongueboy]

Tony Abbott is his hero and Piers Ackerman is up there!

[mercturbo]

  plonky said:

Why?

There are a number of reasons, but I can fairly lay the blame at the feet of the unions. I can understand 'quid pro quo' where there is balance and give and take, but the unions have pushed so hard for all of the little things and used Acts such as OH&S etc to force the employer to spend money for practices/items that should not be required if people took their own responsibility.

It's all very well to criticise the employer etc but it is the employer who puts up his capital and financial risk to start a business. He has the most to lose and the most to gain and the bloody unions use the 'politics of envy' to attack the owners and managers in an atttempt for 'financial equity'

Whilst ever there is a lack of commitment, lack of pride and lack of ownership,. the product produced will always be shoddy.

Plonky, at times yes, unions do use unethical tools to achieve their

requests/demands but when average Joe worker sees Pollies giving themselves 15-20% pay rises at the same time telling Joe worker that he needs to excersise restraint and accept 3 % for the good of the nation/employers, unions should and hopefully will always stand up and argue this. I have had numerous friendly arguments with middle and upper managenment, with them justifying their wage level with their responsibilities, but the fact is, its the unions who have set the standards of wages in this country and thier wages are relative to this, so no unions, crap wages for everyone including you Plonky. Buisnesses need to remain competitive, yes, but a lot of buisnesses have/will obliterate this countries resources/people purely for 1 purpose, themselves/their shareholders, extreme greed, cotton, mining, old growth forest harvesting, pollution, asbestos, no union has raped/caused this kind of damage to Australia, Buisneses/investors are responible for this. I agree people need to take responsibility for their own actions, but their is some shocking management/leadership in Australian Buisness and this is the root cause of the problem, not Joe average union member. Shoddy workmanship comes from poor leadership/management as well as slack/lazy individuals. Poor management begins with the very top level management awarding themselves rediculous remuneration increases and this will always be a problem. Joe average should always fight for proportional wage justice and no I'm not a left wing unionist, just support relative fairness for all workers

[Miyagi]

  mercturbo said:

  plonky said:

Why?

There are a number of reasons, but I can fairly lay the blame at the feet of the unions.  I can understand 'quid pro quo' where there is balance and give and take, but the unions have pushed so hard for all of the little things and used Acts such as OH&S etc to force the employer to spend money for practices/items that should not be required if people took their own responsibility.

It's all very well to criticise the employer etc but it is the employer who puts up his capital and financial risk to start a business.  He has the most to lose and the most to gain and the bloody unions use the 'politics of envy' to attack the owners and managers in an atttempt for 'financial equity'

Whilst ever there is a lack of commitment, lack of pride and lack of ownership,. the product produced will always be shoddy.

Plonky, at times yes, unions do use unethical tools to achieve their

requests/demands but when average Joe worker sees Pollies giving themselves 15-20% pay rises at the same time telling Joe worker that he needs to excersise restraint and accept 3 % for the good of the nation/employers, unions should and hopefully will always stand up and argue this. I have had numerous friendly arguments with middle and upper managenment, with them justifying their wage level with their responsibilities, but the fact is, its the unions who have set the standards of wages in this country and thier wages are relative to this, so no unions, crap wages for everyone including you Plonky. Buisnesses need to remain competitive, yes, but a lot of buisnesses have/will obliterate this countries resources/people purely for 1 purpose, themselves/their shareholders, extreme greed, cotton, mining, old growth forest harvesting, pollution, asbestos, no union has raped/caused this kind of damage to Australia, Buisneses/investors are responible for this. I agree people need to take responsibility for their own actions, but their is some shocking management/leadership in Australian Buisness and this is the root cause of the problem, not Joe average union member. Shoddy workmanship comes from poor leadership/management as well as slack/lazy individuals. Poor management begins with the very top level management awarding themselves rediculous remuneration increases and this will always be a problem. Joe average should always fight for proportional wage justice and no I'm not a left wing unionist, just support relative fairness for all workers

spot on!

[Buf-Phoon]

  mercturbo said:

  plonky said:

Why?

There are a number of reasons, but I can fairly lay the blame at the feet of the unions.  I can understand 'quid pro quo' where there is balance and give and take, but the unions have pushed so hard for all of the little things and used Acts such as OH&S etc to force the employer to spend money for practices/items that should not be required if people took their own responsibility.

It's all very well to criticise the employer etc but it is the employer who puts up his capital and financial risk to start a business.  He has the most to lose and the most to gain and the bloody unions use the 'politics of envy' to attack the owners and managers in an atttempt for 'financial equity'

Whilst ever there is a lack of commitment, lack of pride and lack of ownership,. the product produced will always be shoddy.

Plonky, at times yes, unions do use unethical tools to achieve their

requests/demands but when average Joe worker sees Pollies giving themselves 15-20% pay rises at the same time telling Joe worker that he needs to excersise restraint and accept 3 % for the good of the nation/employers, unions should and hopefully will always stand up and argue this. I have had numerous friendly arguments with middle and upper managenment, with them justifying their wage level with their responsibilities, but the fact is, its the unions who have set the standards of wages in this country and thier wages are relative to this, so no unions, crap wages for everyone including you Plonky. Buisnesses need to remain competitive, yes, but a lot of buisnesses have/will obliterate this countries resources/people purely for 1 purpose, themselves/their shareholders, extreme greed, cotton, mining, old growth forest harvesting, pollution, asbestos, no union has raped/caused this kind of damage to Australia, Buisneses/investors are responible for this. I agree people need to take responsibility for their own actions, but their is some shocking management/leadership in Australian Buisness and this is the root cause of the problem, not Joe average union member. Shoddy workmanship comes from poor leadership/management as well as slack/lazy individuals. Poor management begins with the very top level management awarding themselves rediculous remuneration increases and this will always be a problem. Joe average should always fight for proportional wage justice and no I'm not a left wing unionist, just support relative fairness for all workers

Apologies for a further Hijack of this thread , but all to often Unions place a raft of ambit claims at the feet of the employers and on occasion these are totally unreasonable eg "Dim Sim Allowances" on a building site in Brisbane's China Town a number of years ago.

There is also a reluctance to negotiate improved productivity or quailty in line with these demands. Ultimately some of these archaic behaviours leave the employer no choice but to succumb or face industrial action, or front the Industrial Relations commission at significant cost to their business.

So who wins in these cases , not the employer and certainly not the union member as jobs are often subsequently lost in order to satisfy the majority ,additionally productivity and quality suffers as a consequence placing further pressure on all stakeholders.

I do not disagree that Unions have a role to play in protecting the minimum conditions and renumeration for their members, but if we are to improve the manufacturing standards and efficiency in this country employers cannot be expected to tolerate the " just cough up or we are out on the grass "mentality.

Wouldn't it be better for all if we could further process our own raw materials without importing them as finished goods from somewhere else with a significant mark up ? ( nice to dream )

Sounds like a case for EBAs and incentivised high performance work systems.

my 2.2c or 2.44 in the old money

WhiteTee

[plonky]

  tongueboy said:

Tony Abbott is his hero and Piers Ackerman is up there!

Tony Abbott is a Legend !!!!!

Peter Reith is also a Legend !!!!!

John Howard is Awesome !!!!!

Peter Costello? A great Treasurer and should remain so !!!

The man of the moment though, is Phillip Ruddock. If ever a man has faced such a prolonged personal attack, it is he, and he has withstood it all with dignity and resolve!!

[ducatijb]

Wasn't Abbot the goose who led the vendetta against my Pauline?? :inlove:

[cvanxr]

  plonky said:

  tongueboy said:

Tony Abbott is his hero and Piers Ackerman is up there!  

Tony Abbott is a Legend !!!!!

Peter Reith is also a Legend !!!!!

John Howard is Awesome !!!!!

Peter Costello? A great Treasurer and should remain so !!!

The man of the moment though, is Phillip Ruddock. If ever a man has faced such a prolonged personal attack, it is he, and he has withstood it all with dignity and resolve!!

What this isn't the joke thread? :o

My favourite is Amanda Vanstone. It will take some strong refugees to get her out of the way so they can get in. :lol: