Thousands of Taiwanese workers employed in Australian abattoirs are not paying tax, according to the meatworkers' union.
The young workers, in the country on working holiday visas, work for major Australian companies such as smallgoods manufacturer Primo through specialist labour hire agencies.
The Australasian Meat Industry Employees Union (AMIEU) says the workers are being ripped off, working long hours for little pay.
What is worse, it adds, is that the foreign workers are replacing local workers in towns where the meatworks is a major employer.
Veteran slaughterman Robert Baker said that in the NSW town of Scone, the meatworks, owned by Primo, employs mostly international workers.
Mr Baker has been in the industry for 20 years but lasted only three months at the meatworks before quitting over safety concerns.
He now worries about the Taiwanese friends he has made.
They will give you lots of forms to fill in, including ABN forms. When you ask them how about tax file number they say 'Don't worry about that - you don't have to pay tax, you can earn money using ABN'.
According to the AMIEU, Primo uses specialised labour hire companies to employ the Asian backpackers.
Scottwell International recruited many of the young Taiwanese through a variety of labour hire companies.
On its website, Scottwell says its principal business is the recruitment of Taiwanese, Japanese and Korean employees to work in abattoirs and slaughterhouses across Australia - now at 19 different abattoirs across three states and employing more than 1,100 people.
Ian Tam, who was recently hired by the meatworkers' union as a Taiwanese liaison officer, went undercover at Scottwell.
He says the backpackers are being encouraged not to pay tax by using ABN numbers.
"I investigated this agency. I just [pretended] I was one of them, like a backpacker looking for job," Mr Tam said.
"They give you a form to fill in, quick interview and ask you 'can you work now?'
"They will give you lots of forms to fill in, including ABN forms. When you ask them 'how about tax file number?' They say 'don't worry about that - you don't have to pay tax, you can earn money using ABN'.
"If you don't sign those documents you cannot get the job."
Showing posts with label corporate culture. Show all posts
Showing posts with label corporate culture. Show all posts
Friday, March 07, 2014
Thursday, February 20, 2014
Corporate Culture: SPC Pressured to Slash Pay by 40%
The Abbott government pressed SPC Ardmona to slash pay for workers by as much as 40 per cent under a radical bailout plan for the food processor.
Three union officials told Fairfax Media they had meetings with SPC Ardmona managing director Peter Kelly before Christmas in which Mr Kelly said he was being pressured by the Abbott government to put workers on the award if the company wanted a $25 million subsidy.
Moving workers on to the award would have dramatically cut living standards for hundreds of people at the Shepparton plant, with pay cuts of $20,000 to $30,000 a year for many. Other sources involved in the restructure have separately confirmed to Fairfax Media the Abbott government's pay push at SPC Ardmona. Industry Minister Ian Macfarlane refused to directly answer questions on the issue.
The government has been pushing struggling companies such as Toyota and SPC Ardmona to overhaul their workplace agreements as it has repeatedly warned about high wages, which has become a key political issue. That is despite the wage price index growing at just 2.6 per cent last year, the slowest growth in the 16-year history of the series.
Treasurer Joe Hockey said costs were too high. ''We do have a high Australian dollar. We've got to reduce our costs of making things in Australia,'' he said.
ACTU secretary Dave Oliver said Australia was in a ''job security crisis'' with thousands of jobs lost and wages growth slowing. ''Meanwhile, under the banner of a so-called 'wages blowout', the Abbott government has blamed every economic fallout on workers.
Three union officials told Fairfax Media they had meetings with SPC Ardmona managing director Peter Kelly before Christmas in which Mr Kelly said he was being pressured by the Abbott government to put workers on the award if the company wanted a $25 million subsidy.
Moving workers on to the award would have dramatically cut living standards for hundreds of people at the Shepparton plant, with pay cuts of $20,000 to $30,000 a year for many. Other sources involved in the restructure have separately confirmed to Fairfax Media the Abbott government's pay push at SPC Ardmona. Industry Minister Ian Macfarlane refused to directly answer questions on the issue.
The government has been pushing struggling companies such as Toyota and SPC Ardmona to overhaul their workplace agreements as it has repeatedly warned about high wages, which has become a key political issue. That is despite the wage price index growing at just 2.6 per cent last year, the slowest growth in the 16-year history of the series.
Treasurer Joe Hockey said costs were too high. ''We do have a high Australian dollar. We've got to reduce our costs of making things in Australia,'' he said.
ACTU secretary Dave Oliver said Australia was in a ''job security crisis'' with thousands of jobs lost and wages growth slowing. ''Meanwhile, under the banner of a so-called 'wages blowout', the Abbott government has blamed every economic fallout on workers.
Friday, November 08, 2013
Dismiss the Science - Sack the Scientists! : Mad Monk Planning
"There are currently more than 50,000 Acts and legislative instruments, many of which are a handbrake on Australia's ability to get things done," Mr Abbott said.
The bodies scrapped are: Australian Animals Welfare Advisory Committee; Commonwealth Firearms Advisory Committee; International Legal Services Advisory Committee; National Inter-country Adoption Advisory Council; National Steering Committee on Corporate Wrongdoing; Antarctic Animal Ethics Committee; Advisory Panel on the Marketing in Australia of Infant Formula; High Speed Rail Advisory Group; Maritime Workforce Development Forum; Advisory Panel on Positive Ageing; Insurance Reform Advisory Group; and the National Housing Supply Council.
At the CSIRO, staff leaders fronted their bosses on Thursday, demanding answers on the fate of the workers on contracts, which can often last up to 24 months.
CSIRO has an unusually high proportion of “non-ongoings” with 990 “term” workers and about 440 casual staff among its 6500 headcount.
"It's going to be a huge problem," said one staff member, who wanted to remain anonymous.
Staff were told last week of the decision, which will hit the organisation's 11 research divisions and 11 national research flagships, as well as critical support for frontline scientists.
Catriona Jackson, the chief executive of Science and Technology Australia, the peak lobby for the nation's scientists, said she was "concerned that cuts to the public service may fall disproportionately on scientists".
ACTU Secretary Dave Oliver said, “Cutting jobs at the CSIRO will be bad for productivity in the long run. Our national productivity growth depends on innovation and research, and the application of that research in the development of new products and new technologies.”
“Continued austerity measures, particularly in science and research, will cripple Australia’s ability to grow and expand. We will be left behind as our brightest and best leave our shores to go and work elsewhere.”
Mr Oliver said the CSIRO had been responsible for a number of exciting innovations including new software to more accurately predict the spread of bushfires, a new process enabling three-dimensional printing of customised shoes for racehorses and pioneering of Wi-Fi Our technology for our smartphones.
“Staff cuts put major hurdles in the way of future projects and that could cost Australia dearly in terms future productivity,” he said.
“This is a terrible outcome for CSIRO employees who must be feeling very low right now.”
“In this day and age, can Australia really afford to have a government who doesn’t value and see the vast potential of productivity and jobs growth in new industries such as climate change, scientific research and innovation? This is an important question people need to consider.”
Labor's spokesman for the environment, climate change and water, Mark Butler, said he wasn't surprised that scientists were being sacked by the government, say Mr Abbott does not respect scientists' work, particulary on climate change.
''And I don't think it's a coincidence that the experts being sacked by this government have previously pointed out the serious flaws in the Coalition's direct action con,'' Mr Butler said.
''If the government consulted independent scientists and researchers instead of Wikipedia, they would know their direct action policy will do nothing to tackle pollution and will end up costing households more.
''The government is sacking the experts and shutting out anyone who doesn't agree with them. It's a disgraceful act.''
Read More
The bodies scrapped are: Australian Animals Welfare Advisory Committee; Commonwealth Firearms Advisory Committee; International Legal Services Advisory Committee; National Inter-country Adoption Advisory Council; National Steering Committee on Corporate Wrongdoing; Antarctic Animal Ethics Committee; Advisory Panel on the Marketing in Australia of Infant Formula; High Speed Rail Advisory Group; Maritime Workforce Development Forum; Advisory Panel on Positive Ageing; Insurance Reform Advisory Group; and the National Housing Supply Council.
At the CSIRO, staff leaders fronted their bosses on Thursday, demanding answers on the fate of the workers on contracts, which can often last up to 24 months.
CSIRO has an unusually high proportion of “non-ongoings” with 990 “term” workers and about 440 casual staff among its 6500 headcount.
"It's going to be a huge problem," said one staff member, who wanted to remain anonymous.
Staff were told last week of the decision, which will hit the organisation's 11 research divisions and 11 national research flagships, as well as critical support for frontline scientists.
Catriona Jackson, the chief executive of Science and Technology Australia, the peak lobby for the nation's scientists, said she was "concerned that cuts to the public service may fall disproportionately on scientists".
ACTU Secretary Dave Oliver said, “Cutting jobs at the CSIRO will be bad for productivity in the long run. Our national productivity growth depends on innovation and research, and the application of that research in the development of new products and new technologies.”
“Continued austerity measures, particularly in science and research, will cripple Australia’s ability to grow and expand. We will be left behind as our brightest and best leave our shores to go and work elsewhere.”
Mr Oliver said the CSIRO had been responsible for a number of exciting innovations including new software to more accurately predict the spread of bushfires, a new process enabling three-dimensional printing of customised shoes for racehorses and pioneering of Wi-Fi Our technology for our smartphones.
“Staff cuts put major hurdles in the way of future projects and that could cost Australia dearly in terms future productivity,” he said.
“This is a terrible outcome for CSIRO employees who must be feeling very low right now.”
“In this day and age, can Australia really afford to have a government who doesn’t value and see the vast potential of productivity and jobs growth in new industries such as climate change, scientific research and innovation? This is an important question people need to consider.”
Labor's spokesman for the environment, climate change and water, Mark Butler, said he wasn't surprised that scientists were being sacked by the government, say Mr Abbott does not respect scientists' work, particulary on climate change.
''And I don't think it's a coincidence that the experts being sacked by this government have previously pointed out the serious flaws in the Coalition's direct action con,'' Mr Butler said.
''If the government consulted independent scientists and researchers instead of Wikipedia, they would know their direct action policy will do nothing to tackle pollution and will end up costing households more.
''The government is sacking the experts and shutting out anyone who doesn't agree with them. It's a disgraceful act.''
Read More
Thursday, November 07, 2013
Corporate Culture - Take From Poor and Featherbed Rich
06 November, 2013 | ACTU Media Release
The Abbott Government’s announcement that it will scrap the 15 per cent tax on superannuation income above $100,000 a year, while removing superannuation tax breaks for workers on less than $37,000 per year, shows the new Government is intent on rewarding the wealthy and holds workers’ needs in complete contempt.
ACTU President Ged Kearney said the Abbott Government had already shown its true agenda by scrapping a range of measures that supported workers and their families.
“These decisions will leave millions of workers on average incomes worse off in retirement, while ensuring that wealthy retirees can earn unlimited tax-free income from the superannuation.
“The Abbott Government is attacking ordinary workers ability to have a decent and secure retirement while bringing back tax breaks for the rich.”
“The 15 per cent tax on superannuation incomes over $100,000 per year would have affected less than one per cent of retirees, while raising $300 million for public services.”
“It is not unreasonable to expect that the wealthiest retirees pay some tax on their superannuation income, when they are earning far above the average wage.”
“What makes this decision even more offensive is combining it with scrapping superannuation tax concessions for workers on low incomes.
“The previous Labor Government introduced the Low Income Superannuation Contribution, which reduced tax on superannuation contributions from workers on less than $37,000 per year.
“This was a boost to the superannuation of 3.6 million workers, including 2.1 million women, many of whom are combining raising a family with part-time work.”
Now, under Mr Abbott these workers will be paying more tax on their superannuation than on their take home pay and will have less money in retirement.”
“This is on top of cutting the School Kids Bonus, which has helped millions of families with education expenses.”
“These decisions are giving us a worrying insight into the Abbott Government’s attitude to ordinary workers, and their families.”
The Abbott Government’s announcement that it will scrap the 15 per cent tax on superannuation income above $100,000 a year, while removing superannuation tax breaks for workers on less than $37,000 per year, shows the new Government is intent on rewarding the wealthy and holds workers’ needs in complete contempt.
ACTU President Ged Kearney said the Abbott Government had already shown its true agenda by scrapping a range of measures that supported workers and their families.
“These decisions will leave millions of workers on average incomes worse off in retirement, while ensuring that wealthy retirees can earn unlimited tax-free income from the superannuation.
“The Abbott Government is attacking ordinary workers ability to have a decent and secure retirement while bringing back tax breaks for the rich.”
“The 15 per cent tax on superannuation incomes over $100,000 per year would have affected less than one per cent of retirees, while raising $300 million for public services.”
“It is not unreasonable to expect that the wealthiest retirees pay some tax on their superannuation income, when they are earning far above the average wage.”
“What makes this decision even more offensive is combining it with scrapping superannuation tax concessions for workers on low incomes.
“The previous Labor Government introduced the Low Income Superannuation Contribution, which reduced tax on superannuation contributions from workers on less than $37,000 per year.
“This was a boost to the superannuation of 3.6 million workers, including 2.1 million women, many of whom are combining raising a family with part-time work.”
Now, under Mr Abbott these workers will be paying more tax on their superannuation than on their take home pay and will have less money in retirement.”
“This is on top of cutting the School Kids Bonus, which has helped millions of families with education expenses.”
“These decisions are giving us a worrying insight into the Abbott Government’s attitude to ordinary workers, and their families.”
Tuesday, November 05, 2013
Unions NSW: Political Donations High Court Challenge
Unions are concerned that conservative state governments are pushing to ''silence'' them nationally after Victoria, Queensland and Western Australia joined NSW in defending its political donations laws against a landmark High Court challenge.
A hearing is due to begin today in the case that has been launched by the peak body Unions NSW and five unions in a bid to have the NSW government's donations laws declared unconstitutional.
The laws ban corporations and associations from making political donations in state and local government elections in NSW.
They also restrict how much the Labor Party and its affiliated unions can spend on advertising during an election campaign by counting expenditure by unions against the total amount the party is allowed to spend.
The attorneys-general of Queensland, Victoria, Western Australia and the Commonwealth have ''intervened'' in the case to support the NSW defence.
Labor and the union movement have accused NSW Premier Barry O'Farrell of using the laws, which he has cast as an attempt to reduce the influence of donations in NSW politics, to attack their ability to contest elections.
The unions will argue in the High Court that the laws restrict the freedom of political communication implied in the NSW and federal constitutions.
The secretary of Unions NSW, Mark Lennon, said the decision to intervene ''shows there is a clear agenda to silence the political voice of working people, not just in NSW but across the country''.
''Working people have always pooled resources to express themselves politically,'' he said. ''The point of our case is to make sure that can continue and we have robust political representation in this country''.
A hearing is due to begin today in the case that has been launched by the peak body Unions NSW and five unions in a bid to have the NSW government's donations laws declared unconstitutional.
The laws ban corporations and associations from making political donations in state and local government elections in NSW.
They also restrict how much the Labor Party and its affiliated unions can spend on advertising during an election campaign by counting expenditure by unions against the total amount the party is allowed to spend.
The attorneys-general of Queensland, Victoria, Western Australia and the Commonwealth have ''intervened'' in the case to support the NSW defence.
Labor and the union movement have accused NSW Premier Barry O'Farrell of using the laws, which he has cast as an attempt to reduce the influence of donations in NSW politics, to attack their ability to contest elections.
The unions will argue in the High Court that the laws restrict the freedom of political communication implied in the NSW and federal constitutions.
The secretary of Unions NSW, Mark Lennon, said the decision to intervene ''shows there is a clear agenda to silence the political voice of working people, not just in NSW but across the country''.
''Working people have always pooled resources to express themselves politically,'' he said. ''The point of our case is to make sure that can continue and we have robust political representation in this country''.
Monday, November 04, 2013
Corporate Culture - Hunt Supports Mega Mine : Mega Polution
The federal government has approved a massive coalmining project in central Queensland that will be the largest in the country.
The environment minister and climate septic, Greg Hunt, approved the 37,380-hectare Kevin's Corner project on Friday.
The mine, to be operated by a joint India-Australia consortium, GVK-Hancock, is the first to be approved since the introduction of a water trigger rule by the previous federal government.
Greenpeace claims Kevin's Corner will use more than 9bn litres of water a year and the Lock the Gate Alliance says more information on its impact on Galilee basin groundwater is needed.
On Monday, 13 water science experts urged Hunt to reject any mining proposals that would adversely impact water supplies.
They said mining and coal seam gas extraction could damage aquifers, rivers and water catchments.
The environment minister and climate septic, Greg Hunt, approved the 37,380-hectare Kevin's Corner project on Friday.
The mine, to be operated by a joint India-Australia consortium, GVK-Hancock, is the first to be approved since the introduction of a water trigger rule by the previous federal government.
Greenpeace claims Kevin's Corner will use more than 9bn litres of water a year and the Lock the Gate Alliance says more information on its impact on Galilee basin groundwater is needed.
On Monday, 13 water science experts urged Hunt to reject any mining proposals that would adversely impact water supplies.
They said mining and coal seam gas extraction could damage aquifers, rivers and water catchments.
Sunday, November 03, 2013
Banker sings Abbott's tune - sledges climate scientists
Climate scientists have called on one of Australia’s highest profile business leaders to apologise for accusing their profession of lacking integrity.
The Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society (AMOS) described as a “serious slur” the remarks of David Murray, former head of the Commonwealth Bank and the inaugural chairman of Australia’s multi-billion dollar future fund.
Murray told the ABC’s Lateline he believed there had been a “breakdown in integrity” in the science of climate change.
Murray, who was in charge of $75bn of government assets during his final year as the future fund chairman, said “the climate problem is severely overstated”.
He said he had seen no evidence of “integrity” among climate scientists.
In an open letter, AMOS president Blair Trewin wrote: “The society regards the remarks of Mr Murray as being a serious slur on the integrity of the many Australian and international authors of the IPCC report, and views them as highly offensive to those authors and to the profession at large. The society calls upon Mr Murray to withdraw the remarks.”
During the interview, host Emma Alberici pointed out the work of scientists who had contributed to the latest United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report.
Murray was asked what it would take to “convince him” on the science of climate change.
Murray answered: “When I see some evidence of integrity amongst the scientists themselves. I often look at systems and behaviours as a way of judging something, and in this case, to watch the accusations that fly between these people suggests there’s been a breakdown in integrity in the science.”
The letter from AMOS added: “The IPCC reports are an outstanding example of international science co-operation, rigour and transparency. They are subjected to multiple levels of review by experts both inside and outside the climate community, with all review comments and the authors’ responses to them being made publicly available.”
In 2011, Murray was reported to have said there was “no correlation” between carbon dioxide emissions and global warming and that the world’s glaciers were not melting.
The IPCC said in September it was “extremely likely” that human emissions of greenhouse gases had been the dominant force behind the global warming observed since the 1950s.
The IPCC report also found that between 1993 and 2009 about 275bn tonnes of ice were melting from the world’s glaciers every year.
The Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society (AMOS) described as a “serious slur” the remarks of David Murray, former head of the Commonwealth Bank and the inaugural chairman of Australia’s multi-billion dollar future fund.
Murray told the ABC’s Lateline he believed there had been a “breakdown in integrity” in the science of climate change.
Murray, who was in charge of $75bn of government assets during his final year as the future fund chairman, said “the climate problem is severely overstated”.
He said he had seen no evidence of “integrity” among climate scientists.
In an open letter, AMOS president Blair Trewin wrote: “The society regards the remarks of Mr Murray as being a serious slur on the integrity of the many Australian and international authors of the IPCC report, and views them as highly offensive to those authors and to the profession at large. The society calls upon Mr Murray to withdraw the remarks.”
During the interview, host Emma Alberici pointed out the work of scientists who had contributed to the latest United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report.
Murray was asked what it would take to “convince him” on the science of climate change.
Murray answered: “When I see some evidence of integrity amongst the scientists themselves. I often look at systems and behaviours as a way of judging something, and in this case, to watch the accusations that fly between these people suggests there’s been a breakdown in integrity in the science.”
The letter from AMOS added: “The IPCC reports are an outstanding example of international science co-operation, rigour and transparency. They are subjected to multiple levels of review by experts both inside and outside the climate community, with all review comments and the authors’ responses to them being made publicly available.”
In 2011, Murray was reported to have said there was “no correlation” between carbon dioxide emissions and global warming and that the world’s glaciers were not melting.
The IPCC said in September it was “extremely likely” that human emissions of greenhouse gases had been the dominant force behind the global warming observed since the 1950s.
The IPCC report also found that between 1993 and 2009 about 275bn tonnes of ice were melting from the world’s glaciers every year.
Monday, October 28, 2013
Hockey's Big Business Commission of Audit
28 October, 2013 | Media Release
ACTU calls on the Commission of Audit to be transparent, consult with stakeholders and release an issues paper if it wants to be viewed as credible.
ACTU President Ged Kearney said: “Transparency and consultation are extremely important considering that this is not a broad-based commission, it is a body that has no representatives from civil society or unions and yet will be responsible for major national reform.”
“The Government has outsourced decision making to one section of the community, namely big business, and must open up the process to community, unions and small business in order to create perception of fairness.”
“Credibility will be a major issue for this commission particularly if there is a lack of transparency and consultation. Australians are not stupid and they will identify rushed policy, created behind closed doors, as something to be very suspicious of. That’s why we call, among other things, for early publication of details.”
“A letter has been forwarded to the audit’s chairman Tony Shepherd from the ACTU calling on consultation, transparency and the publishing of clear and appropriate timelines for submissions.”
“If Joe Hockey follows through with his commitment to keep findings and decisions secret until the Federal Budget 2014 then this will signal an unfortunate modus operandi where the Australian government will only consult with big business on issues that affect the whole nation.”
“How will Australian’s know that this major political process represents all interests and not just an agenda of cuts and contracting out services in a similar fashion to the unfortunate example of the UK? All evidence points in that direction.”
“We have seen the results of government 'austerity' programs in Europe, and we do not want Australia to go down that path."
“While in opposition Joe Hockey boasted of plans to cut 20,000 jobs from the public service. This commission must not be used as an excuse to make deep cuts to services and permanently reduce the capacity of the public service.”
ACTU calls on the Commission of Audit to be transparent, consult with stakeholders and release an issues paper if it wants to be viewed as credible.
ACTU President Ged Kearney said: “Transparency and consultation are extremely important considering that this is not a broad-based commission, it is a body that has no representatives from civil society or unions and yet will be responsible for major national reform.”
“The Government has outsourced decision making to one section of the community, namely big business, and must open up the process to community, unions and small business in order to create perception of fairness.”
“Credibility will be a major issue for this commission particularly if there is a lack of transparency and consultation. Australians are not stupid and they will identify rushed policy, created behind closed doors, as something to be very suspicious of. That’s why we call, among other things, for early publication of details.”
“A letter has been forwarded to the audit’s chairman Tony Shepherd from the ACTU calling on consultation, transparency and the publishing of clear and appropriate timelines for submissions.”
“If Joe Hockey follows through with his commitment to keep findings and decisions secret until the Federal Budget 2014 then this will signal an unfortunate modus operandi where the Australian government will only consult with big business on issues that affect the whole nation.”
“How will Australian’s know that this major political process represents all interests and not just an agenda of cuts and contracting out services in a similar fashion to the unfortunate example of the UK? All evidence points in that direction.”
“We have seen the results of government 'austerity' programs in Europe, and we do not want Australia to go down that path."
“While in opposition Joe Hockey boasted of plans to cut 20,000 jobs from the public service. This commission must not be used as an excuse to make deep cuts to services and permanently reduce the capacity of the public service.”
Friday, October 25, 2013
Telstra: 10,0000 Shadow Workforce Overseas
WHY IS TELSTRA HANGING UP ON ITS LOCAL WORKFORCE?
In the fast-moving world of telecoms and digital services it’s hard to see five months ahead let alone five years but that is exactly what we are asking Telstra shareholders and customers to do.
Every day Telstra is shrinking its domestic workforce and every day it is building up a shadow one offshore, one that is trained up by Telstra staff in preparation for the day when the work heads overseas, as it is doing.
As a union we have been doing a lot of work in raising awareness of the issue and the risks that come with offshoring. There are huge business risks when you contract out work to foreign ‘industry partners’ on the scale that Telstra and other companies are currently doing.
10,000 jobs sent offshore
Working off Telstra figures our conservative estimate is that there are at least 10,000 contractors working for Telstra in India, the Philippines and Malaysia at any one time.
To put it into perspective that represents about a third of Telstra’s salaried staff complement.
It’s not just dispiriting for the workers who lose their jobs or those that are left behind see their workforce shrinking, it is also entirely unnecessary.
It’s not as if Telstra is struggling. Yes, revenue in parts of its business are facing challenges but last year it booked $3.8 billion in profits and it stands to bank hundreds of millions more from its participation in the NB
More
In the fast-moving world of telecoms and digital services it’s hard to see five months ahead let alone five years but that is exactly what we are asking Telstra shareholders and customers to do.
Every day Telstra is shrinking its domestic workforce and every day it is building up a shadow one offshore, one that is trained up by Telstra staff in preparation for the day when the work heads overseas, as it is doing.
As a union we have been doing a lot of work in raising awareness of the issue and the risks that come with offshoring. There are huge business risks when you contract out work to foreign ‘industry partners’ on the scale that Telstra and other companies are currently doing.
10,000 jobs sent offshore
Working off Telstra figures our conservative estimate is that there are at least 10,000 contractors working for Telstra in India, the Philippines and Malaysia at any one time.
To put it into perspective that represents about a third of Telstra’s salaried staff complement.
It’s not just dispiriting for the workers who lose their jobs or those that are left behind see their workforce shrinking, it is also entirely unnecessary.
It’s not as if Telstra is struggling. Yes, revenue in parts of its business are facing challenges but last year it booked $3.8 billion in profits and it stands to bank hundreds of millions more from its participation in the NB
More
Abbott Agenda: Less Tax for Corporations, Less Super for Workers
24 October, 2013 | ACTU Media Release
The Abbott Government has begun its attack on ordinary workers by drafting laws that cut taxes for big mining companies but scrap programs, including the Low Income Superannuation Contribution, that benefit low and middle-income workers.
The draft of the Minerals Resource Rent Tax Repeal and Other Measures Bill 2013 released today will hurt millions of workers today and in retirement, the ACTU said today.
ACTU President Ged Kearney said the Abbott Government had shown its true agenda by scrapping a range of measures that supported workers and their families.
“This bill abolishes the Low Income Superannuation Contribution, which reduces tax on superannuation contributions from workers on less than $37,000 per year,” Ms Kearney said.
“This is an effective tax increase on 3.6 million workers, including 2.1 million women. It means that these workers will be paying more tax on their superannuation than on their take home pay and will have less money in retirement.”
“This is class war of the worst kind - an attack on ordinary workers ability to have a decent retirement.”
“It is unbelievable that the Abbott Government intends to slug these workers, while reducing taxes on mining companies.”
“The mining industry sends 80 per cent of its profits offshore and the Minerals and Resources Rent Tax was an attempt to ensure that Australians got a fairer share of the profits generated from their mineral wealth.”
“The bill also scraps the Schoolkids Bonus which helped millions of families with the cost of sending children to school.”
“It also stops the Income Support Bonus, which will hurt people on a range of income support programs, including Newstart and Parenting Payments, which are already too low.
“Small business are also hit, the bill scraps the “loss carry back” provisions that were designed to help small and medium businesses deal with economic downturns. This was a measure recommended by the Business Tax Working Group which included the ACTU was a member.”
“These measures show that the new government will always side with big business at the expense of workers and their families.”
The Abbott Government has begun its attack on ordinary workers by drafting laws that cut taxes for big mining companies but scrap programs, including the Low Income Superannuation Contribution, that benefit low and middle-income workers.
The draft of the Minerals Resource Rent Tax Repeal and Other Measures Bill 2013 released today will hurt millions of workers today and in retirement, the ACTU said today.
ACTU President Ged Kearney said the Abbott Government had shown its true agenda by scrapping a range of measures that supported workers and their families.
“This bill abolishes the Low Income Superannuation Contribution, which reduces tax on superannuation contributions from workers on less than $37,000 per year,” Ms Kearney said.
“This is an effective tax increase on 3.6 million workers, including 2.1 million women. It means that these workers will be paying more tax on their superannuation than on their take home pay and will have less money in retirement.”
“This is class war of the worst kind - an attack on ordinary workers ability to have a decent retirement.”
“It is unbelievable that the Abbott Government intends to slug these workers, while reducing taxes on mining companies.”
“The mining industry sends 80 per cent of its profits offshore and the Minerals and Resources Rent Tax was an attempt to ensure that Australians got a fairer share of the profits generated from their mineral wealth.”
“The bill also scraps the Schoolkids Bonus which helped millions of families with the cost of sending children to school.”
“It also stops the Income Support Bonus, which will hurt people on a range of income support programs, including Newstart and Parenting Payments, which are already too low.
“Small business are also hit, the bill scraps the “loss carry back” provisions that were designed to help small and medium businesses deal with economic downturns. This was a measure recommended by the Business Tax Working Group which included the ACTU was a member.”
“These measures show that the new government will always side with big business at the expense of workers and their families.”
Sunday, October 20, 2013
Abbott - climate septic
"We are giving the Labor Party a chance to repent of its massive breach of faith with the Australian people in the last Parliament," he added.
"I think that the Labor Party, being pragmatic, political survivors, will ultimately embrace that opportunity."
Meanwhile his rush to dismantle services and access to Federal funds is affecting those most in need because of the bushfires in New South Wales.
People who have been cut off from their homes or who have no electricity have not been deemed eligible in the first round of disaster payments determined by Justice Minister Michael Keenan.
Friday, October 18, 2013
Corporate Culture: Abbott's ABCC mark two
17 October, 2013 | ACTU Media Release
Tony Abbott has confirmed his revamped Australian Building and Construction Commission will continue its predecessor's attack on workers' rights by appointing right-wing ideologue John Lloyd and former ABCC Deputy Commissioner Nigel Hadgkiss to the Fair Work Building Industry inspectorate.
ACTU President Ged Kearney said the Abbott Government had made clear its intention to re-establish the ABCC if it could get legislation passed by parliament and the new body would be like the old ABCC which used its coercive powers to unfairly target construction workers.
“The old ABCC was a failed institution that achieved nothing except to intimidate and harass construction workers,” Ms Kearney said.
“The new government has not learnt the lessons of WorkChoices by appointing two of its key figures to oversee its retrograde attack on workplace rights in the construction industry.
“Under the Howard Government the ABCC showed no desire to investigate the actions of employers in the construction industry. It was simply an attack on unions and workers.
“Construction workers were subject to extreme powers - including secret interrogations and the abolition of the right to silence - which did not apply to workers in any other industry.
“The ABCC spent $135 million of taxpayers' money yet failed to find evidence of serious wrongdoing by union officials.
“If there is unlawful activity on construction sites then it should be investigated by the police.”
Ms Kearney urged MPs to block any attempts by Mr Abbott to bring back the ABCC.
Tony Abbott has confirmed his revamped Australian Building and Construction Commission will continue its predecessor's attack on workers' rights by appointing right-wing ideologue John Lloyd and former ABCC Deputy Commissioner Nigel Hadgkiss to the Fair Work Building Industry inspectorate.
ACTU President Ged Kearney said the Abbott Government had made clear its intention to re-establish the ABCC if it could get legislation passed by parliament and the new body would be like the old ABCC which used its coercive powers to unfairly target construction workers.
“The old ABCC was a failed institution that achieved nothing except to intimidate and harass construction workers,” Ms Kearney said.
“The new government has not learnt the lessons of WorkChoices by appointing two of its key figures to oversee its retrograde attack on workplace rights in the construction industry.
“Under the Howard Government the ABCC showed no desire to investigate the actions of employers in the construction industry. It was simply an attack on unions and workers.
“Construction workers were subject to extreme powers - including secret interrogations and the abolition of the right to silence - which did not apply to workers in any other industry.
“The ABCC spent $135 million of taxpayers' money yet failed to find evidence of serious wrongdoing by union officials.
“If there is unlawful activity on construction sites then it should be investigated by the police.”
Ms Kearney urged MPs to block any attempts by Mr Abbott to bring back the ABCC.
Mongolia: Landmark judgement against Rio Tinto
IndustriALL Global Union 15.10.2013
The Supreme Court in Mongolia has ordered Rio Tinto to reinstate an unfairly dismissed employee, as well as to pay compensation.
Gantuya was dismissed from work by Rio Tinto for protesting against discrimination over the remuneration paid to Mongolian employees. The unequal remuneration pay between Mongolian nationals and expatriates translate into a disparity of MNT 3 million for local Mongolian workers at Rio Tinto, to MNT 30 million for expatriates a month on average.
The Ministry of Labor has confirmed that Oyu tolgoi and Rio Tinto were in violation of Clause #8.1 of the OT IA “in the most blatant, wanton manner and never made a single step towards enforcing this obligation”. The Supreme Court ruled that the termination of Gantuya employmentwas unjust and unlawful.
The ruling of the Supreme Court was the final arbiter over Rio Tinto’s intransigence and arrogance to refuse two lower court judgements in favour of Gantuya. Rio Tinto took the matter on appeal to the Supreme Court and lost.
IndustriALL Global Union applauds this important victory, and Assistant Secretary General Kemal Özkan says:
This is a huge victory not only for Sainkhuu Gantuya, but for all workers in Mongolia, especially at Oyu Tolgo. This is a significant and important pushback against Rio Tinto, particularly in the context of IndustriALL Global Union’s global corporate campaign against Rio Tinto.
The Supreme Court in Mongolia has ordered Rio Tinto to reinstate an unfairly dismissed employee, as well as to pay compensation.
Gantuya was dismissed from work by Rio Tinto for protesting against discrimination over the remuneration paid to Mongolian employees. The unequal remuneration pay between Mongolian nationals and expatriates translate into a disparity of MNT 3 million for local Mongolian workers at Rio Tinto, to MNT 30 million for expatriates a month on average.
The Ministry of Labor has confirmed that Oyu tolgoi and Rio Tinto were in violation of Clause #8.1 of the OT IA “in the most blatant, wanton manner and never made a single step towards enforcing this obligation”. The Supreme Court ruled that the termination of Gantuya employmentwas unjust and unlawful.
The ruling of the Supreme Court was the final arbiter over Rio Tinto’s intransigence and arrogance to refuse two lower court judgements in favour of Gantuya. Rio Tinto took the matter on appeal to the Supreme Court and lost.
IndustriALL Global Union applauds this important victory, and Assistant Secretary General Kemal Özkan says:
This is a huge victory not only for Sainkhuu Gantuya, but for all workers in Mongolia, especially at Oyu Tolgo. This is a significant and important pushback against Rio Tinto, particularly in the context of IndustriALL Global Union’s global corporate campaign against Rio Tinto.
Thursday, October 17, 2013
ACTU: Coalition Attack on Public Service
16 October, 2013 | Media Release
Today's announcement confirms the Federal Government intends to commit Australia to follow the failed UK model, rely on unpaid labour, slash jobs and privatise the public sector.
"The government has confirmed they intend to follow a version of the failed British 'Big Society' concept that caused such high unemployment and dysfunctional privatisation in the UK," said ACTU president Ged Kearney.
Ms Kearney said the Coalition has been in the process of campaigning to reduce the role, scope and breadth of government and the public sector.
"This latest announcement of giving more control to charities has much broader implications than first appears."
Charities do a fantastic job but they are there to fill gaps, not take on the full responsibility of supporting all those in need. They already work very hard, are under-resourced and over-burdened. It is the Government's responsibility to protect people and provide a robust public sector, not handball their duties to charities and volunteers," she said.
"What they want to do is privatise vital public services on a massive scale. But without an adequate state controlled safety-net many people will fall through exacerbating inequality and ensuring that we well and truly live in a society of haves and have-nots," she said.
"In the UK it has caused a massive rise in unemployment, where those who once had jobs now face the double barrel of a punitive benefits system and drastically pared-down public services."
She said, "In the UK unpaid labour and the charitable and voluntary sectors were intended to fill the gaps left by public services, however this was too high a burden and what they ended up with was a small number of corporations that are acting as government agents, providing health, education and social services in a for profit system."
"They tried and failed in the UK and now the Australian Government wants to follow that same unfortunate path that caused such polarisation between rich and poor neighbourhoods and greater social divide," Ms Kearney said.
"This subject needs real debate and thorough evaluation. The public should be made well aware of the implication because what is clear is that the government's strategy is to implement its agenda bit by bit so that before we know it, Australia will be a very different nation than it is today."
Today's announcement confirms the Federal Government intends to commit Australia to follow the failed UK model, rely on unpaid labour, slash jobs and privatise the public sector.
"The government has confirmed they intend to follow a version of the failed British 'Big Society' concept that caused such high unemployment and dysfunctional privatisation in the UK," said ACTU president Ged Kearney.
Ms Kearney said the Coalition has been in the process of campaigning to reduce the role, scope and breadth of government and the public sector.
"This latest announcement of giving more control to charities has much broader implications than first appears."
Charities do a fantastic job but they are there to fill gaps, not take on the full responsibility of supporting all those in need. They already work very hard, are under-resourced and over-burdened. It is the Government's responsibility to protect people and provide a robust public sector, not handball their duties to charities and volunteers," she said.
"What they want to do is privatise vital public services on a massive scale. But without an adequate state controlled safety-net many people will fall through exacerbating inequality and ensuring that we well and truly live in a society of haves and have-nots," she said.
"In the UK it has caused a massive rise in unemployment, where those who once had jobs now face the double barrel of a punitive benefits system and drastically pared-down public services."
She said, "In the UK unpaid labour and the charitable and voluntary sectors were intended to fill the gaps left by public services, however this was too high a burden and what they ended up with was a small number of corporations that are acting as government agents, providing health, education and social services in a for profit system."
"They tried and failed in the UK and now the Australian Government wants to follow that same unfortunate path that caused such polarisation between rich and poor neighbourhoods and greater social divide," Ms Kearney said.
"This subject needs real debate and thorough evaluation. The public should be made well aware of the implication because what is clear is that the government's strategy is to implement its agenda bit by bit so that before we know it, Australia will be a very different nation than it is today."
Tuesday, October 15, 2013
CFMEU: Dave Noonan's address to National Conference
Dave concluded his address pledging the Union's commitment for the next few years:
"Abbott has no mandate turn his back on Australia’s history of permanent migration. He has no mandate to sell out Australian workers by allowing employers open slather on temporary visas, with no obligation to first employ Australian workers or to train Australian apprentices.
"This means the exploitation of more 457 workers, less jobs and apprenticeships. This is a real threat to conditions that were achieved from generations of struggle.
"Unlike Tony Abbott our union keeps its promises, and we promise this:
"We will not shirk our responsibility to stand up for our member’s rights on site.
"We will not compromise on defending our member’s safety.
"We will fight to keep our wages and conditions.
"And we know we are not alone.
"Despite Tony Abbott’s attempts to demonise construction workers and their union, despite his friends’ attempts in the Murdoch media to denigrate us for our pay and conditions, we know that we have friends everywhere.
"Working people, even those not in unions, look to the CFMEU for inspiration. They like the fact that we stand up for ourselves, fight for better wages and conditions and look out for each other in a tough working environment.
"They like it because they know that each time we raise our head and take a stand, we are not just doing it for ourselves.
"They like it because they know that strong unions have the ability to not only help their own members, but to also be there for others in our community who need a hand.
"And under an Abbott government when they come after us, we will all need to reach out and help each other.
"We will need to stick together, and we will need to back those in our communities who are also doing it hard.
"It’s what we’ve always done and that’s how we’ll get through the bad times and come out on the other side of this, together, united and strong."
Time for tough questions on Abbott's industrial relations policy
From Worksite by Mark Hearn*
Tony Abbott was desperate to smother a debate on industrial relations during the 2013 election campaign. It's hardly surprising, because industrial relations raises fundamental questions about the society we live in, questions Mister Abbott seemed keen to avoid. How should we share the rewards of work - productivity - between us? How much time should we spend at work or with family, or friends? What are your rights at work?
Senator Eric Abetz, the Coalition's spokesman on industrial relations, barely surfaced during the long weeks of the 2013 election campaign. Interestingly, his brief appearances attracted attention - although possibly not the kind enjoyed by Tony Abbott or Liberal Party campaign headquarters.
Prior to the election Fairfax Media reported that 'Tony Abbott's industrial relations spokesman Eric Abetz attracted internal criticism for "freelancing" on future Coalition policy by suggesting an Abbott government would intervene in wage settlements if wage rates were too high.'
Abetz also warned that an Abbott government would not consider 'excessive ambit claims' as good faith bargaining. These claims should be subject to a 'productivity' test.
Apparently, Senator Abetz failed the honesty test: he was a little too honest with the Australian people about the Coalition's policies. 'Senior Liberals were aghast on Thursday when they read that Senator Abetz had granted an unscheduled interview on his party's workplace relations laws', Fairfax reported.
Abetz did not define what he meant by an 'excessive ambit claim', or how 'productivity' would be measured. When are wage rates too high? It seems sufficient to deploy these vague edicts untested by any kind of rigorous methodology.
Abetz also promised that the Coalition would initiate a Productivity Commission inquiry into Australia's industrial relations. That sounds pretty significant, doesn't it?
It would suggest that Australians could expect to see some profound changes flowing from the Productivity Commissions' ensuing report: changes to the rules governing work, how pay and conditions are negotiated, how employers and employees manage their workplace relationships.
Abetz declined to outline the specific terms of reference that will frame the Productivity Commission's inquiry. And apparently, Abetz felt little pressure to really explain Coalition industrial relations policy to the people of Australia during election 2013.
It seems that everything will be 'fair' under the Coalition's new rules of work: its industrial relations policy document assures workers that they will have the 'right' to 'access fair flexibility', in order to 'work innovatively'. Sounds fair; workers can only assume that left to their own resources in negotiations with the boss, flexibility and innovation doesn't simply mean longer hours and less pay.
The right of unions to enter workplaces will also be 'sensible and fair', under a Coalition government and, one suspects, virtually non-existent. Union right of entry - to consult their members - is a major source of employer irritation.
The Coalition justifies a critical stance on unions by reference to the criminal charges brought against Health Services Union officials over the alleged misappropriation of funds. The Coalition will require tighter financial disclosure and reporting guidelines, like those subjected to companies. Union officials will also be held to the same standards and tough financial penalties applying to company directors.
The trouble is, unions aren't companies. They are non-profit associations, whose tasks are not only fulfilled by paid officials but by the volunteer labour of thousands of ordinary working men and women who serve as rank and file union delegates or on the union's management committees. They are not running profit-generating enterprises. They often perform demanding tasks for little or no recompense and precious little glory.
Persons charged with criminal offences should face the courts. If the Coalition intends to treat rank and file unionists who take on elected roles as if they are company directors - the Coalition's policy does not clarify what it means by a 'union official' in this context - it will amount to a punitive sanction and an attack on democracy. It will discourage participation in what is essentially a voluntary community service. Perhaps the Coalition knows that?
It's difficult to shake off a suspicion of deviousness about the Coalition's industrial relations policies. Just as newly-elected governments love to 'open the books' and discover the financial wickedness left behind by their predecessors, it seems that the Productivity Commission is being primed as the bomb to plant under 'obstructive' workplace practices that hamper 'productivity' growth. Look, Tony Abbott will say: we can't ignore the shocking problems uncovered in this damning report.
There is little critical analysis of the way in which the term productivity is used in public debate. Simply invoking the word apparently justifies reducing wages and cutting entitlements, or outsourcing jobs, or even sending them offshore.
Productivity is often polite code for what employers have always craved: reduced labour costs. They want someone to do the same amount of work - or more - for less money.
Presumably an Abbott government will be forced to clarify how it intends to renovate the rules of work. The terms of reference handed to the Productivity Commission will likely give the Coalition's game away.
* Dr Mark Hearn is a lecturer in the Department of Modern History and Politics at Macquarie University.
Published 4 September 2013
Tony Abbott was desperate to smother a debate on industrial relations during the 2013 election campaign. It's hardly surprising, because industrial relations raises fundamental questions about the society we live in, questions Mister Abbott seemed keen to avoid. How should we share the rewards of work - productivity - between us? How much time should we spend at work or with family, or friends? What are your rights at work?
Senator Eric Abetz, the Coalition's spokesman on industrial relations, barely surfaced during the long weeks of the 2013 election campaign. Interestingly, his brief appearances attracted attention - although possibly not the kind enjoyed by Tony Abbott or Liberal Party campaign headquarters.
Prior to the election Fairfax Media reported that 'Tony Abbott's industrial relations spokesman Eric Abetz attracted internal criticism for "freelancing" on future Coalition policy by suggesting an Abbott government would intervene in wage settlements if wage rates were too high.'
Abetz also warned that an Abbott government would not consider 'excessive ambit claims' as good faith bargaining. These claims should be subject to a 'productivity' test.
Apparently, Senator Abetz failed the honesty test: he was a little too honest with the Australian people about the Coalition's policies. 'Senior Liberals were aghast on Thursday when they read that Senator Abetz had granted an unscheduled interview on his party's workplace relations laws', Fairfax reported.
Abetz did not define what he meant by an 'excessive ambit claim', or how 'productivity' would be measured. When are wage rates too high? It seems sufficient to deploy these vague edicts untested by any kind of rigorous methodology.
Abetz also promised that the Coalition would initiate a Productivity Commission inquiry into Australia's industrial relations. That sounds pretty significant, doesn't it?
It would suggest that Australians could expect to see some profound changes flowing from the Productivity Commissions' ensuing report: changes to the rules governing work, how pay and conditions are negotiated, how employers and employees manage their workplace relationships.
Abetz declined to outline the specific terms of reference that will frame the Productivity Commission's inquiry. And apparently, Abetz felt little pressure to really explain Coalition industrial relations policy to the people of Australia during election 2013.
It seems that everything will be 'fair' under the Coalition's new rules of work: its industrial relations policy document assures workers that they will have the 'right' to 'access fair flexibility', in order to 'work innovatively'. Sounds fair; workers can only assume that left to their own resources in negotiations with the boss, flexibility and innovation doesn't simply mean longer hours and less pay.
The right of unions to enter workplaces will also be 'sensible and fair', under a Coalition government and, one suspects, virtually non-existent. Union right of entry - to consult their members - is a major source of employer irritation.
The Coalition justifies a critical stance on unions by reference to the criminal charges brought against Health Services Union officials over the alleged misappropriation of funds. The Coalition will require tighter financial disclosure and reporting guidelines, like those subjected to companies. Union officials will also be held to the same standards and tough financial penalties applying to company directors.
The trouble is, unions aren't companies. They are non-profit associations, whose tasks are not only fulfilled by paid officials but by the volunteer labour of thousands of ordinary working men and women who serve as rank and file union delegates or on the union's management committees. They are not running profit-generating enterprises. They often perform demanding tasks for little or no recompense and precious little glory.
Persons charged with criminal offences should face the courts. If the Coalition intends to treat rank and file unionists who take on elected roles as if they are company directors - the Coalition's policy does not clarify what it means by a 'union official' in this context - it will amount to a punitive sanction and an attack on democracy. It will discourage participation in what is essentially a voluntary community service. Perhaps the Coalition knows that?
It's difficult to shake off a suspicion of deviousness about the Coalition's industrial relations policies. Just as newly-elected governments love to 'open the books' and discover the financial wickedness left behind by their predecessors, it seems that the Productivity Commission is being primed as the bomb to plant under 'obstructive' workplace practices that hamper 'productivity' growth. Look, Tony Abbott will say: we can't ignore the shocking problems uncovered in this damning report.
There is little critical analysis of the way in which the term productivity is used in public debate. Simply invoking the word apparently justifies reducing wages and cutting entitlements, or outsourcing jobs, or even sending them offshore.
Productivity is often polite code for what employers have always craved: reduced labour costs. They want someone to do the same amount of work - or more - for less money.
Presumably an Abbott government will be forced to clarify how it intends to renovate the rules of work. The terms of reference handed to the Productivity Commission will likely give the Coalition's game away.
* Dr Mark Hearn is a lecturer in the Department of Modern History and Politics at Macquarie University.
Published 4 September 2013
Saturday, October 12, 2013
CFMEU: Youth Unemployment and Free Trade Agreement
Youth unemployment continues to rise as new Federal Government trades away more jobs
The Construction Forestry Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) is today calling on the Federal Government to re-think free trade negotiations currently underway and reject an employer push to turbo charge the 457 visa program, in the face of ever rising youth unemployment.
New figures out today from the ABS show that, whilst the headline national unemployment rate dropped slightly, youth unemployment continues to move upwards to unacceptable levels.
Youth unemployment is now 12.6% nationally, the highest it has been since 2002. It has risen in each of the last consecutive 6 months.
CFMEU National Secretary Michael O’Connor said today that young people in Australia were being let down.
“Currently our Government is negotiating free trade agreements where they intend to give greater access to our markets to countries such as China, which we have consistently argued is not a market economy.
“This flies in the face of all available evidence that shows that lower tariffs will make us even more vulnerable to dumping and products that don’t meet our standards while our competitors continuously subsidise their industries and use non-tariff trade barriers to keep our exports out.
“Going down this route will spell disaster for manufacturing jobs.
”In addition, they have explicitly and deliberately placed the bringing in of foreign nationals to work in Australia on the negotiating table.
“Equally, there will be a sustained push by employers over the next few months to return to the bad old days of a de-regulated 457 visa scheme allowing tens of thousands more temporary overseas workers in to Australia to work, displacing young people who need a start in the job market
“How can these policies possibly be justified in the context of a growing youth unemployment problem?
The top line national figures released today also of course don’t capture effectively the huge problem with youth unemployment in some regional and rural communities.
“That Tony Abbott wants to rush into a swathe of free-trade agreements and that employers want to abolish any requirement to try and place Australians in Australian jobs in Australia, in the face of these youth unemployment figures, is a national disgrace.”
Friday, October 11, 2013
Abbott’s rush to Free Trade deals will leave workers short-changed
AMWU Oct 08, 2013
Tony Abbott’s push to sign a Free Trade Agreement with China within a year and to speed up negotiations for the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA) involving the USA is a foolish policy that will hurt workers, the AMWU said today.
AMWU National President Andrew Dettmer said that rushing trade negotiations to fit an arbitrary deadline was a potentially disastrous strategy that could cost jobs in Australia.
“Australia should only sign a free trade deal after a comprehensive analysis that shows it benefits Australia and Australian workers.
“This applies to a deal with China or any other country. Trying to set deadlines for agreements just weakens our negotiating position.
“Free trade agreements generally promise much and deliver little. They usually come at the price of lost jobs and threatened industries.
“Australia, unlike most of our trading partners, has an open economy and few barriers to imported goods. This makes it difficult for Australian manufacturers who often face unfair barriers when they try to export.
“We need to make sure that these deals do not give away the few protections Australian workers have.
“We also need to make sure it does not reduce the powers of the Foreign Investment Review Board to examine overseas investment and evaluate if it is in the national interest.
Mr Dettmer said any agreement with China needed to address labour standards, in particular the issues of forced labour and child labour, and require signatories to uphold ILO conventions on these issues.
He said that the TPPA should not include investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) provisions.
“These provisions would undermine our democratic sovereignty by letting foreign corporations sue over changes to legislation that they believe damage their investments.
“Major multinationals would have the right to challenge and overrule our Parliament – and that is unacceptable.
“A US mining company is using the ISDS provisions in the North American Free Trade Agreement to sue the Québec provincial government of Canada for $250 million because it dared to have an environmental review of shale oil mining – we cannot allow this type of thing to happen in Australia.
“Previous governments have rejected giving corporations the right to sue governments for losses brought about by law changes, and Mr Abbott must not budge on this issue.
“Trade deals must be about the interests of Australia and Australian workers, not big multinationals,” said Mr Dettmer.
Tony Abbott’s push to sign a Free Trade Agreement with China within a year and to speed up negotiations for the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA) involving the USA is a foolish policy that will hurt workers, the AMWU said today.
AMWU National President Andrew Dettmer said that rushing trade negotiations to fit an arbitrary deadline was a potentially disastrous strategy that could cost jobs in Australia.
“Australia should only sign a free trade deal after a comprehensive analysis that shows it benefits Australia and Australian workers.
“This applies to a deal with China or any other country. Trying to set deadlines for agreements just weakens our negotiating position.
“Free trade agreements generally promise much and deliver little. They usually come at the price of lost jobs and threatened industries.
“Australia, unlike most of our trading partners, has an open economy and few barriers to imported goods. This makes it difficult for Australian manufacturers who often face unfair barriers when they try to export.
“We need to make sure that these deals do not give away the few protections Australian workers have.
“We also need to make sure it does not reduce the powers of the Foreign Investment Review Board to examine overseas investment and evaluate if it is in the national interest.
Mr Dettmer said any agreement with China needed to address labour standards, in particular the issues of forced labour and child labour, and require signatories to uphold ILO conventions on these issues.
He said that the TPPA should not include investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) provisions.
“These provisions would undermine our democratic sovereignty by letting foreign corporations sue over changes to legislation that they believe damage their investments.
“Major multinationals would have the right to challenge and overrule our Parliament – and that is unacceptable.
“A US mining company is using the ISDS provisions in the North American Free Trade Agreement to sue the Québec provincial government of Canada for $250 million because it dared to have an environmental review of shale oil mining – we cannot allow this type of thing to happen in Australia.
“Previous governments have rejected giving corporations the right to sue governments for losses brought about by law changes, and Mr Abbott must not budge on this issue.
“Trade deals must be about the interests of Australia and Australian workers, not big multinationals,” said Mr Dettmer.
Tuesday, October 08, 2013
Qld: government’s decision will put worker’s lives at risk
07 October, 2013 | Media Release
ACTU condemns the Queensland government’s proposed amendments to the Work Health and Safety Laws which will put worker’s lives at risk and take the heat off employers who choose to cut corners on safety.
ACTU Assistant Secretary Michael Borowick said, “These proposed amendments will put all workers at risk, not just on construction sites but across many workplaces. It takes the pressure off employers to do the right thing and it makes it harder for unions to protect their members.”
“Unions are fearful this type of dangerous thinking could spread to other states creating a lowering of health and safety standards in Australia.”
Jarrod Bleijie Attorney-General and State Minister for Justice said he would be seeking the agreement of other states and territories to get on board. “This would be very bad for Australia because at the end of the day, these amendments reward bad employers and make going to work more dangerous, especially for those on construction sites.”
“We don’t believe there has been proper consideration of the impact of these changes on workplaces.
“Government has provided no evidence that current laws are a problem, in fact only evidence given by Government is that non-fatal injuries and disease claim rate for construction sites in Queensland are improving and at a faster rate than the rest of the country.”
“Forcing unions to give notice before entering worksites will give employers time to cover up dangerous practices, therefore putting lives at risk.”
“Employers need to be vigilant with safety all the time, not just on the day of an inspection.”
Mr Borowick said that further to the dangers involved in a weakening of right of entry laws created to protect workers, he was concerned with Queensland’s decision to reject the national standards for health and safety.
“Queensland is basically going it alone. They are moving away from national standards that aim to make Australia one of the safest countries in the world and are instead doing it their way and doing it the wrong way.”
“Unions are the number one reason why safety in the workplace is such a key issue here in Australia. While there are many good employers out there, too many others will cut corners to save money if they can and the cost of that is injury and death of workers.”
“We want people to go home at the end of the day and will fight any move to weaken occupational health and safety laws.”
Mr Borowick also said it was disappointing that the Queensland government would attempt to sway opinion by using false connection such as militant union activity and safety.
“This is an unsurprising but still disappointing attempt to link strike action with laws around safety. The laws that govern workplaces need to be of the highest order and whether there is strike action at that workplace or not should have no bearing on this.”
ACTU condemns the Queensland government’s proposed amendments to the Work Health and Safety Laws which will put worker’s lives at risk and take the heat off employers who choose to cut corners on safety.
ACTU Assistant Secretary Michael Borowick said, “These proposed amendments will put all workers at risk, not just on construction sites but across many workplaces. It takes the pressure off employers to do the right thing and it makes it harder for unions to protect their members.”
“Unions are fearful this type of dangerous thinking could spread to other states creating a lowering of health and safety standards in Australia.”
Jarrod Bleijie Attorney-General and State Minister for Justice said he would be seeking the agreement of other states and territories to get on board. “This would be very bad for Australia because at the end of the day, these amendments reward bad employers and make going to work more dangerous, especially for those on construction sites.”
“We don’t believe there has been proper consideration of the impact of these changes on workplaces.
“Government has provided no evidence that current laws are a problem, in fact only evidence given by Government is that non-fatal injuries and disease claim rate for construction sites in Queensland are improving and at a faster rate than the rest of the country.”
“Forcing unions to give notice before entering worksites will give employers time to cover up dangerous practices, therefore putting lives at risk.”
“Employers need to be vigilant with safety all the time, not just on the day of an inspection.”
Mr Borowick said that further to the dangers involved in a weakening of right of entry laws created to protect workers, he was concerned with Queensland’s decision to reject the national standards for health and safety.
“Queensland is basically going it alone. They are moving away from national standards that aim to make Australia one of the safest countries in the world and are instead doing it their way and doing it the wrong way.”
“Unions are the number one reason why safety in the workplace is such a key issue here in Australia. While there are many good employers out there, too many others will cut corners to save money if they can and the cost of that is injury and death of workers.”
“We want people to go home at the end of the day and will fight any move to weaken occupational health and safety laws.”
Mr Borowick also said it was disappointing that the Queensland government would attempt to sway opinion by using false connection such as militant union activity and safety.
“This is an unsurprising but still disappointing attempt to link strike action with laws around safety. The laws that govern workplaces need to be of the highest order and whether there is strike action at that workplace or not should have no bearing on this.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)