4
   

Oz Election Thread #4 - Gillard's Labor

 
 
dadpad
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Apr, 2011 11:04 pm
The welfare recipients I have had contact with dont know how to work even if they are given the chance.
They take sickies, work at an alarmingly slow rate if at all, turn up late, leave early.

Its not just about employees it's also about employers who believe they have a god given right to slander, abuse and disrespect employees.

Employers provide substandard and/or broken tools and machinery or create temporary repairs to "get production happening again" which slowly become part of the environment and expect employees to work around the fix.
Complaints are ignored or fobbed off and if a complaint is taken further (whistleblowers) it creates an inhospitable environment.
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Apr, 2011 11:30 pm
@hingehead,
Quote:
It's not a space I have much contact with, but it does seem to me that the non-indigenous unemployed are either in temporary unemployment or are the rugged and the buggered. I can't see dropping unemployment much. Would like to know how many of the unemployed are mentally ill, socially dysfunctional, or coping with physical ailments and disabilities that make inflexible employment impossible for them.

I can't honestly see much drop in the unemployment rates, either, hinge.
I would add discrimination (like age, when people who are perfectly capable of the work required, but are always unsuccessful in their applications for work despite that) to the list of reasons you've given for ongoing unemployment.

If the federal government wants to see real improvement in employment rates, then I think surely some proactive initiatives are required? Not just rhetoric. The reliance on the private sector to create work opportunities is more than a little unrealistic, I think.
Whatever happened to government initiated work programs?
I mean for real, necessary programs that the private sector would never dream of becoming involved in.
(But I can already hear the cries of no more taxes! to pay for such things. Neutral )

But when the prime minister says things like this, in the current circumstances:

''I will fight the prejudice that says some people's lot is drawing a fortnightly cheque, that we shouldn't expect anything more of them,'' she said. ''Relying on welfare to provide opportunity is no longer the right focus for our times."

I see her as adopting opportunistic, thoroughly unpleasant populist rhetoric ... designed to appeal to the worst prejudices in the community.

This sort of rhetoric doesn't surprise me at all if it comes from an Abbott or a Howard. But it is deeply disappointing & disturbing coming from the leader of the Australian Labor Party & the PM of this country.
Whoever is advising her is barking up entirely the wrong tree.
And even she would well know better than this!

hingehead
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Apr, 2011 02:26 pm
@msolga,
I'm at a loss too Olgs. Why be populist on dole bludgers, but not on a carbon tax? I agree that advisers seem a little off the planet.

Mrs Hinge's take? Expect to see a rise in immigration from professionals later in the year. Govt can say we did everything in our power to fill jobs from our unemployed but business is still crying out for professional staff and our only option is to lift the quota.
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Apr, 2011 06:59 pm
@hingehead,
I'm thinking she's going for the populist vote, trying to one-up Abbott, following his (thoroughly predictable) pronouncements on dole bludgers last week.

And trying, once again, to distance Labor from the Greens, following her statements last week (about the ALP not being a puppet of the Greens).

It's all rather misguided, really. Moving Labor further right is more likely to lose even more support for the ALP (from their traditional support base) than gain new voter support.

I don't believe she believes a word of this rubbish she's been sprouting. Once again, following very poor advice.

Ah, poor Labor Party. Sad
This is only going to make things worse.

Today's AGE letters to the editor:

Quote:
Gillard attacks wrong target

WE HAVE been researching for a decade the long-term unemployed. We write to correct what is an unfortunate undercurrent and set of assumptions underpinning policy in regard to this group of people. The Prime Minister and employment services policy generally lay the blame for continued unemployment on the people themselves - either as a function of skills or character deficits (''PM takes aim at welfare'', The Age, 14/4).

Current unemployment is largely a function of macroeconomic policy. Treasury uses the unemployment rate to manage inflation: the higher the levels of unemployment, the lower the inflation rate. It does this by turning on or off the ''taps'' of the economy through government expenditure.

Further, the long-term unemployed - particularly the mature-aged unemployed and people with disabilities - are desperate for work but continually face discrimination. Nevertheless, the Prime Minister deliberately ignores the ineffective functioning of the labour market. In the short and medium term we need social policy measures to improve the living conditions of the unemployed and over the long term we need to refocus efforts on sustainable labour market policies.
Advertisement: Story continues below

Professor Catherine McDonald, RMIT University, and Professor Greg Marston, The University of Queensland, St Lucia



Middle-class benefits

SO IT'S not fair for taxpayers to support people who can support themselves? In that case, as a taxpayer on average wages, can I ask the Prime Minister what her government is going to do about me having to subsidise private health insurance, private school education and negative gearing when I can afford none of them? Those who can afford them are well able to support themselves.

Marian Gedye, Killawarra


Forget social inclusion

WHEN Gillard says, ''It's not fair for taxpayers to support someone who can support themselves,'' is she suggesting that long-term welfare recipients have the means to improve their situation?

There is a vast difference between ''survival'' and ''function'' in today's society, and our search to serve the community and find a place to belong is not always easy. As an over-55 with minor health problems and no bankable workplace skills - who has tried to move forward on a diet of short-term-employment and income-support; who has worked hard to build a career as an artist, writer and educator; and who does voluntary work two days per week to justify entitlement to Newstart - I have a good idea of what's fair and what's not.

I also have a good idea what politicians mean when they use the words ''fair'' and ''taxpayers'' in the same sentence. Thanks Julia; I'm sure that's what social inclusion is all about.

Nick Costello, Boronia



Can't upset the powerful

IF ONLY the disadvantaged who are being asked to pull their own weight had the resources to mount an aggressive advertising campaign. Maybe then they could continue to live in the ''luxury'' our government affords them. Yet mining companies seem unashamed to announce record profits in the wake of their bullying against the mining tax. Unfortunately, recent rhetoric suggests we look to the most vulnerable to avoid upsetting the most powerful.

Lisa Blanch, North Balwyn



Two-speed economy

IT SEEMS Tony Abbott is now pulling Julia's strings as she shifts further to the right. In the eyes of politicians there is no such thing as people being unemployed, just unwilling to work. It's time all politicians realised that just because the mining industry is booming, the rest of the economy is not in the same situation. Many desperately want jobs, but don't have the opportunities that others get. I am a very disillusioned (former) Labor supporter, having expected great things from a minister ''wanting 30 per cent of 30-year-olds to have a tertiary qualification'' but not willing to walk the talk. Julia, show leadership and take action on the root cause of the issues.

Adrian Cope, Gisborne



Politics

JULIA Gillard has finally acted on criticism that she's under the influence of the Greens. She's now under the influence of Tony Abbott.

Stephen Jeffery, Sandy Bay, Tas


GILLARD and Abbott won't chase the top end of town because the disabled are easier to catch.

Paul Custance, Highett


GILLARD declares it's not fair for taxpayers to pay for someone who can support themselves. A pity she didn't show the same high courage when caving in to the mining companies.

Robert Gardiner, Welshmans Reef


POOR sorry souls on the dole.

Joshua Bain, Carlton



http://www.theage.com.au/national/letters/gillard-attacks-wrong-target-20110414-1dfux.html
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Apr, 2011 07:28 pm
@dadpad,
I just saw your post now, dp.
Don't know how I missed it before, but I did.
Quote:
The welfare recipients I have had contact with dont know how to work even if they are given the chance.

What sort of employment arrangement do these people have with the employer/s?
Is it one of those government subsidized arrangements for a limited time?
dadpad
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Apr, 2011 11:55 pm
@msolga,
Quote:
What sort of employment arrangement do these people have with the employer/s?

None. employers won't employ them. Cause they wont do the work.

My wife deals often with people in financial trouble. some are good eggs and just need a hand up, most are useless twits ho believe the world owes them a living. (there are all varieties in between as well).





msolga
 
  1  
Reply Fri 15 Apr, 2011 12:17 am
@dadpad,
Yes, I agree that there are all varieties, dp.
Including work evaders. Or those who are just plain up the creek without a paddle.
But I sincerely believe that most people actually do want to find viable work opportunities.
Most people seriously don't want to spend their lives in grinding poverty on the dole.
And they don't need to be demonized when real work opportunities aren't actually available to them, despite their best efforts.
0 Replies
 
tenderfoot
 
  1  
Reply Fri 15 Apr, 2011 10:56 pm
I have seven grandchildren.. All but two have well paying jobs with a future ... One of the other two is going to university, the last one is a female ...21 year old has had 5-6 jobs since leaving school, but seems to find no hoper males to move in with then looses her job and going on the dole ,the latest one she had has just left, we she had been conned her into using speed, had her here with us for a week or so trying to help her get out of it... She was a wreck when we had her, is now back with her mother and looks like going the same way again. ( I was told you could get a hit of speed for as little as $20 in a nightclub and it was cheaper to get high than pay the liquor prices in getting pissed )
I learnt from her and the other grandchildren, who, between them all, have a huge number of friends, there seems to be the general concept that getting together, getting a flat and a boyfriend and either working and living the good life, or, if they loose their jobs, just going on the dole and doing part time cash in hand is the way to go and quite acceptable, have friend in our tennis club who tell us the same and they even have or have had son's-daughters doing the same , come to think of it out three son's lived in with our daughter in laws prior to getting married.
I can't see that there is any simple solution but do think with boys at high school age, we should have a means to to be taught trades to those that are slow or unable to pick things up... would be a good step, in the right direction for their future.
0 Replies
 
dadpad
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Apr, 2011 12:10 am
Quote:
I can't see that there is any simple solution but do think with boys at high school age, we should have a means to to be taught trades to those that are slow or unable to pick things up... would be a good step, in the right direction for their future.


Ist year apprentices should be 16. Currently to get an apprenticeship you need to be 18 and passed VCE, or 17 with 12 months fulltime training at TAFE in the particular trade.
Kids need to move to where jobs are available too.
Show me an 18 year old living away from home (vehical as well) that can manage on 10.00 per hour...gross wage, not net take home.

I see a shortage of chefs is making the news. 4 out of 10 starting apprenticeships make it through. most drop out citing low wags and hours of work as the problem.

Employers say they need trained staff but are unwilling to do the training.

A big step in the right direction would be to weed out the kids less academically inclined at 16 and send them to a regional live-in hands on trades training centre. Train them to hold stop/slow signs, and dig holes, drive tractors and headers and mix cement.
Let the regional training centres act as an employment exchange.
Employer needs a tractor driver for 3 weeks? training center provides a short list employer interviews 4 or 5 kids and selects one. The kid does work experience then goes back to training college until the next employer rings up and wants a shovel hand.
Builder
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Apr, 2011 07:44 am
@dadpad,
I think your plan is quite realistic.

I spent three years training indig kids in hand and power tool tech. They were grade nine. Some were up for it. Some were clearly not ready. I found that admin was sending (lumping me with) kids who couldn't read a ruler, or add up two simple numbers. Construction is not for dummies. It requires vision, for starters, arithmatic, even at a basic level to begin with, and communication skills above all else.

So yeah, dadpad, start them off with the basics. And as I said to some of the more advanced students, the only job you start at the top, is digging a hole.
dadpad
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Apr, 2011 07:56 am
@Builder,
I'm just not too sure about having 100 or so (slightly out of control) 16 year olds all in the one place at the same time.
hingehead
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Apr, 2011 02:28 pm
@dadpad,
Especially if they have power tools....
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Apr, 2011 05:49 pm
@hingehead,
Sounds like a recipe for trouble to me! Smile
0 Replies
 
dadpad
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Apr, 2011 06:34 pm
@hingehead,
The woodwork room in our highschool has lathes, a bandsaw, electic planer and a belt sander. The kids arn't allowed to use them for fear of injury.
VCE students (17 and 18 year old) are allowed to use some of them but only under direct 1 to 1 supervision.
They are consideing removal of chisels, screwdrivers (weapons) and hand saws (injury risk).
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Apr, 2011 08:13 pm
@dadpad,
That's because trade teachers are scare as hen's teeth these days, dp.
Many of the ones I know of are getting on in years, too.
Who's going to replace them, I wonder?
All this talk of shortages in critical skill areas ... a lot more could be done about it, I'm sure.
(Years ago I worked in the tech school system for some time. A whole different ballgame.)
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Apr, 2011 08:18 pm
And let's not forget about skilled older workers, who have been retrenched, or have retired. A hugely under-utilized resource, largely through employer prejudice. Many would love to be part of the workforce & off the dole ques.
http://images.theage.com.au/2011/04/18/2312166/petty2cod-620x0.jpg
0 Replies
 
Deckland
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Apr, 2011 01:16 am
@dadpad,
dadpad wrote:

The woodwork room in our highschool has lathes, a bandsaw, electic planer and a belt sander. The kids arn't allowed to use them for fear of injury.
VCE students (17 and 18 year old) are allowed to use some of them but only under direct 1 to 1 supervision.
They are consideing removal of chisels, screwdrivers (weapons) and hand saws (injury risk).

Good god ! Maybe they could be replaced with rubber tools and the students could write an essay on how they would make an article if the tools were real.
What is the world coming to ? Unbelievable.
0 Replies
 
Builder
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Apr, 2011 01:57 am
@dadpad,
Quote:
I'm just not too sure about having 100 or so (slightly out of control) 16 year olds all in the one place at the same time.


My class size was limited to ten. Never had any trouble, except for one tryhard who threatened to smash me in front of the class. I told him to meet me at the low level (local swimming spot) at 5 pm. And suggested he bring some friends, because he would need a lift to hospital. He was over 120 kg's. I weigh 60 wringing wet. He never showed.

During our short in-house training session (Adult edu) at NTU, I raised the issue of what to do when confronted by such a situation. The lecturer had no practical advice. Several other trainee assessors started relating similar instances of their own. One was teaching cooking skills in prison. I guess they could do away with knives, and simply use food processors.
dadpad
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Apr, 2011 02:21 am
@Builder,
The knives in prison kitchens ate chained to the benches.

Going to prison seems to be a good low cost method of getting an education/or trade skills. Given the quality of the food and conditions at barwon prison Its almost like encoragement.
0 Replies
 
Deckland
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Apr, 2011 12:33 pm
Talking of prisons .. Here is an idea that was posted somewhere ...

Quote:
Let's put the seniors in jail and the criminals in a nursing home. This way the seniors would have access to showers, hobbies and walks. They'd receive unlimited free prescriptions, dental and medical treatment, wheel chairs etc and they'd receive money instead of paying it out. They would have constant video monitoring, so they could be helped instantly if they fell, or needed assistance.

Bedding would be washed twice a week, and all clothing would be ironed and returned to them. A guard would check on them every 20 minutes and bring their meals and snacks to their cell.

They would have family visits in a suite built for that purpose. They would have access to a library, weight room, spiritual counselling, pool and education.

Simple clothing, shoes, slippers, PJ's and legal aid would be free, on request. Private, secure! rooms for all, with an exercise outdoor yard, with gardens. Each senior could have a PC a TV radio and daily phone calls.

There would be a board of directors to hear complaints, and the guards would have a code of conduct that would be strictly adhered to.

The "criminals" would get cold food, be left all alone and unsupervised. Lights off at 8pm, and showers once a week. Live in a tiny room and pay $900.00 per month and have no hope of ever getting out.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Beached As Bro - Discussion by dadpad
Oz election thread #3 - Rudd's Labour - Discussion by msolga
Australian music - Discussion by Wilso
Oz Election Thread #6 - Abbott's LNP - Discussion by hingehead
AUstralian Philosophers - Discussion by dadpad
Australia voting system - Discussion by fbaezer
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 01/11/2025 at 11:10:59