Macquarie Network ::: 2GB | 2CH | LIVENEWS | STREET CORNER | RUGBYLEAGUELIVE | WHAT CAREER | AMAZING AUSTRALIANS :::
Thursday, 08 January 2009

Bosses need to get house in order

4/12/2008 3:17:00 PM.  | Tim Brunero
Just a day after employer unions were bleating about a ‘return to union power’ with the recent introduction of Julia Gillard’s Fair Work laws, multinational behemoth Toys R Us has been caught out rorting its young workforce.

Sydney-wide raids by officers from the Workplace Ombudsman (a rabid left-wing body set up by John Howard) found that staff are owed several million dollars following systemic underpayment according to today’s Daily Telegraph.

When the staff - on no doubt already abysmal retail wages - are owed several million dollars, you know the rort must have been pretty big.

The Workplace Ombudsman also found other humiliating workplace practices being perpetrated on young staff.  

Like subjecting them to mandatory bag checks when leaving the store and a holidays ban for four months a year.

It’s a far cry from the predictions of big business on Tuesday.  Way back then the big end of town’s mouthpiece, The Australian, was screaming about the country’s entry into a new “dangerous’ union era”.

The Oz told us the business community would go mental if, shock horror, there was a return to industry-wide union bargaining, or, even bigger shock horror, if at the end of a bargaining period they had to abide by an “umpire’s decision”.

Liberal die-hards in parliament, like Alby Shultz, who haven’t got the message that the electorate hates WorkChoices and the era of boss lock-outs, were threatening to cross the floor and vote against their own party.

Shultz was apparently miffed that unions might get to inspect wage records of non-union employees.  

One can only wonder if ripped off Toys R Us workers are worried about the Workplace Ombudsman looking at their wage records if it means they are going to receive the pay they are entitled to.

Of course, at the end of the day the question has to be asked - if big well-known retailers can rip off staff and are only reined in by government action who else is ripping off their vulnerable teenage employees?

Or am I just getting caught up in this new “dangerous union era”?

COMMENTS

Thursday, 04 December 2008

Toy money.

Posted by: Observer JWH Party, Australia

 

Thursday, 04 December 2008

one railway company i know is saying the employees will no longer be able to ask for days off. as they are short on staff. so if you need to go to the doctor. need to spend time with your kids. forget it. you have to work. it will be written in the awa. or eba which ever they are doing. they will just be allocated days off, and these are subject to change at a moments notice. so don't make plans. work comes first.

Posted by: Belinda Hummie, New lambton

Thursday, 04 December 2008

Yeah, you can't put that in an AWA (or its replacement)...the doctor visits and tending to kids needs are all protected by anti discrimination laws - so that compnay will have some issues. Even if they could, most people won't put up with that & would leave...no staff, no business...management will soon learn you need to give & take. Also, I have made a note to never work in railways...your chats over recent weeks have enlightened me as to what mongrels they seem to be!

Posted by: Concerned Liberal, Minto

 

Thursday, 04 December 2008

Tim (great name), I don't condone underpayment of wages for a moment, whether by large or small employers. But I believe that the non-payment of superannuation entitlements is an even bigger issue, and one that rarely gets mentioned by young employees because they don't want to upset the apple cart and because retirement is such a long time in the distance. A friend in her 40's recently asked the ATO to intervene in such a situation, only to be told the backlog of cases is more than 12 months.

Posted by: Tim Williams, Penrith

 

Thursday, 04 December 2008

The underpayments have yet to be substantiated and there is nothing wrong with the bag search (bags are searched in supermarkets). The holiday restriction over a four month period is reasonable for operational reasons. It was the Unions and the Labor politicians-assisted by the ABC- that engaged in scaremongering in relation to Work Choices. Since Rudd was elected jobs have been disappearing at an alarming rate-no it is not all the fault of the GFC. Employer confidence was down before the severity of the GFC became apparent

Posted by: Desmond Harris, Beacon Hill

 

Thursday, 04 December 2008

Tim, you said HOWARD set up the Workplace Ombudsman and they raided this large company for allegedly breaching good work practices - doesn't this tell you that Howard system is working? There will always be bastard bosses - that won't change, but as long as there are mechanisms to redress any issues - whats the problem?

Posted by: Concerned Liberal, Minto

 

Thursday, 04 December 2008

On another note - I personally don't see the problem with mandatory bag searches when you leave work, given the levels of workplace theft in retain outlets. Also whats wrong with a holidays ban....most businesses I know have this policy, so that you don't get short staffed during peak periods.

Posted by: Concerned Liberal, Minto

Thursday, 04 December 2008

yeah concerned liberal people at rio, bhp, fmg and other big companies are making their employees take their holidays. too bad if you had holidays planned for later next year. at least they still have jobs i guess. police dont take holidays over the xmas holiday period etc. it happens in lots of businesses. big W, woollies, etc. bag checks are also a thing that happens these days Tim, its a fact of life now. also drug and alcohol testing is becoming more frequent. so employees have to be good

Posted by: Belinda Hummie, New lambton

Thursday, 04 December 2008

Agree on both posts CL, especially on the WC Ombudsman. As for employers needing their workers at certain times of the year, when the work load is heavier, either you want a job or you don't. Nothing unreasonable in the boss stating when your needed to work. Sheeeesh, what the hell do people expect now. You work when your required to work, whats the good of wanting to work when business is slow, then holiday when business is booming. Be thankful you have employment, it could be worse.

Posted by: susan lawe, wherever

 

Thursday, 04 December 2008

Tim, when I began work in late '84 I was working a part time job full time and going to uni and the employer made lif really difficult .. under ALP legislation. I got another empleyer who promised to pay HECS fees and didn't .. under ALP. It happened again .. under ALP. I have been ripped off under ALP legislation every which way .. regardless of union affiliation. I found work choices fair .. and the current NSW one unfair.

Posted by: Happy Fun Ball, Carramar/Sydney

Friday, 05 December 2008

No, you were ripped off by slimey employers nutterboy

Posted by: john sallvatore, Sydney

 

Thursday, 04 December 2008

Tim, What gives any UNION boss the right to delve into NON members Files? heard of the term "Privacy"? I note you didnt mention the part where Gillard has left the door open for the UNIONS to charge a fee for Abitration of Agreements. Now I have no issues with the UNION trying to earn a quid, I do however have an issue with the market being cornered for them , leaving people with no choice but to go through the UNIONS. Give it time and it'll be the discrimination Unions Love.No ticket no JOB!

Posted by: Nick Again, maryborough

Thursday, 04 December 2008

Sorry nick - let me get this right. You want the union members to pay for the negotiations that win all the pay and conditions for all the others who pay no union fees. Bit unfair.

Posted by: Tim Brunero, Sydney

Thursday, 04 December 2008

Tim Nick and I both know how Compulsory Unionism works and we both know we don't need them today to negotiate a good wage and conditions workplace. I spent a time in Unions, and a time negotiating for myself. There are AWARDS and LAWS that set wages and conditions today. In the days when Unions actually had REAL issues with employers, like safety, equal pay, cleaning up working conditions, and getting decent wages, they worked well for employee's...after that they began being run by thugs for thugs.The work place today has enough LAWS and regulations to keep most workers employed in fair conditions, with decent pay rates, and laws to stop unscrupulous employers taking advantage. Workers should be free to choose, negotiate your own contract, or join a Union. Compulsory Unionism is nothing short of legalised thuggery.

Posted by: susan lawe, wherever

Friday, 05 December 2008

Tim I object to the Unions charging management fees on my superannuation when they spend it on restricting pay rises for conditions I can't access .. like maternity leave and legal services. I have a right to not be a member of a union .. except under ALP legislation in some industries. It is grossly unfair, lacks transparency and is possibly corrupt.

Posted by: Happy Fun Ball, Carramar/Sydney

Friday, 05 December 2008

Tim - how about the unions negotiation contracts for union members and non union members negotiate their own. That way the individuals have an objective assessment about how well the union works for you. The problem with unions is that most of them want an all or nothing approach. The problem with that is that people and their circumstances are all different, & therefore have different needs from a workplace, unions simply can't accomadate that.

Posted by: Concerned Liberal, Minto

Friday, 05 December 2008

One worker is killed every week on a building site in Australia... sorry to interrupt... you were saying there are no longer safety concerns in the workplace.

Posted by: Tim Brunero, Sydney

Friday, 05 December 2008

Unions never stopped it when they were Compulsory Tim. There wil always be work place accidents, and work places that don't practice safety measures with or without a Union.....LAWS will deal with negligent employers with or without a Union. Compulsory Unionism doesnt stop human error or negligent employers, it does how ever foster corruption.

Posted by: susan lawe, wherever

Friday, 05 December 2008

Tim, I know that some unions make workplaces more dangerous with their practise. The problem with corruption is that it devalues everything. I have no problems with unions, in principle, but the way they are run .. I can't accept them as they are. The overall point is that your example does not show that workchoices was wrong or that fair choices is better.

Posted by: Happy Fun Ball, Carramar/Sydney

 

Thursday, 04 December 2008

we have been in an inflationary cycle since 2005. this contributes to unemployment depending on how you interpret unemployment. in some groups its risen, in others fallen.' since rudd, jobs have been disappearing at an ''alarming rate?is a political statement not an economic fact. and even if it has ,there coud be many reasons for it other than rudd.remarks about 'employer confidence before the gfc ? is pure speculation. workchoices was nothing more than anti union legislation. good riddance

Posted by: david green, wiley pk

 

Thursday, 04 December 2008

australians only have to look at the 'new zealand experiment' which is their version of workchoices. its been a disaster for most kiwis. particularly low income earners. in 1998 incomes for the top 10%of households increased by 43%. however for the bottom 50% of households income decreased by 14%. says it all really. it was good for a small minority and not the majority. this makes it bad legislation. many younger or unskilled employees were exploited unmercifully. we woke up just in time

Posted by: trevor crook, wiley pk

 

Friday, 05 December 2008

apparently its ok for employers to treat workers like criminals by going through bags but wrong for unions to access workers files. no union fees, no union advantages eg overtime or loading rates, union attained pay rises . if you are not in the club why should you benefit at the expense of paying members.? this is freeloadingif you think you can get a better deal from your boss, good luck. youll need it.

Posted by: trevor crook, wiley pk

Friday, 05 December 2008

absolutely love it trevor... it's ok for the boss to rifle through your handbag but not ok for the union to look at your pay records... love it... yeah you're right on with the freeloading as well - maybe unions should start behaving like a business and charge a 'negotiation fee' to non members who want to get the pay rises?

Posted by: Tim Brunero, Sydney

Friday, 05 December 2008

If you work in retail where pilfering is rife, the stock is your EMPLOYERS PROPERTY. Many pilfer from their employers, and bag checking is not new or unusual in these work places. What can I pilfer from a Union while in my workplace ???? More to the point, if I am not a member of said Union, why then do they need any of my private information, unless I give MY permission. You are trying to compare chalk and cheese.

Posted by: susan lawe, wherever

 

Friday, 05 December 2008

''mechanisms that address the balance? you must be joking concerned liberal . most employees particularly younger ones or women will not pursue their rights out of fear or a lack of experience. they are wide open to exploitation. the new zealand model being a case in point.perhaps you should work in a non unionised workplace for a while to experience reality?

Posted by: david green, wiley pk

Friday, 05 December 2008

David, I have only ever worked in one unionised place - it was overseas where it was the LAW to join a union. I was 16 & it was my first job. Within a month of starting, we were on stike - it stayed like that for two weeks. We got no pay during that time & ultimately got a 5c per hour payrise or something ridiculous. Most of us didn't want to be on stike. I grew up with kids whose dads all worked in a freezing works - they worked for 8mths in a year & were usually on strike for 3 of those.

Posted by: Concerned Liberal, Minto

Friday, 05 December 2008

The strikes usually happened at xmas & many of my friends went without xmas lunch or presents. The pay increases they got were huge & everyone wanted to work there because you only worked for half a year & earnt more than the national annual income. BUT out of the 8 freezing works that used to be there, there are two left - the pays got too high. All those workers - they don't have jobs anymore. Since my experience I have been experiencing reality in the real world thankfully.

Posted by: Concerned Liberal, Minto

 

Friday, 05 December 2008

Haven't posted for a while but this thread is as garbled as they have ever been, being led by Belinda on a bummer pendulum ride it would seem - railways cannot ask for leave! and then it's OK with some if you'll have a job, and so Belinda do you have any idea on how major industry and all sorts of businesses have worked for decades with industry having annual Xmas shutdowns for maintenance/plant projects and it has always been that in essential services that hoildays are scheduled, nothing new.

Posted by: Neville Simms, Sydney

Friday, 05 December 2008

neville i know that, but usually in the railway its just over xmas not 6 weeks. the other bit i was talking about was book off days you used to be able to book these ahead within reason. now its not the case with one company was all i was saying

Posted by: Belinda (JWH Party) (Sex Party), Newcastle

Friday, 05 December 2008

Belinda (JWH Party) (Sex Party), people throughout this great wide and wonderful land now know you as a citizen of Australia, a person with no serious criminal convictions, a patriot and... if that wasn't enough to demonstrate your bona fides and worth to your country, sexy as well! Go, sister, go! The world is your oyster!

Posted by: Observer JWH Party, Australia

Saturday, 06 December 2008

why thanks Observer JWH Party, Australia, had to do it for paul and you, but couldn't leave out the sex party. will wait for all the rude comments now lol. oh well its all in fun. have a good weekend.

Posted by: Belinda (JWH Party) (Sex Party), Newcastle

 

Friday, 05 December 2008

This kind of behavior is to be expected in that 'employers are standing over Teenage workers'. It happens in McDonald's everyday and prior to the last election 'old man Howard' had the audacity to impose legislation upon the entire industrial landscape allowing employers to treat their employees as if they were serfs!

Posted by: Sean Ambrose, Helensburgh

Saturday, 06 December 2008

But Komr