Redundant Laws

It seems that those that are newly out of work as a result of the GFC are having a hard time getting the support that is required from the government.

THOUSANDS of newly retrenched workers are excluded from unemployment benefits and help from Job Network agencies due to punitive rules on savings and redundancy payments that are wrong for the times, a welfare advocacy group says.

I would have thought that in this economic climate, everything should be done to help get people back into work so that they can survive.

The Howard government halved the amount of savings an unemployed person could have to $2500 for a single and $5000 for a couple before waiting periods for benefits cut in. On top of the usual one-week wait for Newstart after lodging a claim, people face a further week’s wait for every $1000 in savings over the threshold.

Nice, eh?

Advertisements

94 Responses

  1. Now you see where Howard’s system totally falls down and where WorkChoices if allowed to remain as was would have severely punished workers across the country.

    “Don’t like it, then get another job.” was the catch cry from the previous government. All well and truly good when there are jobs to get but falls into a screaming heap when there aren’t, where world wide the normal state of affairs is not full employment and rarely has been.

    I never understood Howard’s penchant for punishing the most vulnerable and least well off in our society whilst handsomely rewarding and aiding those least in need of rewards and help.

  2. This is the mess I find myself in. I will not be able to claim any unemployement benefits until late May, after being laid off in early December. Should have taken my holidays when I got the chance.

    And the fact that the money I got is almost gone does not matter. I paid off debts when I got it, and have now been told that I should consider getting those debts back in order to survive.

    Thanks for that (NOT)

    And unfortunately, it goes on what money I had in the bank at the time.

    Perhaps I should have kept my debts. Thats what I get for thinking positive haha

  3. Tom R

    Just like big companies, those who made the wrong decisions and have big debt get help – and those that did the right thing get no help and suffer.

    Things are just not right.

  4. Yes, that’s it. You cannot keep money aside to pay for the kids’ school fees, to pay for the car rego or the rates. You have to run your savings down to the bone.

    And not only but also, have waste time when you could be attending job interviews to front up to classes about how to read from a telephone book.

    Plus make certain that after being ‘awarded’ the dole, don’t get a job too soon or else you will end up spending the next 2 years having to pay off your debt.

  5. Tom R

    One of my good friends lost his job due to a violent attack of depression while on the job.

    He paid off his credit card debt with his savings to ensure he had no liabilites.

    As a result Centrelink would not pay him for 11 weeks so he had to live off his Credit Card.

    Left him with no funds, and then had to live off credit.

  6. Oh – and the boyf got laid off from a major department store last week.

  7. Oh no..and C was so pleased and proud to have that job. Obviously they were just using him up for over the Christmas holiday period.

  8. Sorry to hear that joni

    Hope that he finds something else soon

    And that he finds something to occupy his mind in the interim. The only thing that keeps me sane is keeping flat out doing jobs around the house lol

    Every cloud has a silver lining, the house never looked better.

  9. Have a look at http://aussgworldpolitics.wordpress.com/ to see what occupies his time. He really writes good stuff and needs some more hits and comments.

    And yeah – he was pretty down at what happened. And I fear that in these tough times it will be hard for him to get a new job. He hopes to start doing some freelance writing for some local papers.

    Looks like we will have to take in a lodger to help with the bills.

  10. When I lost my job a few years ago, I lived with my parents for 6 months, b/c I could not get benefits because I had too many shares… I was 35,

    …our generation has been robbed by baby boomers since the early 1990’s, get used to it, they will slap us again to get out of this mess. These housing grants for ‘poor’ new home buyers just blows away new home buyers who saved for this moment for years to prop up baby boomers dumping investment properties… it will never end

    joni: Welcome to the blog, Will. Good to have a new commentor.

  11. Sorry to hear the bad news, joni

    Another angle to this subject – my 17 yo g/son, who has never worked in his life, is now doing two, IT Diplomas at TAFE, (attends three days a week) but was refused any assistance by Centrelink, in finding a part time job, because he is considered to be studying full time…

    …he didn’t want money, he just wanted some help to find a job…bet he’s not alone…

  12. I never understood Howard’s penchant for punishing the most vulnerable and least well off in our society whilst handsomely rewarding and aiding those least in need of rewards and help.

    I never will understand that kind of mentality either Adrian, but it is the conservative way – a hallmark of conservative politics. They also like to vilify the poor and the disadvantaged as bludgers too.

    Tom R, on February 2nd, 2009 at 12:17 pm Said:

    I read on another blog that someone’s brother was denied benefits on account of his bank balance, he then emptied the account of about 6 or 8 grand, asked family members to deposit it in their a/c’s on his behalf. He then went back to centrelink and was granted the benefits.

    I’m just saying this is what some people do – not commenting on whether it’s right or wrong.

  13. Welcome, Will

    …our generation has been robbed by baby boomers since the early 1990’s…

    That’s a good start…

    😯

  14. Whoa Will. As a baby boomber, we are stuck in the middle, having to support our student children..and you say yourself, you lived with your parents for 6 months plus having to support the older generation whose Pension is a pittance.

    No such thing as housing grants in my day, one just had to live on fish and chips and do something called save.

    Agreed, some baby boomers chose to purchase investment properties thinking that this would be their ‘nest egg’ for their retirement..better than money in the bank. Anyway..it’s all going down the tube and everyone my age had better get used to living on the pension. My 85yr old Mum can do it and still pays all of her bills on time.

    Likewise, welcome aboard.

  15. Hehe..sorry for the typo. Is it a baby boomer or a baby bomber??

  16. On the matter of emptying accounts. You cannot do it. If you apply with Centrelink and your account balance is $6,000 and they say no and you go and empty the accounts and go back and apply they will still say no. You had the money in the first place and they check the balance of the accounts for 2 weeks before you apply as well to make sure you did not suddenly withdraw all the money the day before you called in.

    If you find yourself in need of Centrelink assistance you may wish to consider your course of actions prior to apply for assistance.

  17. “Baby Bomber” – wasn’t that Kim Beasley’s nickname when young?

  18. TB, if your son is considered to be studying full-time then can he get Austudy? All that parents need to do is to declare their child as ‘independant’ and make a statement that they aren’t prepared to support them. It’s such a family-friendly system.

  19. Min

    No household income is too high. His parents have no problem with that, neither do I.

    …but would have thought some assistance in job seeking would have encouraged him…first job is always the toughest and his jobseeker skills are non-existent (family and friends are on the look out of course…)

  20. shaneinqld

    That would be my understanding too.

    Perhaps if I had emptied the account BEFORE I was laid off, but then, we never saw it coming.

    Really puts me off saving in the future.

    Perhaps that is what they want??

    Also, it will be skewing the actual unemployment figures I would have thought, as I don’t think that I will be actually considered unemployed until I actually go on Newstart (or whatever the hell they call the dole these days)

  21. Will, on February 2nd, 2009 at 12:48 pm Said:

    Hi Will,
    I can understand how your generation feels and I agree, it is wrong for the boomers to be speculating and driving the house prices up so high that young people can’t afford to either rent or buy.

    Not all boomers are doing it though, many of us, as min says, are supporting adult kids because due to changes in centrelink, we are expected to provide for our kids until they are 25 years old.

    I blame ‘negative gearing’ for the problem and wish that the tax law was reformed in this area. I can’t tell you how many women I know at work who falsely complain of living (and raising children) in house after house during renovations, because they and their husbands are constantly buying and renovating. Australia has become a ‘renovation nation’.

    shaneinqld may have more expert opinion than me on the topic though.

  22. Kitty. Agree absolutely re negative gearing.

    I would suggest that the illusion of the well to do baby boomer choofing off in their Winnebago resting comfortably on their numerous investment properties is mostly a furphy. It’s a similar illusion to generation X who are sitting in their 4 bedroom houses complete with surround sound mega home theatres who take os holidays every year.

    There are some that do, but most don’t.

  23. kitty

    You are totally correct Negative Gearing has been the major contributor to the massive increase in our house prices. It is a blight on the taxation laws in this country skewed to the wealthy increase their assets at the expense of tax payers.

    In Australia if you buy your own home the interest is not tax deductible. If you buy an investment property not only is the interest tax deductible it can also be deductible against any other income you earn separate from the rental income. This is why it is called negative gearing. So the big winners from the ATO are investors making a fortune in rental and the losers are first home buyers.

    In the USA it is the total opposite. INterest on your own home is fully deductible against your income therefore giving the home owner an incentive and some relief from the burdon of monthly mortgage repayments.
    If you are an investor then tough luck the interest charged cannot be negatively geared against income earned separate from the rentla income. Therefore the biggest benefit from their ATO (the IRS) goes to the home purchaser not the wealthy investor who has multiple homes.

  24. And don’t get me started on the transfer of wealth from taxpayer to investor because of the interaction of building depreciation, Strata fund sinking fund levies and CGT. This is an even bigger problem than the deductibility of interest IMO.

  25. Tom R – I’m really sorry to hear about your situation.

    You’re always a great (and fun) contributor, though a little misdirected on occasions.

    Just a little encouragement, for what it is worth!!

  26. Tom, Tom R is misdirected on occasions according to who, you and your misdirected slant on occasions. 😉 ?

    Great encouragement, you are fun but misdirected on occasion. Tom in all levity do not give me encouragement if I report I’m on my last legs and have no hope left.

  27. Agree entirely on tax deductions for interest repayments on investment properties. I think I was talking about this a year ago but it was more important at the time to sling it on Costello for First Home Buyers Grants inflating house prices. I’d lie to see either a complete removal of tax deductions for interest rates on residential properties or a complete granting of them, at least to 1st home buyers. I think their removal would be more effective. It would rid the market of abusive and bullying landlords. Do it now, have the property crash we have had to have and it will kill off a few of these property spruikers who have made so much out of ripping renters and buyers off for so long.

  28. Strata fund sinking fund levies and CGT

    What are they huh?

  29. James

    My suggestions to rectify the mess we are in.

    1) Remove the First Home Owners Grant as it is incentivising Real estate Agents to inflate prices to earn more commission.
    2) Replace the FHOG with a guarantee by the Fedral Government of the first 20% of a home via the superannuation guarantee levy which would gradually decrease as the loan is repaid.
    3) Remove interest deductibility for all properties other than your first home. The reason is if you are not buying your first home you have already enjoyed tax deductibility and are more than likely selling your current owner occupied home for more than you paid for it and no longer need assistance. However interest deductibility for the loan amount outstanding with regards to your initial first home would still apply.
    4) This assistance is to be limited to a maximum Home Purchase of $400,000. If you want to live in something more expensive, then you are on your own. No excuses regarding location of job, you can commute like the poor people do. We will not subsidiase your multi million dollar home in Hunters Hill.

    This would put the funds in the correct place to create increased home ownership, limit the increase of homes, create a building industry that is sustainable, take away the powerful renters group who have inflated rental prices by ridiculous margins over the last few years, and put the billions refunded to wealthy investors back into the building industry and the pockets of home owners who then spend it on consumables and other purchases to keep the economy ticking over.

  30. Min, on February 2nd, 2009 at 2:14 pm

    I’m glad I waited for a better (nicer) post than the one I wrote – most b/boomers in my “circle” left school early – 14/15 yo – and are still working thier arses off – just like my X Gen kids…its not about generations…and my YGen g/kids will be expected to do…

    …its about misuse of power, greed and control by the constantly wealthy over the ignorant (in the true meaning) and poor…

    …occasionally some of us start reading between the lines of BS that The Robber Barons have been feeding us for centuries…why improve education or make it easy to get if it means more questions…

    …hopefully each generation is getting a little smarter…

    …a simple method is to own everything – stop borrowing as soon a s possible – earn and save your wealth…

    …that way you break the chains of The Robber Barons – and to some degree the government(s) run by them…

  31. Thank you TB. Yes, still working our arses off. And now hubby rapidly approaching 61yrs is faced with redundancy and we have no super to speak of and had to spend our savings when my father passed away.

    We have had 2 holidays in last 20 years.

  32. Min

    🙂 I remember my best mate standing up at our 25th telling everyone we’de had ten weeks holiday in 25 years – we’de never counted 🙂

  33. I went on a holiday to Manly on Saturday night – does that count?

    Not like that lazy one (reb) who is frolicking around SE Asia as we are here slaving away. 😉

  34. Oh dear..the Opposition/Turnbull is whining about the government not responding to any of it’s propositions.

    Qu#1. What propositions?

    However, Turnbull states that he does believe in ‘prosperity’. Oh goody.

  35. Sinking Fund Levies are the levies paid to provide the funds for future building refurbishment eg lift replacement etc. Because of the high costs of these the Strata Fund ‘saves up’ for this expenditure.

    Many of these costs are of a capital nature and although the expenditure would only qualify for tax deductibility via depreciation or building write-off (ie over a number of years). If paid by the owner of a non-strata property they get to start claiming the tax deduction only after they have spent the money (even if they spent years saving up). When paid as part of the strata levy they are tax deductible when paid.

    When the strata unit is sold there may be significant amounts held in the sinking fund but no adjustment is made to include that amount as an add-back against their taxable income, yet the value is reflected in the price received for the property.

    Eg a property I know of recently had the equivalent of $70,000 per unit in the sinking fund as they planned a significant refurbishment of the building. That $70,000 was reflected in the sale price, the owner had the benefit of claiming the $70,000 over the previous 4 years at the top tax rate of 48.5% yet when he sold that $70,000 wasn’t included as recouped tax expense and taxed at his marginal tax rate. Instead that extra $70,000 value is included as part of the capital consideration received and only taxed at a maximum of 24.25% because of the 50% CGT exemption.

    ie a direct transfer of wealth from the taxpayer to the investor of $17,150. Also has the effect of bringing forward the deductibility from when the money is actually spent on the refurb to when the investor starts ‘saving’ for the refurb.

  36. I did warn not to get me started!

  37. Thanks for the thoughts Tom, it is most welcome, I know we have vastly different opinions about subjects, but I think we do agree we are passionate about them. In that respect we are the same 🙂

    And misdirected?? ME!!

    NEVER lol

  38. Huh

    Great explanation – I will have to look into my stratas sinking fund to see how much of it is mine. But of course, being a owner-occupier I get no tax benefits 😦

  39. Mark says this at LP and how true it is

    It’s been interesting to watch the shift in political rhetoric regarding the unemployed, now that it’s not just about the underclass in long term unemployment and those who are low skilled. With middle class types and “aspirationals” either losing their jobs or fearing that they will, all of a sudden it’s politically respectable to make a case against things like having to exhaust all your savings and redundancy pay before your qualify for benefits.

    So during the boom times of the Howard years when nearly all middle class and upper class were working and the ones almost exclusively unemployed were the lower socio economic group, they were all dole bludgers, welfare cheats and mongrels that should be made to do back breaking labour to earn their dole.

    All of a sudden it’s the middle class and even some of the crust being made redundant and they’re no longer dole bludgers or mongrels, and the very big stick with tiny carrot is no longer applicable. The stick is to be thrown away and huge carrots are to be handed out in their laps without them having to lift a finger to earn them.

  40. Adrian..very well said. Yes, the times they are a’changing. The unemployed are no longer the layabouts with facial piercings who deserve nothing better than a begrudging handout. Let’s just see how the middle class and even the upper crust manage on the dole.

    And it’s all happening, the evidence being the $1m+ homes now being sold for say $300,000+ less than original asking price.

  41. Here I am trying to plan 2009, a scaper Oddyssey and you guys are giving my the guilts?

    Well we could never be bothered to buy those fancy big screen thingies or surround sound either as we kind of live like we did twenty years ago so we have disposable income and are pretty much debt free.

    Sheesh, I only pay myself $800 a week and we seem to live off that in our lifestyle…I won’t mention the girls every few months taking my debit card on a shopping spree though…at least they can not spend more than a thousand as that is the daily limit.

    The answer is simple…fluck the dole and get out there and get another job…any job, not the one you like.

    Mrs scaper was out of the workforce for seven years to raise scapette to school age and she took up cleaning other peoples homes because the legal process had changed in those years and she could not get a look in.

    She eventually got back into legal starting at the bottom on a paltry $33K a year and worked her way back up the ladder.

    There is work out there, it’s just there is too many lazy people that want everything for as little toil as possible…my recent advertisement indicates as much.

    We are becoming a nation of jelly bums!!!

  42. Scaper, during the last recession my job was putting the inserts into Trunkin’ Life mags.

  43. Thanks,

    Sorry, I did not mean it offend Baby Boomers as individuals :o). I more mean to infer that groups in the population bulges are favored by government. I am not bitter or anything like that… life is hard for most people in one way or another, and easy in another way or one. hehehe

    I am a middle class X Gen (the minority).. we have cool computers and big TV’s and some of us are wealthy, some of our babyboom parents are “loaded”, although they just got hurt a bit by this crash.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_X
    I am 1971… smack in the middle

    Not enough of us XGens have a home and/or kids though. We are survivors who don’t ever trust our future will be safe. Some of us sponged off Mum and Dad… but not many, most rented (i did). The generations after us saw what happened to us and sponged to save money… they are Y-Gen, not really X (maybe late xgen). The currently y-gens (e-Gen? rofl) have started renting now (I think) and paying through the teeth or share living in a big way.

    As it stands I can now almost buy a small house outright with no loan, if I had bought a house in the past I would have been poor forever. Right when it looks like we could get a home for a good price the government grants new people almost half a normal deposit. It is great if you are stable enough to get into debt really young, however, it is a grant I never wanted or could use to my benefit.

    It is not just housing… we got hit in the face with AUSStudy and HECS which were introduced when we went to UNI. (I found out about HECS while standing in a line enrolling). It has taken me some 18 years to pay it all off, so I never got to keep a tax return. We came out of school into a recession and out of uni into a recession we the saw a boom we could not really catch then lost our jobs multiple times in the 911/IT crash as the government pumped money into employment/hr firms who hire and fire just to exist.

    Since then I learned my lesson and have a lower paying stable job for this crash.

    p.s. The most handy thing I did in my life as an XGen was join the army reserves. I hated it and quit but it showed me how to get up out of bed and out.

    The problem with how the unemployment system was 20 years ago was that it was too easy to “live off the dole”… 10 years ago it was too expensive to live off the dole… now it is too hard to use it as a stop-gap, but people still live-off it… although now they can’t buy cigs and beer.

    Really it should be a stop-gap first and foremost… even if that gap may be an on/off 4 years for some people.

  44. scaper, unemployment of greater than 5-6% means there are now more people than jobs.

    So what’s your answer when every job has a queue of over 100 lining up for it, and that is for the lowest and dirtiest jobs in the country?

  45. The recession in the late eighties affected me for thirty one days before it was full steam again.

    If there was one since I missed it…I refuse to let the daily gloom being propagated by the MSM influence me either as this crap is making the situation worse.

    I call it the ‘correction we had to have’…original, eh…LOL!

  46. There is work out there, it’s just there is too many lazy people that want everything for as little toil as possible…my recent advertisement indicates as much.

    If I remember scaper you were crowing about the many applicants you had, but it seems they changed their mind.

    Scaper, you are an avowed anti-union employer (you’ve stated it many times on these pages). I wonder if the applicants sensed your attitude toward unions and ‘lazy’ workers?

  47. Kittylitter – you mean “you are an avowed, botoxed, anti-union employer”

  48. Infrastructure…better than propping up some poxy retailer peddling Chinese goods at a two to three hundred per cent mark-up…at least!

    People might have to relocate to the site proximity just like all the great projects of the world thus far and if they don’t…well, they will have to settle for the pittance called whatever.

    Our forefathers would roll over in their graves if they knew what a bunch of jelly bums we have become and to think that a lot paid with their in wars for this!

    A couple of hundred thousand immigrants that will come here in the next year will take the jobs and the rentals anyway.

  49. What?

  50. scaper

    Completely agree. Infrastructure, it employs people and benefits the nation as a whole.

    I suppose with Howard not contributing to any infrastructure for over 12 years at least we have plenty to fix.

  51. rofl,

    I think he is saying Infrastructure spending is better than handouts… which is true.

  52. Don’t pay out on the Chinese though, they make some of the best electronics in the world now…. many of their cheap low quality factories went bust a few months back… so expect to pay more for Chinese goods.

  53. Yep, got almost eighty applicants and employed two…one did not turn up and the other turned up late after going to another job interview.

    All my guys are on sub- contract now and are enjoying getting paid between seventy and a hundred thousand a year…not bad money for no real qualifications.

    Better than $45K which is the going rate…unions…BOO!

  54. I think he is saying Infrastructure spending is better than handouts… which is true.

    Better than tax cuts too.

  55. Will, on February 2nd, 2009 at 3:53 pm

    Will, this is the standard link at Blogocrats for similar posts…

    Enjoy 😀

  56. I have it on tape

  57. Kitty as always has something pertinent to add.

    Why on earth add the denegrating comment re botox? The only reason is to try to stop the debate.

  58. All my guys are on sub- contract now

    Yeah, how to shift all employer responsibilities onto the employee. They need the extra cash to provide for their own entitlements.

  59. I expected as much…it sounds like you have no grasp of business at the coalface!

  60. I don’t have a contract at all in my current job, it is weird, but I feel quite safe.

  61. BO(t)O(x)

    “They need the extra cash to provide for their own entitlements.”

    Probably also workers compensation.

  62. Scaper..you’re employing subbies..sigh… Ever heard of employment of permanents.

  63. Will, don’t you even have 3 months? My crew are reasonable safe with the exception of hubby as the desal plant job is just about finished, then it will be back to the queue.

    Without being too much of a stickynose, Will where are you and your area of expertise.

    MinXx

  64. scaper

    while you may pay your workers

    If your workers are sub contracters on 70k which is more than a union worker but they are responsible for the following.

    1) they have no paid annual leave
    2)they have no sick leave
    3) they have no superannuation contribution of 9%
    4) No long service leave
    5) they are responsible for all costs
    6) they have to pay for their own public liability and all insurances
    7) They have no workers compensation
    8) They have no dismissal protection.
    9) They have no minimum hours or any obligation from you to employ them under any circumstances

    Now tell me why you employed your workers as subbies, if it was not to benefit yourself in cutting costs both now and in the future, removal of all responsibility for employees

  65. What…it was their choice, not mine!

    They were permanent last year but were given the option.

    They are enjoying the advantages of self employment, too many to point out here.

  66. scaper

    If it was their free choice then fair enough

  67. Shane, you got six wrong, mate!

    I’m not going into how I structure my business or how the subbies have their structure either.

    By the way…how many thousands did you give your workers as a bonus last Xmas???

    It is blatantly obvious that many here have not been on the other side of the fence judging by some comments.

  68. There are several tests that are applied by employment and taxation lawyers to determine whether a sub contractor is bona fide, or whether they are an employee.

    Perhaps a friendlier blogger will provide advice, but it is a reasonably complicated area of law.

    It’s fine while everyone is happy with the money, but wait for a falling out that result in termination. That’s when many businesses reach for the cheque book.

  69. I’m not going into how I structure my business or how the subbies have their structure either.

    gee scaper, now you don’t want to share your private affairs with us!- just when I was interested to know!

  70. Yes Tom, absolutely. And if you can’t work it out then an audit from the Taxation Department is often useful.

  71. Never Mind The Frolykz, here’s Weekend Wonderland!
    Posted on January 16, 2009
    (my bold)

    scaper…, on January 17th, 2009 at 10:35 am Said:

    I’ve been overwhelmed with applications for the jobs…a lot of Irish backpackers who do not qualify as I only employ Australian citizens.

    Some real quality people too…a bricklayer and five carpenters so far…even landscapers that have their own business who are finding it tough and just want a wage!

    I’m tossing up the idea of forming a carpentry gang…decks, pergolas and fencing, and price at only a 12% margin to win work.

  72. I know the law on employment, book-keeping, tax accountancy, contractural law, Australian standards and every aspect of construction…I don’t think I need advice!

  73. Yep…funny when I started quizzing them they did not know the answers…plenty of pretenders out there willing to waste peoples time so they can put it on their dole forms.

    Twelve per cent was a way to get people employed…I could not be bothered helping anyone anymore!

  74. If Scaper has the gonads to start a business in this climate, can’t he go about structuring it the way he wants? Why does he owe some anonymous person a living?

  75. “even landscapers that have their own business who are finding it tough and just want a wage!”

    …and now it turns out that they weren’t being offered a wage but were being offered work under a sub-contract arrangement. Not necessarily the same thing at all.

    “Perhaps a friendlier blogger will provide advice, but it is a reasonably complicated area of law.”

    A good place to start (WARNING PDF doc) from the ATO
    http://www.ato.gov.au/content/downloads/N2780-4-2003WithholdingGuideNo2.pdf

  76. Judging by the quote from Kittylitter, an expert in long term business planning as well!!

    Reach for the cheque book!

    When a downturn comes, subbies always look for redundancy, back pay of annual leave. They’ll say – “we didn’t know he wasn’t paying any super!”

  77. Gee, I’ve already said that I cover six elements on Shane’s list…I’m sure you clever people could work out which six…being armchair experts.

  78. Why does he owe some anonymous person a living?

    He just owes the person a fair days pay for a fair days work, the person can then decide their own living.

    What does some anonymous person owe scaper?

  79. The anonymous owes scaper a fair day’s work for their pay, and from what I can tell, Scaper will no doubt reqard him/her handsomely.

  80. Boy, I would not be surprised if my poor workers who have been with me for a couple of years now work less hours than you for more pay!

  81. If 6 of those points are covered, they are unlikely to be subbies in a legal sense.

    They’re more likely to have the type of employment structure that some may remember as the Odco decision of the High Court – Troubleshooters & NFF.

    Very entertaining. I do hope we can continue to observe this saga play out.

  82. scaper

    I also run my own business and was a contract cleaner with my own business. If you are covering any of the things I stated in my blog then you are not truly hiring them as individual contractors.

    Like I said if the workers wanted to be subbies then so be it I am not blaming you for anything unless they were forced to change.

  83. I think that the worst thing about having to work as a subbie is the lack of security. Put off any tick of the clock and so you can’t lash out to do something such as buy furniture and you can never plan for any family occasions much less have any holidays or plan for any days off.

  84. Well , one must have a hobby I reckon…my taxable income was $12,400 last year…I think it will be $15,000 this year.

  85. My guys have been on two European holidays and are planning one this winter…generalisations are always erroneous in a variable world.

  86. He just owes the person a fair days pay for a fair days work,

    …and there a many ways to do that as an employee:

    perrmanent,
    casual,
    part-time,

    Or as a sub-contractor:

    sole trader,
    partnership; or
    company

    Every one legitimate under our tax, commercial and H&S laws…

    Methinks, you’re beng “stirred” but not shaken, scaper

    What does some anonymous person owe scaper?

    …a fair days work for a fair days pay…simple really 😉

  87. “Will, don’t you even have 3 months? … Without being too much of a stickynose, Will where are you and your area of expertise.” min

    how do I quote ppl?

    nope.
    No contract, no nothing, just get my super and money. I was told I had one but they refused to show it to me… twice.
    My guess is they are just too lazy to make one. rofl

    I am/was a Civil Engineer, but ended up writing software for various companies. IT is a very exploitative industry… I am paid well but quite used to being replaced by cheaper migrant ‘maintainers’ once I have been ‘used’ to produce something of value, which is why I posted here. If I were in another industry, I would hate to be facing that right now. It is all about conserving cash, conserve it anyway you can ;oP

    I could have done better as a Civil Engineer probably, but I like coding too much (and I never quite understood how to get a job I liked as a Civil Engineer.. and although I did a bit of work on the southeastern freeway I disliked it).

  88. Min, on February 2nd, 2009 at 5:26 pm

    Min, hate to tell you this (especially after your post re: possible redundancy for yer better ‘alf) but no one has ever had real job security – the maximum notice required was determined at Common Law – decades ago – as two weeks (even if you are paid monthly – a common myth – ie notice matches payment cycle).

    The Minister and I just finished setting up my son-in-law’s new company and accounts system – a requirement for his present job…now that’s abrogating ALL responsibility for staff…

  89. Hmm You’re right TB, just a wee bit tired pushin’ 60 with no job security, just short term contracts. At least this year, the 1st time in 5 years hubby was paid a retainer over Christmas. Mostly it is laid off just prior to Christmas and then rehired in February…during which time all one’s savings go down the tube.

  90. “I’m sure you clever people could work out which six…being armchair experts”

    Just a little patronising…

    There is a body of electronic evidence to source, no need for the cryptic insinuations. I wouldn’t mind betting that many here know how to work their arses off.

    Permanency is the only true safety net, those who choose otherwise (knowingly) do so at the peril of the slings & arrows of their “kindly” employer. Even permanency is no airtight guarantee of job security.

    Tom, a rivetting, ongoing, saga eh?

    Will…great contributions.

  91. Will. Well they are dead meat if they try to sack you, because then they will have to front up with your contract. Anyway..with things so iffy, I don’t blame you in the least for leaving well enough alone.

  92. “…our generation has been robbed by baby boomers since the early 1990’s” (Will).

    Hello Will, and welcome. I don’t mean to be picky on your first post, but the above comment concerns me. Is it just you, or does your generation have a problem with us baby boomers?

    Perhaps you can clarify your statement, for my benefit.

    Baby boomers: the people you run to when you need a roof over your head.

    Baby boomers: the people who spend your inheritance while helping you survive.

    How dare they.

  93. This is not about fault or individuals. One way to look at (and it is not the only way I look at it) government and western economies is to look at populations and overlay bits and bods.

    When I ‘ran to my parents’ for that 6 months they were not home, they were away flying around Aus and the world… I did not use a cent of their money… I just conserved mine by not paying rent. I supplied my own food and went to the beach to apply for jobs with my mobile. I just got sick of running down 5-20 grand every time I swapped jobs. I have never lived off my parents money or received anything since the age of 18, they save their money for their retirement while flying around Europe, NZ and Australia… what is left our generation will probably pass to our kids (if we managed to have them) as fast as possible. I don’t actually care about money much and have never needed other peoples to survive.

  94. Hello Will,

    Please see my comments to you on the Lurking by the Watercooler.

    Cheers, Miglo.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: