News Gabba Upgrade & Olympics News

[Johnny Bananas]

There are dodgy people and or Companies in every industry.
No Doubt that Unions have their place but in the Construction Industry and particularly the CFMEU have always had too much power and it has only got stronger in recent years.

The criminal activity is certainly a problem if the investigation finds it to be true. But again, unions wouldn't have anywhere near as much power if they were representing workers that are not in great demand and easily substituted.

I'd bet everything I own that the unions covering retail and fast food workers haven't been able to extract pay increases anywhere near what the CFMEU have. If that's the case, then one of the following has to be true:

1. The CFMEU are an extremely competent union and the retail and fast food ones are totally incompetent.
2. Every single government in Australia for the past four years has been in the pocket of the CFMEU, including the Liberal ones.
3. The CFMEU represents workers in areas of significant skills shortages and high demand, whereas the retail and fast food ones are not.

Which do you think is true?

 

[Dalions]

The criminal activity is certainly a problem if the investigation finds it to be true. But again, unions wouldn't have anywhere near as much power if they were representing workers that are not in great demand and easily substituted.

I'd bet everything I own that the unions covering retail and fast food workers haven't been able to extract pay increases anywhere near what the CFMEU have. If that's the case, then one of the following has to be true:

1. The CFMEU are an extremely competent union and the retail and fast food ones are totally incompetent.
2. Every single government in Australia for the past four years has been in the pocket of the CFMEU, including the Liberal ones.
3. The CFMEU represents workers in areas of significant skills shortages and high demand, whereas the retail and fast food ones are not.

Which do you think is true?

2. (Qld only) But hard to lay any blame on the LNP since they have spent 3 years in Power in the last 30 years.

 

[mighty_lions]

The criminal activity is certainly a problem if the investigation finds it to be true. But again, unions wouldn't have anywhere near as much power if they were representing workers that are not in great demand and easily substituted.

I'd bet everything I own that the unions covering retail and fast food workers haven't been able to extract pay increases anywhere near what the CFMEU have. If that's the case, then one of the following has to be true:

1. The CFMEU are an extremely competent union and the retail and fast food ones are totally incompetent.
2. Every single government in Australia for the past four years has been in the pocket of the CFMEU, including the Liberal ones.
3. The CFMEU represents workers in areas of significant skills shortages and high demand, whereas the retail and fast food ones are not.

Which do you think is true?

I don't think any of those 3 are the reason, the reason is the consequences are greater, I work in hospitality as a chef, if the hospitality industry went on strike you could still get food somewhere, the construction industry no one else can do it and there's a cost associated with any strikes

 

[Johnny Bananas]

2. (Qld only) But hard to lay any blame on the LNP since they have spent 3 years in Power in the last 30 years.

Cost increases are not particular to Queensland only. Multiple federal and state projects around the nation have had significant cost increases. On top of which, there is no legal or bureaucratic barrier on internal migration. People are free to hire tradies from anywhere in Australia to work on their projects. So why haven't the construction industry just hired a bunch of workers from interstate on cheaper wages then?

I don't think any of those 3 are the reason, the reason is the consequences are greater, I work in hospitality as a chef, if the hospitality industry went on strike you could still get food somewhere, the construction industry no one else can do it and there's a cost associated with any strikes

That's what my point 3 is, just expressed in a different way. There's an easy substitution of workers in the fast food industry and there isn't in construction. My point is, this is just the CFMEU playing the cards they were dealt and doing their job. The real issue is we want to build a lot of things but we don't have enough tradespeople. And this isn't a new problem either, I distinctly remember hearing warnings about it in the mid 2000s.

 

[Dalions]

Cost increases are not particular to Queensland only. Multiple federal and state projects around the nation have had significant cost increases. On top of which, there is no legal or bureaucratic barrier on internal migration. People are free to hire tradies from anywhere in Australia to work on their projects. So why haven't the construction industry just hired a bunch of workers from interstate on cheaper wages then?

Cost increases for Materials and Labour are not the issue.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

Cost increases for Materials and Labour are not the issue.

I thought cost increases for labour were the issue, according to the LNP anyway.

 

[Dalions]

I thought cost increases for labour were the issue, according to the LNP anyway.

Any cost increases for labour are only really just catching up after many years remaining stagnant.
But if they are chasing a further 30% increase from here then they are kidding themselves.
But that is only one small part of the problem when labour and materials can be easily factored in with any pricing, it is the unforeseen shit that’s impossible to be catered for and that is where the budget blowouts come from.

 

[Section 5]

I can only guess as to why cost blowouts happen.
So, google helps me out, not that i fully understand what all the reasons are. Risk Offloading is interesting though.

Why Australia's infrastructure projects cost more than they should. -

Why Australia's infrastructure projects cost more than they should: A large amount of money is expended on large scale infrastructure

www.cis.org.au

Labour and Industrial Relations: Australia generally has higher labour costs compared with many other countries. Wages, benefits, and labour regulations can contribute to higher project costs.

Lower Productivity: Productivity is hampered by the lack of a sufficiently educated, skilled and engaged workforce, an efficient work environment, innovation, efficient procurement models and ultimately trust between industry stakeholders.

Regulations and Standards: Australia has strict regulations and standards when it comes to construction, safety, and environmental considerations. Compliance with these regulations often adds to the complexity and cost of infrastructure projects.

Design Complexity: Infrastructure projects in Australia often involve complex engineering and design requirements. This can include considerations such as environmental impact, sustainability, and resilience, which may contribute to increased costs.

Project Management: Effective project management is crucial for successful infrastructure projects. Factors like inefficient planning, delays, and changes in scope can contribute to cost overruns.

Risk Offloading: Project cost is often inflated in Australia by a misguided focus on unloading risk in the early stages of a project’s development. This is often driven by the type of contract that is presented to the industry by lawyers, with the objective of minimising up-front costs and putting most of the risks on the contractors. This practice is not generally followed in other countries, which look at ‘whole of Life’ costs and benefits, resulting in a more cooperative and cheaper outcome.
...........................................................................

 

[M Malice]

I come to share some good news, well better than the last few weeks anyway.

I read cristafulli say on another issue a week ago 'when Tony Cochrane talks, I listen'. Maybe Tony has his ear, hopefully he gets on the committee, coz he will be pushing what benefits the AFL really hard, being a new stadium.

The other ok news is the new sports minister was on senq yesterday. Other than being a dyed in the wool rugby league man, he seemed quite reasonable. Reading between the lines myself, i think it's gonna be a new stadium privately funded, as he said he's aware how much of a mess the gabba rebuild became and how financially it was going to affect the lions and cricket 'and the previous government expected them to pay'!.

Anyway just my opinion, he also said 'only experts not politicians' will be on the committee. He seems confident on everything, i think they already know what they want and listening to this, I'm leaning towards it not being the gabba.



* starts at about 11 min mark. It's a shame Heals didn't speak up a bit more.

Just listened to this, very encouraging re a new Stadium.

Mander saying no politicians and only experts on the 100 day review panel gives the Government an obvious out re the "no new stadium" rhetoric/promise pre and post election.

Victoria Park here we come.

 

[Dalions]

Just listened to this, very encouraging re a new Stadium.

Mander saying no politicians and only experts on the 100 day review panel gives the Government an obvious out re the "no new stadium" rhetoric/promise pre and post election.

Victoria Park here we come.

After listening the other day and again just now.
I heard it completely differently to yourself and others, it sounds to me like their plan is definitely the Gabba, only that they will not be forcing the affected codes (AFL and Cricket) to pay towards any construction costs of any re-homing for the 5 or so years.
The fact that when asked specifically about a New Stadium he started to say that the LNP have made their stance very clear on No New Stadiums but cut himself short of actually saying it and then went straight onto the former government wanting AFL and Cricket to pay towards RNA and how crazy an idea it was and they will come up with a better plan.
Sounds like the Gabba to me only they will do it differently in some way shape or form.
IMO VIC Park will be off the table as soon as the terms of reference of the new review are completed.

 

[M Malice]

After listening the other day and again just now.
I heard it completely differently to yourself and others, it sounds to me like their plan is definitely the Gabba, only that they will not be forcing the affected codes (AFL and Cricket) to pay towards any construction costs of any re-homing for the 5 or so years.
The fact that when asked specifically about a New Stadium he started to say that the LNP have made their stance very clear on No New Stadiums but cut himself short of actually saying it and then went straight onto the former government wanting AFL and Cricket to pay towards RNA and how crazy an idea it was and they will come up with a better plan.
Sounds like the Gabba to me only they will do it differently in some way shape or form.
IMO VIC Park will be off the table as soon as the terms of reference of the new review are completed.

IF that happens I hope it is not 4 years of home games at Metricon for us... although it is very hard to see another option in Brisbane with at the very least a 20K capacity being up and ready by Round 1 2026.

 

[Dalions]

IF that happens I hope it is not 4 years of home games at Metricon for us... although it is very hard to see another option in Brisbane with at the very least a 20K capacity being up and ready by Round 1 2026.

Or maybe to throw a dagger at Labour they propose QSAC as an option with a bit of spend.
But that would be throwing a dagger at Lions and Cricket fans too.

 

[BuntonRules]

Sounds Vic Park to me. Much more happy for hearing that.

 

[mighty_lions]

After listening the other day and again just now.
I heard it completely differently to yourself and others, it sounds to me like their plan is definitely the Gabba, only that they will not be forcing the affected codes (AFL and Cricket) to pay towards any construction costs of any re-homing for the 5 or so years.
The fact that when asked specifically about a New Stadium he started to say that the LNP have made their stance very clear on No New Stadiums but cut himself short of actually saying it and then went straight onto the former government wanting AFL and Cricket to pay towards RNA and how crazy an idea it was and they will come up with a better plan.
Sounds like the Gabba to me only they will do it differently in some way shape or form.
IMO VIC Park will be off the table as soon as the terms of reference of the new review are completed.

I agree that was my thoughts sounded like Gabba rebuild

 

[braddsey]

I can only guess as to why cost blowouts happen.
So, google helps me out, not that i fully understand what all the reasons are. Risk Offloading is interesting though.

Why Australia's infrastructure projects cost more than they should. -

Why Australia's infrastructure projects cost more than they should: A large amount of money is expended on large scale infrastructure

www.cis.org.au

Labour and Industrial Relations: Australia generally has higher labour costs compared with many other countries. Wages, benefits, and labour regulations can contribute to higher project costs.

Lower Productivity: Productivity is hampered by the lack of a sufficiently educated, skilled and engaged workforce, an efficient work environment, innovation, efficient procurement models and ultimately trust between industry stakeholders.

Regulations and Standards: Australia has strict regulations and standards when it comes to construction, safety, and environmental considerations. Compliance with these regulations often adds to the complexity and cost of infrastructure projects.

Design Complexity: Infrastructure projects in Australia often involve complex engineering and design requirements. This can include considerations such as environmental impact, sustainability, and resilience, which may contribute to increased costs.

Project Management: Effective project management is crucial for successful infrastructure projects. Factors like inefficient planning, delays, and changes in scope can contribute to cost overruns.

Risk Offloading: Project cost is often inflated in Australia by a misguided focus on unloading risk in the early stages of a project’s development. This is often driven by the type of contract that is presented to the industry by lawyers, with the objective of minimising up-front costs and putting most of the risks on the contractors. This practice is not generally followed in other countries, which look at ‘whole of Life’ costs and benefits, resulting in a more cooperative and cheaper outcome.
...........................................................................

If the project is in Victoria, you can also add a loading for paying CFMEU officials and senior position holders, who just happen to have linked with outlaw motorcycle gangs.

 

[Grasshopper17]

we're in an economy where construction demand is high and there aren't enough skilled workers.

No need for the union then

 

[Gadzorks]

There's a new bridge gong in between kenmore and jindalee on the western freeway.

Massive project.

The CFMEU was not happy with the union that was running the site. A union on union stoush ensured.

The cfmeu picketed the site and shut it down for over a month. Massive site, totally deserted.

I have been a union member at times and believe they play an important role. But shutting down infrastructure projects is a massive drain on every tax payer.

And when it happens because two unions are fighting it is a disgrace.

The Olympic builds are going to be rife with this behaviour and cost blowouts.

 

[Jivlain]

The criminal activity is certainly a problem if the investigation finds it to be true. But again, unions wouldn't have anywhere near as much power if they were representing workers that are not in great demand and easily substituted.

I'd bet everything I own that the unions covering retail and fast food workers haven't been able to extract pay increases anywhere near what the CFMEU have. If that's the case, then one of the following has to be true:

1. The CFMEU are an extremely competent union and the retail and fast food ones are totally incompetent.
2. Every single government in Australia for the past four years has been in the pocket of the CFMEU, including the Liberal ones.
3. The CFMEU represents workers in areas of significant skills shortages and high demand, whereas the retail and fast food ones are not.

Which do you think is true?

The SDA (which represents retail and fast food workers) is worse than useless. Back when I worked retail the company actively encouraged us to join the SDA, which speaks to the relationship

 

[Section 5]

Getting closer to naming an Authority to oversee the 100-day review
During this 100-day review will they review the 60-day review.
Andrew Liveris said on 10 news last night, "we are running out of time to have to many more 100-day reviews."

Very exciting times coming up

 

[Johnny Bananas]

The SDA (which represents retail and fast food workers) is worse than useless. Back when I worked retail the company actively encouraged us to join the SDA, which speaks to the relationship

I'm told RAFFWU is much better. It's a relatively new union started by workers who were tired of the SDAs incompetence.

 

[Section 5]

Below article dated 11-11-24 so not too much we don't already know.
I am not convinced that Crisafulli and recently Mander have said things that people think the LNP may change their mind on a new stadium.
I suppose it is a matter of interpretation.
The author of the article finishes off with the below paragraph that gives some hope to BF posters.
..............................................................

Federal and Queensland governments have agreed to a 'funding envelope' that would pump billions into the Brisbane 2032 Olympic Games and a new stadium has been estimated to cost around A$3.4 billion (€2.11 billion). Despite Crisafulli previously voicing that he would not be keen to commit to a brand-new stadium, his latest words suggest that he may now be leaning that way given the importance of legacy and the prices of both being not far apart.

https://www.insidethegames.biz/articles/1149957/2032-brisbane-olympics-cost-blowout

 

[Johnny Bananas]

No need for the union then

What do you think the point of a union is?

(BTW I really enjoy reading your posts, so sorry if that came across as blunt).

 

[Johnny Bananas]

There's a new bridge gong in between kenmore and jindalee on the western freeway.

This is the same project where a worker got impaled in the neck with a metal rod due to poor safety standards on site. Sounds like they could do with a stronger union there.

The CFMEU was not happy with the union that was running the site. A union on union stoush ensured.

This is an oversimplification. There were other issues there such as safety problems and a reliance on inferior Chinese building material.

The cfmeu picketed the site and shut it down for over a month. Massive site, totally deserted.

Do you think pickets are ever justified?

I have been a union member at times and believe they play an important role. But shutting down infrastructure projects is a massive drain on every tax payer.

Almost all taxpayer project is contracted out to the private sector these days. This one was no exception, having been contracted out to BMD. When you consider every private company tries to squeeze the workers as much as they can and keep more money as profits, why wouldn't a union be pushing for a bigger piece of the pie?

The government chose to take this risk on behalf of the taxpayer when they contracted the project to the private sector. We can't on one hand accept government efforts to cut costs through contracting and on the other decry that the taxpayer is being hurt by the consequences of that contracting without being hypocritical.

And when it happens because two unions are fighting it is a disgrace.

Can you please let us know which union this was? I saw this claim in a Newscorp story but curiously they never named this other union that was apparently opposing the CFMEU.

 

[Grasshopper17]

What do you think the point of a union is?

(BTW I really enjoy reading your posts, so sorry if that came across as blunt).

Not at all. My perspective on unions boils down to the notion that they seek to isolate and collect (and then pass on to their members, in an ideal world) what are essentially the "transaction costs" associated with sacking an entire workforce and replacing them with a whole new workforce.

Then at the more granular scale there's the levelling of the playing field between the more capable workers in the given industry, and those perhaps less capable than they should be (given their age/experience etc), thereby quarantining for the workforce business revenue which in a free market would form part of the owner's profit share.

To me there is little incentive, certainly in a free market, for those "more capable" workers to join a union, and similarly little incentive for workers whose skills are scarce and in high demand.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

Not at all. My perspective on unions boils down to the notion that they seek to isolate and collect (and then pass on to their members, in an ideal world) what are essentially the "transaction costs" associated with sacking an entire workforce and replacing them with a whole new workforce.

That's a fair view, though I disagree in parts. I think that labour relations are a power struggle between employer and employee, but the employer almost always has more power over the employee by virtue of having more money (aka capital), and the employee potentially being reduced to poverty if they're out of work for an extended period.

The idea of a union is to coalesce the power of the workers to rival the power of capital. And I think this is not just limited to transaction costs of labour replacement, but also what economists call the surplus value of labour, the profit margin above a reasonable level of risk ("super profits" as Kevin Rudd's mining tax called it).

Then at the more granular scale there's the levelling of the playing field between the more capable workers in the given industry, and those perhaps less capable than they should be (given their age/experience etc), thereby quarantining for the workforce business revenue which in a free market would form part of the owner's profit share.

This is closer to my view, though I think the gap between workers is less drastic than it's made out to be. Otherwise every capable worker would go and become their own contractor and make potloads, or start their own business and become an employer themselves. And I don't think our economic system would work anywhere near as well if every capable employee did those things. Everything would cost even more than it already does, half the population would be in poverty, and a giant underclass would form.

To me there is little incentive, certainly in a free market, for those "more capable" workers to join a union, and similarly little incentive for workers whose skills are scarce and in high demand.

The more capable worker is still perfectly capable of being sacked or mistreated if the employer takes a dislike to them or finds a way to replace them. And nobody stays on top of the skills pile forever. Even the world's most talented plumber will eventually suffer the physical consequences of their job. As Bob Dylan said, the first one now shall later be last. In that sense, unions provide a level of insurance for workers across their career.