Setka Resigns

[QuietB]

you think the CFMEU are on every site?

Union sites - yes 100%

Have you ever been on a building site?

 

[HirdsTheWord]

Union sites - yes 100%

Have you ever been on a building site?

lol. just a couple..........

 

[Kram]

Yeah I've been on their sites, lol if you think you need those self serving meatheads to make a workplace safe.

 

[QuietB]

lol. just a couple..........

Yeah I've been on their sites, lol if you think you need those self serving meatheads to make a workplace safe.

Ok, so you have both been on big union sites. Who runs the safety meetings? Who stops work if an incident happens? Who is actually supervising safety?

It is certainly not Worksafe or any other government agency.

 

[Nuggs Bunny]

Ok, so you have both been on big union sites. Who runs the safety meetings? Who stops work if an incident happens? Who is actually supervising safety?

It is certainly not Worksafe or any other government agency.

It's generally not the unions either, so not sure where you're going with this.

The traffic cop role that Worksafe has is by design - the unions do not want an independent regulator to take safety decisions away from their members. The brothers would up and walk out if it was decided that Worksafe was the final word on what was safe and what wasn't in the workplace.

 

[QuietB]

It's generally not the unions either, so not sure where you're going with this.

The traffic cop role that Worksafe has is by design - the unions do not want an independent regulator to take safety decisions away from their members. The brothers would up and walk out if it was decided that Worksafe was the final word on what was safe and what wasn't in the workplace.

But that is my point - the unions have entrenched themselves into the system because they (claim to) do a role that no one else is doing. And they have entrenched themselves in the system.

Builders don’t care - the more it costs the better - they are making a margin on cost.

Building surveyors are not responsible for safety and neither are any of the other consultants.

Worksafe are not even there.

So my point is that unions have simply filled a safety supervision vacuum where no one else wants to do it. You can argue if they do it well or not but that is irrelevant to why they are so powerful.

When unions walk off a building site it is invariably because of some real or imagined safety issue and there is no higher authority to override this.

 

[Nuggs Bunny]

But that is my point - the unions have entrenched themselves into the system because they (claim to) do a role that no one else is doing. And they have entrenched themselves in the system.

Builders don’t care - the more it costs the better - they are making a margin on cost.

Building surveyors are not responsible for safety and neither are any of the other consultants.

Worksafe are not even there.

So my point is that unions have simply filled a safety supervision vacuum where no one else wants to do it. You can argue if they do it well or not but that is irrelevant to why they are so powerful.

When unions walk off a building site it is invariably because of some real or imagined safety issue and there is no higher authority to override this.

So back to your original point, it's hardly an issue of small government because the people who are whinging about the system the most don't want it to change because it's working exactly as they intended. There will never be political support on any side of the fence to remove control of safety from workers and businesses and hand it to an independent regulator. I wouldn't say Worksafe is an example of small government either; they're huge and have a lot of power.

 

[QuietB]

So back to your original point, it's hardly an issue of small government because the people who are whinging about the system the most don't want it to change because it's working exactly as they intended. There will never be political support on any side of the fence to remove control of safety from workers and businesses and hand it to an independent regulator. I wouldn't say Worksafe is an example of small government either; they're huge and have a lot of power.

So my original point is that union power in construction has become imbedded in the system because they have filled a void.

That void could have been filled by regulators or could have been filled by consultants or whatever.

But it was filled by no one - so construction unions filled it and made themselves indispensable. And powerful.

 

[Zim^zuM]

It's been 3 sleeps heading to a 4th since the story started breaking.

I've read the HS articles and watched 60 minutes. Don't have access to the age.

So far what damning evidence has been presented so far by the age?

 

[Saint]

It's been 3 sleeps heading to a 4th since the story started breaking.

I've read the HS articles and watched 60 minutes. Don't have access to the age.

So far what damning evidence has been presented so far by the age?

Criminals getting jobs. Bikies working on Union jobs. Hardly revolutionary stuff.

The problem is that neither side can be trusted over Industrial relations. Both are completely beholden to one side of the power struggle. So both have gone completely partisan on the issue. Which led to decades of wage theft and exploitation and decades of Union corruption.

There's no chance of a bi-partisan approach, so I'm not sure how this resolves itself. Unions will remain militant against bosses to get a better deal for their workers and bosses will try to squeeze every ounce out of their workers that they can.

The Libs only had their Union corruption Royal Commission in 2015. They found so much corruption that one person got a $500 good behaviour bond. They created the ABCC and the first Commissioner resigned with a $8500 fine.

Both sides are bending the rules too much and neither side gets punished. I wish all forms of corruption were punished, but not that only one side of corruption is punished. Don't forget where the corruption of Robodebt ended......they're all still in direct Govt employment and the anti-corruption commissioner doesn't think it's their job to worry about corruption.

 

[barreness]

Criminals getting jobs. Bikies working on Union jobs. Hardly revolutionary stuff.

The problem is that neither side can be trusted over Industrial relations. Both are completely beholden to one side of the power struggle. So both have gone completely partisan on the issue. Which led to decades of wage theft and exploitation and decades of Union corruption.

There's no chance of a bi-partisan approach, so I'm not sure how this resolves itself. Unions will remain militant against bosses to get a better deal for their workers and bosses will try to squeeze every ounce out of their workers that they can.

The Libs only had their Union corruption Royal Commission in 2015. They found so much corruption that one person got a $500 good behaviour bond. They created the ABCC and the first Commissioner resigned with a $8500 fine.

Both sides are bending the rules too much and neither side gets punished. I wish all forms of corruption were punished, but not that only one side of corruption is punished. Don't forget where the corruption of Robodebt ended......they're all still in direct Govt employment and the anti-corruption commissioner doesn't think it's their job to worry about corruption.

Let self-interest be the rule........

 

[The Punter]

I reckon the CFMEU may just exist because they get their members paid like CEOs. Just a little.

 

[nut]

It's been 3 sleeps heading to a 4th since the story started breaking.

I've read the HS articles and watched 60 minutes. Don't have access to the age.

So far what damning evidence has been presented so far by the age?

It’s EXPLOSIVE !!!!!!!

 

[nut]

I reckon the CFMEU may just exist because they get their members paid like CEOs. Just a little.

Well then just get the CEO’s to build shit then!!

 

[The Punter]

Well then just get the CEO’s to build shit then!!

I wasn't necessarily making a criticism. Safety is not the only reason the CFMEU is seen as being effective representatives for their membership.

Although if a component of the wage is related to the inherent danger of the work, and the work is getting less dangerous, shouldn't that have a downward force on wages? No one ever hands back cash at a EBA negotiation unless you are a Shoppie.

 

[nut]

What does “giving criminals” Jobs mean?
Are we talking about people that have been convicted, been to prison and now released? Are we ment to stop these people from getting jobs?

 

[nut]

I wasn't necessarily making a criticism. Safety is not the only reason the CFMEU is seen as being effective representatives for their membership.

Although if a component of the wage is related to the inherent danger of the work, and the work is getting less dangerous, shouldn't that have a downward force on wages? No one ever hands back cash at a EBA negotiation unless you are a Shoppie.

So the union makes things less dangerous and everyone has to take a pay cut? … seems pointless .. they may as well
Make things more dangerous …
Or is it only CEO’s that should from benefit increased safety??? With mega bonuses??

 

[The Punter]

What does “giving criminals” Jobs mean?
Are we talking about people that have been convicted, been to prison and now released? Are we ment to stop these people from getting jobs?

Taxpayer funded jobs where they get taxpayer funded cars to ferry themselves to hospital when they get shot after doing work that they were not hired to do?

Yes.

 

[nut]

Taxpayer funded jobs where they get taxpayer funded cars to ferry themselves to hospital when they get shot after doing work that they were not hired to do?

Yes.

How often does this happen? Are we talking daily? Weekly? Monthly?

 

[The Punter]

So the union makes things less dangerous and everyone has to take a pay cut? … seems pointless .. they may as well
Make things more dangerous …
Or is it only CEO’s that should from benefit increased safety??? With mega bonuses??

EBA's in the construction industry are largely a legal fiction. The work week is 32 hours - no one works as little as that on a construction site. It's about obfuscating the exact amount employees get paid.

The whole saga should serve as a lesson that we need more transparency here. No more allowances and palaver like that - just an honest (and probably higher) base rate based on a work week length that accurately reflects how long employees actually work on site.

 

[The Punter]

How often does this happen? Are we talking daily? Weekly? Monthly?

Once is too many times. Especially when the mistake is obvious and easy to avoid.

Perhaps better, more transparent hiring practices could have prevented me paying for a bikie to conduct a drug deal, getting shot and driving himself to hospital in a car I also paid for.

 

[nut]

Once is too many times. Especially when the mistake is obvious and easy to avoid.

Perhaps better, more transparent hiring practices could have prevented me paying for a bikie to conduct a drug deal, getting shot and driving himself to hospital in a car I also paid for.

So it’s happened once?
What hiring practises lead to this happening?
Should convicted criminals be banned from jobs?

 

[Saint]

A lot of the safety inspections are fixed too. They word up a couple of members on site to do certain things they're not supposed to so that the CFMEU can come in and notice it and stop work until they get what they want.

Oh look, somebody spilled petrol in this area, or moved a fire extinguisher which is supposed to be there. Miraculously it's all back to normal and the fire extinguisher goes back to gathering dust in the same place for weeks or months until the next time the CFMEU has a bone to pick.

 

[Couch Coach]

So it’s happened once?
What hiring practises lead to this happening?
Should convicted criminals be banned from jobs?

Just a few weeks ago John Setka wanted a "go slow" on all AFL projects due to the AFL hiring Stephen McBurney a former commissioner of the Australian Building and Construction Commission (ABCC). McBurney has not been convicted of anything and is not working in the construction industry any more.

This is not about hiring convicted criminals that are reformed.
Part of this is about hiring convicted criminals that are still engaging in criminal activity.
Part of this is about a pattern of hiring convicted criminals as "stand over men" for the CFMEU to illegially stop non CFMEU union members from accessing sites. (These people may be members of other unions like the AWU).
Part of this is about limiting which companies can work on CFMEU sites and reciving kickbacks from the CMFEU approved companies.
Part of this is about restricting productivity on site unless the CFMEU gets something in return.

 

[Carn The Berries]

So it’s happened once?
What hiring practises lead to this happening?
Should convicted criminals be banned from jobs?

Being a convicted criminal who has served their time is not the issue in the example raised. This was a person, who may or may not have been previously convicted of a crime and/or been to prison, using the equipment provided in their publicly funded role to conduct criminal activities and seek medical attention thereafter.

They're not the same thing, so I have no idea why you think this question is relevant.

And it's happened once... That we know about.