OnPoint: Two wallops of wonk, with a side of waffle
119 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 Newer→ Last
-
...but it all just seems so fucking lame.
Whomever came up with today's headline for Audrey Young's Herald story "Jobs summit throws up three big ideas" seems similarly unimpressed.
-
(My naivete and my cynicism are having a ding-dong battle.)
I feel your pain -- picked a really bad time to simultaneously give up smoking (for real this time: got the patches, lozenges and the Hammer of Loving Self-Correction to hand!), clean up the diet, and temper one's cynicism with cautious optimism. Should be fun and games until someone loses an eye.
-
What other gems do we have in todays throwing up alongside,taxpayer funding, public private partnership and John Key's Minister for Tourisms big idea,?(oh that's right,isn't he the Minister of Tourism?)
-
Well, Sofie, were you really expecting the world's problems to melt away in a gust of cinnamon-scented unicorn farts? (Yes, the writers room at the Daily Show will be getting paid for that.)
-
A lot of them flatulent unicorns lately..
-
Well, Sofie, were you really expecting the world's problems to melt away in a gust of cinnamon-scented unicorn farts? (Yes, the writers room at the Daily Show will be getting paid for that.)
It's a goody innit Craig, and no, I didn't expect anything much at all with this summit or any other window dressing but that's just my silly little cynicism.I kinda was expecting a Crosby Textor style summit and felt I wasn't let down because well, we weren't really allowed to be informed as the choice of venue made sure of that. At the end of the day (it's night ;) I liken Nat/Act/MUF party to the yardglass.One can only drink until you must throw up so I just don't go there, but you knew that right?How's the patches goin'? Don't forget to take them off at bedtime or you get bad dreams.
-
Don't you mean?
-
Having the summit is fine for a discussion group of and for the powerful. But that group was making decisions for other people, not themselves. Probably none of the attendees will actually go on a 9 day week, face redundancy, have to front up to Work and Income, or ever need a food bank. They will probably continue to have jobs, assets, and most of all power, for the duration of the depression or whatever we call it.
The real expertise in coping and addressing these issues, and therefore the innovative solutions, lies with those with the most experience of being powerless. So I would like to see a summit of disabled people, unemployed people, young people, immigrants and refugees, and those for whom English isn't a first language. Perhaps mix them with some front line Work and Income staff, public health nurses, teachers from low decile schools, budget advisors, voluntary agencies etc. Imagine the creative but effective ideas this could spark
-
Arghhhh, no edit button, 9 day fortnight (or 4 day week or 3 and half week month or whatever). And who gets to choose what the day off will be or how you must spend it?
-
I invite anyone somehow wowed by the Cape-to-Bluff Cyclebahn initiative to inspect a map of the Auckland cycle 'network'. Looks like Technicolor Morse code.
I'm predicting that if this comes to pass, there'll be a few showy mini-flyovers for ministers or local government wallahs to get their pictures taken on, a few more stretches of hastily-poured concrete path, and a lot of white lines and stencils sprayed down the middle of bumpy old footpaths. The rest will be the same daggy suburban roads and middle-of-nowhere highway stretches with nothing added except a few cycleway signs and a squiggle on a council touring map.
-
But that group was making decisions for other people, not themselves.
I feel they were trying to find solutions for themselves because it was big business that they operate. I don't think they care about the bread and butter stuff (read lay offs) because that is just fodder and we are being told to" expect the worst "and "tighten the belt " which should line up quite nicely with "we will need lots of public/private partnership" because we just can't afford not to. The one thing I would like to know is, why are we using so called experts( I'm assuming expert because we don't get told much) to try to dig us out of a hole, when a lot of them will be the bastards that created it in the first place?
-
why are we using so called experts... to try to dig us out of a hole, when a lot of them will be the bastards that created it in the first place?
It has to be the one thought that keeps popping to the front of my mind too.
Why do we keep asking the people who a year ago predicted that everything was going to be jake with the global economy what they predict will happen now, and how they think we can get out of the crap they and their mates created? It is totally bizarre that these guys have jobs still, let alone that we (not me!) listen to the drivel they spout considering their track record.
Reminds me of sitting listening to the guy from Merrill Lynch telling us that the whole Sub-Prime issue was a storm in a tea cup and ML was strong, and the money was safe. That was a year before ML was 'rescued' from bankruptcy. And some of that group listening to that man still think he is worth listening to and trust him to look after their best interests.
Who is the fool in this picture? The guy earning big $ to gamble with your money, or you? The same goes for government. We (not me!) elected them. What did we expect? Tax cuts and everyone gets a pony?
Mwahahahahhahaha!!!!
-
Word is the Commerce Commission's investigation of our power supply companies will show that consumers have been overcharged for a few years now. Fancy that. How about the govt subsidise solar-panel installation for all our houses? And while they're at it, throw in a bit of retro-fit insulation? i think we've earned it.
-
I don't think the Prime Minister has gone far enough. These are radical times, and we are a nation of DOers.
I want him to suggest a 2 day working week, with the other 3 days paid for by the Government. That way, we could reduce productive capacity and no-one would be worse off.
It takes a bold man to say these things. And that man is John Key. Can you imagine Helen Clark introducing the 2 day working week, for example? There is no comparison.
-
Love it, George. Your Views styles again, right?
-
Re the 9-day fortnight - after reading this article, I'm not sure our employment legislation allows for it to be imposed?
That article outlines how HP has ordered 5% pay cuts globally - but in NZ, it's for the employee to accept that. And you can't tell them that they, personally, are more likely to be made redundant if they don't - i.e., employees have to decide that by taking a pay cut they are lessening the chances of redundancy OVERALL across the organisation, and therefore possibly reducing the chance of themselves.
So my read of that is that the Govt and employers couldn't force a 5%/1-day cut because that would be contrary to your contract and you'd have to give consent. So this could only be made available as an option for employees...
-
On National Radio this morning, there was an interview with a textile worker from Oamaru, who is working a 9 day fortnight. He says the provisions for this were already in his employment contract.
-
Which is what happens when you invite only rich business-owners to these sorts of things: complete obliviousness to how it looks from the other end.
The unions were at the conference, too. Out in force, in fact.
Are we talking about the very public and chummy media focused face of the big unions or are we talking about unionists who are involved in gettting their minimum wage or near it members the best possible deal at every negotiation?
cos there's a difference.
I have to agree though, that if you are seeking to prevent job losses it makes sense to invite business people as errr...they will be the ones making the decision about cutbacks.
Inviting other folk from non-profit making organisations can be useful, if the government is going to subsidise jobs in their sector for the public good.
Otherwise, give all those folk at the conference prosac in the drinking water, and hope this restores international business confidence....
-
The rule in the UK is that one must have some sort of binding agreement to allow reduction of hours or lay-off (reduction of a whole week), usually in the contract or a workforce agreement. If that clause exists then the employer can usually impose a variation in hours (in exchange for a small retainer like payment). This is based on longstanding practice and has been incorporated in the relevant employment legislation.
Perhaps the same is true in New Zealand already.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.