Guest Guest5035

job losses and this

    Recommended Posts

    Guest bigal

    This country may be great, only because they have always poached workers from other countries, unemployment at record levels, we should be training our own!

    Shame on you Australia.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    Strange I said exactly the same thing to my OH the other day.

     

    The only reason I can thing of is that they must make alot of money from the Immigration fees people have to pay.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    This will eventually sort itself out. I think at the moment there's a bit of jostling going on for political reasons.

     

    It seems that the project will not be able to source sufficient numbers of Australian workers for the three-year construction phase. If that's true then fair enough, if there is need to important, on a temporary basis, overseas workers with the required skills then it seems reasonable that they should be able to do so. But caveats should apply. Firstly, there must be a demonstrated inability to hire local workers. It isn't only a skills shortage issue, it's about whether or not local workers who may have the required skills are willing to take a job for a limited period (it's suggested that it's three years) in what is probably an isolated area. If they can't fill vacancies with locals then to ensure the project goes ahead it seems fair enough to bring in skilled workers. But I also think that those workers on 457 visas should be paid at the rate they would get in Australia (or more if they can get it). The unions are cranky because those 457 workers would not be union members. They must also be seen by their members as opposing the importation of foreign workers, even though it may be necessary. This has been a central tenet in Australian unionism since the 1890s and is deeply ingrained in the union movement here. It would be bizarre if the CFMEU or the AWU or the AMU or any other union publicly welcomed this. Any union official doing so would lose their job next election.

     

    The government, accused by so many of being under the thumb of the union movement, is demonstrating that it is not. It is formulating a reasonable policy which appears to meet the needs of the business involved while ensuring the business doesn't pull a swifty and try and fill all positions with 457 visa workers on less then Australian wages and conditions. If they did anything else they would be open to very valid criticism from all sides.

     

    The policy from the government looks pretty good but it will need to watch the business involved like a hawk, any slippage will do them a great deal of harm.

     

    Has anyone seen the Opposition't take on this yet?

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Guest smit

    import workers to cover 3 years !!!!......how long do you think mining boom been in WA and QLD?..........employers want skilled workers .........would rather buy in then train, in all honesty probably cheaper. Plenty of workers out there willing to train but dont get a chance.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Guest Guest5035
    Plenty of workers out there willing to train but dont get a chance.

     

    Now if i got $1 for everytime i've heard that in my 21 years here, someone could have my job as i'd be able to retire..

     

    Stevo

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    import workers to cover 3 years !!!!......how long do you think mining boom been in WA and QLD?..........employers want skilled workers .........would rather buy in then train, in all honesty probably cheaper. Plenty of workers out there willing to train but dont get a chance.

     

    The problem is, I think, that the company wants skilled labour for the construction phase. The production phase will come later and the number of jobs will drop so they will probably be able to find workers with the necessary skills to work on the production process. A company thinks only of its own requirements, it isn't interested in the broader, policy issues. This is a particular situation in which the company is looking to meet its own needs. Training takes time and money and it seems that this company has decided that training people for a three year construction phase isn't the most appropriate solution, hence the request for some foreign workers.

     

    The "mining boom" is a series of commercial operations by individual companies, it isn't a government policy. It could fall over tomorrow if trade conditions were unfavourable and the companies would wind back operations and start sacking workers. That's how they work. It's up to government to take a longer term view and use forecasting to try and predict labour needs into the future. I would imagine that's a fairly difficult task but it could and should be done. Unfortunately a lot of the training schemes that were put in place by the Keating government were dismantled when the first Howard government took office. I thought at the time that was short-sighted and I haven't changed my opinion.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Guest Sachertorte

    Agree with you Royd, your analysis sounds pretty spot on. Sometimes what pertains to policy and what to corporate interest is easily confused by many!

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    While this may not be the case in this instance...I have witnessed first hand the abuse of bringing people in on 457 visas to cover suppose 'shortages'. I know of a company that created 'an old boys club' of bringing in everyone from a certain country and then put them in management positions over Aussies and if there was not a management job one was created for them to go into. Aussies were forced out of the company with horrific bullying tactics. The company creates job adverts with such specific criteria (and pays rubbish money) and then says to Immigration there is no one in Australia that wants the job, so they are able to go to the certain country and recruit the person they had in mind when they wrote the advert. Some of the Aussies within the company have contacted the Immigration Department and even lawyers but the practice still continues.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Guest Guest5035

    Thankyou JB, pretty obvious whats going to happen..

     

    stevo

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    There has certainly been abuse of the 457 visas, various unions have uncovered them and the authorities have acted. Any time something like this is created there is always someone ready to rort it. That's why it's important this particular project is closely scrutinised. I would think though that this company is so big, so wealthy, that it doesn't need to rort the system like a smaller contractor might do.

     

    What I can see at the moment though is a blue coming up inside the government which is not necessary. Abbott is making a lot of noise about Gillard not knowing about it, but why would the PM bother when two Ministers with portfolios that are relevant take care of it? Doesn't the term "delegation" mean anything any more?

     

    Doug Cameron was on the evening news having a bit of a spray about it, probably playing to his old constituency. The media will make a bit of noise too but frankly I don't see what else the government can do but accede to the request provided it's a valid requirement.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Guest Shanners

    What I can see at the moment though is a blue coming up inside the government which is not necessary. Abbott is making a lot of noise about Gillard not knowing about it, but why would the PM bother when two Ministers with portfolios that are relevant take care of it? Doesn't the term "delegation" mean anything any more?

     

    Doug Cameron was on the evening news having a bit of a spray about it, probably playing to his old constituency. The media will make a bit of noise too but frankly I don't see what else the government can do but accede to the request provided it's a valid requirement.

     

     

     

    Please don't mention Tony Abbott if you're having a serious dicussion (about anything!!)

     

    Chris

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    Create an account or sign in to comment

    You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create an account

    Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

    Register a new account

    Sign in

    Already have an account? Sign in here.

    Sign In Now