Jane Bovary

But why are migrants so much easier to employ...? I believe largely because our affluent culture of comfort has degenerated work ethics and there is a lesser and lesser attitude of responsibility for one’s own life and life decisions. Young Australians (not that I’m quite so old) are so obsessed with their rights and very reluctant to discuss their responsibilities.

Well there are two sides to that particular coin. Why are migrants easier to employ....? Sometimes because they are easier to exploit. Many migrants come from countries where workers rights are sorely neglected, and the standard of living is poor, some are used to sweat shop labour...it's hardly surprising that they are uncomplaining labourers, grateful for work. Look at the clothing industry here, notorious for exploiting migrant labourers, usually machinists who do gruelling work for a pittance. Would you wish the same standard for Australia that is to be found in the countries these people have sought to escape from?

I agree that people should consider their responsibilities to a society as well as their rights, but that cuts both ways. Industry also has a responsibility to its workers...left alone, it too often forsakes people in favour of profit. I've never employed anyone, but most Australians I know are prepared to do a reasonable days work for a reasonable wage. In fact statistics show that we are working harder and longer than ever before. I think this myth of the "lazy Australian" is a furphy perpetrated by those whose interests are served by bringing Australian labour standards into line with cheap off-shore labour. This would drastically alter the tenure of Australian society and completely smash our egalitarian ethos.


The disabled and the special cases are the safety net which I would want to protect with welfare. But it becomes impossible when others seek shelter under it as well. This is where the illegitimates anger me so much, that the safety net needs to be so low as to keep them out.

Do you also get p***ed off with wealthy tax cheats who steal much more from Australians than the so-called "dole bludgers".


Way off topic now...but oh well.

echidna

Continuing our little sub-plot ...

This is a good example. The straightforward reason that we virtually don’t have a rag trade here is clearly because of pay. I’d wager that most of your threads came from a developing nation, because we both want them cheaper. Mine certainly did. I can buy Italian shirts from an OECD country, but jeez, they’re 4 times the price, and besides, I’m an unjineer.

Now, if someone chooses to work in Australia for a wage which they are freely offered, with dole money also freely offered, would you prefer to threaten them in order to prevent that free transaction from occurring ? Because those free, unregulated trades occur in a high proportion of our economy already, without the heartache and tragedy which you describe.

A high-profile case would be SPC Shepparton, where Halfpenny preferred to shut down a factory rather than allow workers and employers self-determine to negotiate salary reductions for all, outside of the Award. Fortunately common sense and economic rationalisation prevailed and today SPC survives.

There is a perception that people have a right to employment. While there are some rights I can understand, I really don’t see how anyone has a god-given right to the job of their choice. But it seems quite a common message from Trades Hall.

Have you been following Dubya’s 40% steel levy ? Calling Australia’s steelworks "sub-standard conditions" has been used by the steel lobby to force this decision. Are they "sub-standard" ? I won’t deny they’re sweatshops, it kinda goes with the industry after all , but Australian work conditions are right up there with any OECD country.

You may well be surprised at the high, and increasing standards of living in many of our developing trade partners.

When we are mortified and holier-than-thou about "horrific" conditions in developing nations, we quickly forget that these were the norm here only one or two decades ago.

Of course that all depends on the definition of reasonable. I managed one of the smaller Cigweld factories in Preston for 3 years – closed union shop, completely illegal BTW, but ruthlessly and violently enforced by the union. Good workpractices were flagrantly brought down to the lowest common denominator & the petty power of the shop stewards drove most agendas. Intimidation commonplace.

Oh I blame management first, a more corrupt, lazier, spineless and incompetent pack of Old Boys I hope I never come across. And their product was a divided, inefficient & dying company. There was no perception of their responsibility to the 600 livelihoods which they held in their hands.

But what can one do ? Today Cigweld has all but moved offshore. There was no other solution. The union simply prohibited any possibility of restructuring & inefficiencies made the product range uncompetitive. And simultaneously management via some of the worst engineering managers I have ever come across, were strangling the company with a deplorable lack of product development.

(Proudly I can say I think I was instrumental in launching Gas Equipment’s first new product range, welding helmets how dull, in almost 20 years, which not only took out the 1999 Australian Design of the Year, but is still growing in exports each year, but that’d just be blowing my own trumpet. )

Actually I blame inept business management far more than I blame corrupt business management. As long as I would prefer not to pay $50 for my shirts, economic rationalism is necessary to remove the Cigweld’s from the market.

FWIW, is our labour treatment suffering so badly ? Because thanks to a ridiculously low dollar, our manufacturing and other export industries are thriving, without any suffering to our standards of living, unless of course you need to buy a BMW or Range Rover.

Even moreso. Can I just say 2 words : Pat Rafter !!!

DarkDruid

So... if you have something that somebody else doesn't, you owe them? You have not given a clear reason as to why such unfortunate individuals should have to compensate African-Americans.

Jane Bovary

Can I just say 2 words : Pat Rafter !!!

echidna, I do love it when we find a rare point of agreement...Pat Rafter.."Australian of the Year".

As 99 would say, bleh.

hinduwoman

Shivakami, as you know, the problem in India is not with compensation for the lowest castes, but with the 'creamy layers' of these castes. They are people who have enjoyed the benefits of the affirmative action and has become a part of middleclass and political structure. However they unfairly insist on hogging these benefits for their children instead of letting their still depressed brethren have them. This is very unfair and should be stopped.

Example: the President of India is by birth an untouchable. He came up through the help of these reservation laws. However his children has grown up in luxury, they have the best education money can buy, and their social status is the highest. How can they claim compensation for oprression inflicted on their ancestors. Yet according to law they can. Similalry many well-to-do untouchables still insist on having the same reservations for their children though the children no longer need them. The law therefore must be changed to take into account this reality.

Also I think there must be a limit to these kind of thing. Otherwise Indians are entitled to ask compensation from England. (BTW, many want the Kohinoor back). One man arguing with muslims said that since the constitution allows him to be discriminated against based on what his ancestors did, he is entitled to discriminate against present day muslims based on what their ancestors did.

DRFseven

And because the slaves were never compensated, there were no socioeconomic benefits to be passed along. The greatest "crime", in my opinion, was not the mere economic loss, but the psychosocial ramifications that continue to reverberate. This is why I think some form of educational entitlement would be better than cash payments, which might do nothing to alleviate the cultural gap that exists as a result of attitudes toward African Americans generated by the practice of slavery in the U.S.

Because in the one case, you are talking about individualized "bad luck", which will happen even in just states; every case is different. In the other case, you are talking about government-institutionalized discrimination and deprivations that made successful integration of a group into society impossible. In the individualized cases, it's not clear at all that the government was the source of the problem; only that the government might be able to intervene.

But I never saw where you addressed my statement that it was the promulgated attitude that Africans were subhuman that allowed slavery and perpetuated the oppression for generation after generation. The actual slavery was only the first step in the "racial" problems we see today in the U.S.

But all the effect was begun by the introduction of slavery!

It could be that there might be "ceilings"of certain standards of living, over which, no recompense is indicated. Not all African-Americans think it's a good idea. I'm also generally in favor of, not every social program, but of trying to figure out how to implement programs that address specific social ills and that might actually work to reduce suffering.

echidna

To me the best solution is maintain the attitude that we owe nothing to someone because they are Aboriginal or Black African. However we have a moral responsibility to constructively assist someone who is socially disadvantaged, for whatever reason.

Preferential subsidies need to be carefully formulated so misuse can be minimised. I still question the moral wisdom of paying $300 per fortnight to a chronic alcoholic. Personally I also favour widespread and dramatic increase in means (and ability) -tested scholarships.

But education alone is hardly adequate for regional communities where the social problems are often concentrated. Here regional programs need to be laid out on a case-by-case basis, but not simply according to race. And focussing not only on education, but more importantly on employment. Economic independence is the goal.