Tens of thousands of tradies across the country have marched in protest against the federal government's decision to put the construction arm of the CFMEU under administration.
“The government is not for turning and nor is the Australian public — they want to see this industry cleaned up,” he said. (Aparently Albanese said this)
Do we have a Labor government or Thatcher?? Not sure whether putting the Construction part of the CFMEU into administration or not is the right decision. But aligning yourself with historic union busting figures? Albanese is insane to think this is good politics.
Good to here Max Chandler Mather out there again showing some solidarity.
Not sure whether putting the Construction part of the CFMEU into administration or not is the right decision.
Even IF the CFMEU is fucked, this is massive overreach, imo. Even if we take the claims at total face value, do they want criminals to not have jobs that pay the bills? Because that’s how you get crime. No one is getting into cooking meth for the funsies.
That combined with the alignment with union busters makes it pretty clear that this is an attempt to roll back worker conditions.
Even IF the CFMEU is fucked, this is massive overreach, imo. Even if we take the claims at total face value, do they want criminals to not have jobs that pay the bills? Because that’s how you get crime. No one is getting into cooking meth for the funsies.
So what are we supposed to do here? Let the union clean itself up? We’ve been making that joke a very long time.
Don’t disagree. But Max-Chandler’s comparison with banking, and religious institutions kind of makes that a hard argument to make.
Why are we suddenly seeing such hard and fast political reaction against the unions when theft, collusion, and some of the worst criminal behaviour imagineable, has been committed and Governments have taken a slow approach, and in other cases not seemed to pull their finger out at all.
I think its the comparison and rhetoric that really smells here, because lets be honest, administration isn’t shutting down the union, some people will lose their jobs, but the representation of workers will probably be maintained… in this present case.
I’d suggest that if there’s dirty behaviour that needs to be cleaned up, that would be a matter for the police. Not for the government to pass a bespoke bill disregarding the judiciary process for.
To a degree the right to disconnect is like working from home, those policies affect white collar far more than blue collar, or min wage service workers, etc.
So in my mind it makes sense that, that reform went through without much issue. Everybody is on the side of the middle clas white collar worker it seems.
Its noticeable how much media time work from home has got since COVID over just about every other issue impacting workers. Maybe its because journalists identify more with it, maybe other classes of workers haven’t the power to effect change, and influence national conversations.
Really? Because the first place my mind goes to is service workers. Not answering a call wanting to get them in off shift, and not facing penalty for it.
White collar workers would not be penalised for not responding out of work hours, it’s a lawsuit waiting to happen
Eh, I think strictly codifying a law that basically exists but is potentially vague can be a good thing. This makes it absolutely undeniable that you have the right to disconnect from work, where previously you’d have to kind of work it out and employers might try to argue exceptions.
It’s like minimum passing laws for cyclists. A car going past a cyclist at 90 cm is obviously dangerous and irresponsible driving and any reasonable person would say it’s a chargeable offence for that reason. But in practice it very rarely got prosecuted, and even when it was it didn’t always succeed, because motornormative society defaults to saying the cyclist must be wrong. With a hard and fast rule that passing at less than 1 metre breaks the law, nobody can quibble about subjective matters like whether it’s dangerous or reckless.
Seriously, watching that interview is a little painful with all the interrupting to try and railroad the conversation, and attaching weird attacks and assertions to make loaded questions, or rather, framing a claim as a question. I haven’t seen it so bad outside of Faux News in the US.
Glad to hear Max got a quick mention of the Green Bans of the BLF in.
This article from David Spears, i think, explains Ferguson’s line of questioning. Basically the ABC have drawn an optics comparison between that and Tony Abbott’s ditch the witch protest speech. And yeah there is similarity.
In both cases though, was it worth the media being distracted over the signs and forgetting the issues at hand?
“The government is not for turning and nor is the Australian public — they want to see this industry cleaned up,” he said. (Aparently Albanese said this)
Do we have a Labor government or Thatcher?? Not sure whether putting the Construction part of the CFMEU into administration or not is the right decision. But aligning yourself with historic union busting figures? Albanese is insane to think this is good politics.
Good to here Max Chandler Mather out there again showing some solidarity.
You don’t need good politics in Australia.
It is not a Democracy.
Even IF the CFMEU is fucked, this is massive overreach, imo. Even if we take the claims at total face value, do they want criminals to not have jobs that pay the bills? Because that’s how you get crime. No one is getting into cooking meth for the funsies.
That combined with the alignment with union busters makes it pretty clear that this is an attempt to roll back worker conditions.
So what are we supposed to do here? Let the union clean itself up? We’ve been making that joke a very long time.
Don’t disagree. But Max-Chandler’s comparison with banking, and religious institutions kind of makes that a hard argument to make.
Why are we suddenly seeing such hard and fast political reaction against the unions when theft, collusion, and some of the worst criminal behaviour imagineable, has been committed and Governments have taken a slow approach, and in other cases not seemed to pull their finger out at all.
I think its the comparison and rhetoric that really smells here, because lets be honest, administration isn’t shutting down the union, some people will lose their jobs, but the representation of workers will probably be maintained… in this present case.
Ooh, got a link to Max’s comments on it?
I’d suggest that if there’s dirty behaviour that needs to be cleaned up, that would be a matter for the police. Not for the government to pass a bespoke bill disregarding the judiciary process for.
yup, and oh look, they recently gave us the carrot of “right to disconnect” as if it was something we previously didn’t fucking have
To a degree the right to disconnect is like working from home, those policies affect white collar far more than blue collar, or min wage service workers, etc.
So in my mind it makes sense that, that reform went through without much issue. Everybody is on the side of the middle clas white collar worker it seems.
Its noticeable how much media time work from home has got since COVID over just about every other issue impacting workers. Maybe its because journalists identify more with it, maybe other classes of workers haven’t the power to effect change, and influence national conversations.
Really? Because the first place my mind goes to is service workers. Not answering a call wanting to get them in off shift, and not facing penalty for it.
White collar workers would not be penalised for not responding out of work hours, it’s a lawsuit waiting to happen
Yep, true, they’re good points.
Eh, I think strictly codifying a law that basically exists but is potentially vague can be a good thing. This makes it absolutely undeniable that you have the right to disconnect from work, where previously you’d have to kind of work it out and employers might try to argue exceptions.
It’s like minimum passing laws for cyclists. A car going past a cyclist at 90 cm is obviously dangerous and irresponsible driving and any reasonable person would say it’s a chargeable offence for that reason. But in practice it very rarely got prosecuted, and even when it was it didn’t always succeed, because motornormative society defaults to saying the cyclist must be wrong. With a hard and fast rule that passing at less than 1 metre breaks the law, nobody can quibble about subjective matters like whether it’s dangerous or reckless.
As a regular cyclist, your analogy is giving me zero faith in lawful application
agreed. Is Ferguson always like this? Max did well not getting pushed around.
Seriously, watching that interview is a little painful with all the interrupting to try and railroad the conversation, and attaching weird attacks and assertions to make loaded questions, or rather, framing a claim as a question. I haven’t seen it so bad outside of Faux News in the US.
Glad to hear Max got a quick mention of the Green Bans of the BLF in.
The interviewer seemed to have a line she was trying to follow, and Max Chandler-Mather wasn’t having a bar of it.
Max Chandler-Mather’s CFMEU rally antics have given Labor a political weapon to wield against the Greens By David Speers
This article from David Spears, i think, explains Ferguson’s line of questioning. Basically the ABC have drawn an optics comparison between that and Tony Abbott’s ditch the witch protest speech. And yeah there is similarity.
In both cases though, was it worth the media being distracted over the signs and forgetting the issues at hand?