Long lunch
Had a lovely lunch with Graeme H at Punch Lane. Delightful arrangement - I choose the venue and he pays.
Graeme is dealing with a set of AWA’s in the mushroom industry - particularly, a Mildura producer. All but two of the employees are on board and the two are neutral. Naturally, the AWU is trying to stop them.
The game is a relatively common one - the AWU working with the largest employer in the industry to raise the costs of the smaller players, since a large employer is a lot easier to organise than small regional firms, with the story hitting the media half way through, not at the beginning. Naturally also, the Judge is Tony North. Like the MUA in the wharf dispute, the AWU waited until Mr Justice North was the judge going to hear the next case. (Amazing accuracy in timing in filing their case.)
So, it’s workers versus the union. The case is Tuesday.
Graeme came up with an amusing grading of money: money comes in four forms -- your own money that you spend on yourself, your own money that your spend on others, other people's money that you spend on yourself and other people's money that you spend on other people. Each involves less reason to care about value for money than the stage before. Politics tends to divide between those who want to continually increase how much social resources are deployed as spending other people's money and those who believe that social resources are generally better deployed as people spending their own money.
ADDENDA The AWU has backed off, delaying its case for a month. Graeme believes it was the TV report of the employees holding up a sign signed by 51 out of 53 employees saying We support Jim & Vera (the owner-managers) which did it. A story of workers versus Union plays very badly for the Union (as per SPC case of some years ago). You have to admire the scam though -- the union changes the award coverage, which raises costs, so there are almost certainly bound to be employee losers. Then the union campaigns on blaming the employer(s) response to the original union move for everything. Sweet.
Graeme is dealing with a set of AWA’s in the mushroom industry - particularly, a Mildura producer. All but two of the employees are on board and the two are neutral. Naturally, the AWU is trying to stop them.
The game is a relatively common one - the AWU working with the largest employer in the industry to raise the costs of the smaller players, since a large employer is a lot easier to organise than small regional firms, with the story hitting the media half way through, not at the beginning. Naturally also, the Judge is Tony North. Like the MUA in the wharf dispute, the AWU waited until Mr Justice North was the judge going to hear the next case. (Amazing accuracy in timing in filing their case.)
So, it’s workers versus the union. The case is Tuesday.
Graeme came up with an amusing grading of money: money comes in four forms -- your own money that you spend on yourself, your own money that your spend on others, other people's money that you spend on yourself and other people's money that you spend on other people. Each involves less reason to care about value for money than the stage before. Politics tends to divide between those who want to continually increase how much social resources are deployed as spending other people's money and those who believe that social resources are generally better deployed as people spending their own money.
ADDENDA The AWU has backed off, delaying its case for a month. Graeme believes it was the TV report of the employees holding up a sign signed by 51 out of 53 employees saying We support Jim & Vera (the owner-managers) which did it. A story of workers versus Union plays very badly for the Union (as per SPC case of some years ago). You have to admire the scam though -- the union changes the award coverage, which raises costs, so there are almost certainly bound to be employee losers. Then the union campaigns on blaming the employer(s) response to the original union move for everything. Sweet.