Will/Can they REALLY do it?

[Sheer Bliss]

Just looking at all of the posts & Labours 'promise' to reverse the IR laws (which is giving me a feeling of deja vu with regards to the GST reversal) is it really likey to happen if Labour are voted in? If they won the election when they promised to remove GST - it was highly unlikely that it would happen - the cost would have crippled the government, not to mention the inconsistencies it would have created.

Is it really something that they can actually do? What about the people that have lost their jobs under the new conditions? Or people that have signed new agreeements - will all these agreements become void? It's a lovely promise for them to be making - but is it something they are using because they realise so many people migth jump on the bandwagon with? From an administrative & logistical point of view, i honestly don't see how they will be able to do it. They might be able to add to it to improve the situation, but are we kidding ourselves if we think they can actually reverse them entirely??

[Alekay]

I dint have an answer for you but will be interested to see what others think:yes:

I thought that they arent getting rid of it completely but they will amend some parts of it.....Just what i thought:confused:

[~Emmylou~]

Well considering the way these laws were bought in - with little input from anyone and even less discussion - I shouldn't think it would be that difficult to reverse them.

Basically the country was told - here you go, this is what we're doing, like it or lump it.

It would be the same thing to undo them - just in reverse :p

[Roopee]

I have heard that the IR laws stay.
Mr Rudd has been pretty elusive to the answer for that so im unsure.:thumbsup:

[forbetoel]

The IR law will be reversed, it is against Labor policy and ethics to have IR law work that so negatively impact against the worker.

[Elfin]

I would of thought it depends on who has control of the Senate.

[forbetoel]

IMr Rudd has been pretty elusive to the answer for that so im unsure.:thumbsup:

:wave: HI Roopee, Rudd said last night during the debate that the IR laws will be gone if he gets in, he has been anything but evasive.:)

[Roopee]

The IR law will be reversed, it is against Labor policy and ethics to have IR law work that so negatively impact against the worker.

Where does it state that? Has that been "announced" yet?

[Roopee]

oops- just read your other post- sorry 4boys.

I dont think they will be- i guess IF he wins we will see eh?:thumbsup:

[Sheer Bliss]

IT's easy to say - yes they will be reversed, but has anyone actually thought of what this will involve?? It's not just a matter of saying this won't exist anymore, the legalities of it all come into play? Can you say yes it will be done and not cost us thousands in court cases to sort everything out? I just don't see it as being feasible. It's not a light switch that can just be turned out.

Have there been any examples of this in the past (an honest q, as i really don't know)?

[Roopee]

IT's easy to say - yes they will be reversed, but has anyone actually thought of what this will involve?? It's not just a matter of saying this won't exist anymore, the legalities of it all come into play? Can you say yes it will be done and not cost us thousands in court cases to sort everything out? I just don't see it as being feasible. It's not a light switch that can just be turned out.

Have there been any examples of this in the past (an honest q, as i really don't know)?

^^^^^ Yes- i agree!

[IAdoreYou]

Julia spoke about this ages ago on breakfast tele and said they would slowly get rid of IR laws, it will be like a 5 year plan, it won't be an overnight thing, and the public won't be told about it! It will gradually go.

THEY will be staying if Labour gets in, who knows if they really will take them away, Kevin could get in and keep it all.

GO LIBERAL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'm doing it for the SAHM's with working partners, we need these yearly tax breaks, Kevin Rudd ( Labour ) have and will never be into tax breaks, they can't juggle the books, never have and never will. Labour do have to match though what John Howard is proposing if he gets in!

Inflation will rise, we all want everything "now" so TAX CUTS are needed its part of "life" especially when you live in one of the richest, under populated, popular and admired country in the world. Whilst under Liberal tax cuts will always be coming.

[forbetoel]

IT's easy to say - yes they will be reversed, but has anyone actually thought of what this will involve?? It's not just a matter of saying this won't exist anymore, the legalities of it all come into play? Can you say yes it will be done and not cost us thousands in court cases to sort everything out? I just don't see it as being feasible. It's not a light switch that can just be turned out.

Have there been any examples of this in the past (an honest q, as i really don't know)?

I am sorry but I don't care what is invoved in changing it. Real people, with real families are hurting because of these new IR laws. They managed to whip em in, can't imagine it will be that hard to whip em out. My neighbor is just one example of the IR laws hurting families, he was fired and then rehired for $7 less an hour. I may not have been directly affected by the laws, but I honestly care about those that have been. To make laws that will be fairer for all workers, it doesn't matter what has to be done, I m thinking of my kids, not kowing what road they may one day take....I want to know they will be looked after and treated fairly no matter what their choices.

[BJelly]

From my understanding, if the ALP wins the election, people on AWA's can stay on them until they are due to expire after 5 years. If people are unhappy with their AWA they would be allowed to get out of it.

People won't be able to employ people using AWA's, but can use the Award agreement, Common Law agreements, Collective Enterprise agreements.

[pinkpirate]

Yes this policy was worked out months and months ago - it was one of the first really, really detailed policies Labor released. They released the policy overview (ie, "no more unfair AWAs," "restoration of the right to protection from unfair dismissal") ages ago before the Labor conference. Find details of the policy here on Kevin07 (http://www.kevin07.com.au/fresh-ideas/forward-with-fairness/forward-with-fairness.html)


Then, a few months later, the ALP detailed the transitional arrangements, which was the document that said stuff like, "no one will be left up in the air, if you like your AWA you can stay on it for 5 years" etc.

Yes they are deadly serious about this.

Of course, the bad thing is that the Liberals have control of the Senate at the moment. The upper house is supposed to be the house of "review" to keep a check on the Government.

If Rudd is elected but the Liberal senate is in place, they could make it really rough for Rudd to get his IR laws through, even though he would have a mandate from the electorate!

Labor can't win the Senate (its mathematically impossible this election) but hopefully Labor and minor parties will gain some seats so the senate is more balanced.

[spoon]

Yes this policy was worked out months and months ago - it was one of the first really, really detailed policies Labor released. They released the policy overview (ie, "no more unfair AWAs," "restoration of the right to protection from unfair dismissal") ages ago before the Labor conference. Find details of the policy here on Kevin07 (http://www.kevin07.com.au/fresh-ideas/forward-with-fairness/forward-with-fairness.html)


Then, a few months later, the ALP detailed the transitional arrangements, which was the document that said stuff like, "no one will be left up in the air, if you like your AWA you can stay on it for 5 years" etc.

Yes they are deadly serious about this.

Of course, the bad thing is that the Liberals have control of the Senate at the moment. The upper house is supposed to be the house of "review" to keep a check on the Government.

If Rudd is elected but the Liberal senate is in place, they could make it really rough for Rudd to get his IR laws through, even though he would have a mandate from the electorate!

Labor can't win the Senate (its mathematically impossible this election) but hopefully Labor and minor parties will gain some seats so the senate is more balanced.

Pink Pirate, Thanks so much for this awesome info:yelclap: excellent post:thumbsup:

[ShadyCharacter]

I'm doing it for the SAHM's with working partners, we need these yearly tax breaks, Kevin Rudd ( Labour ) have and will never be into tax breaks, they can't juggle the books, never have and never will. Labour do have to match though what John Howard is proposing if he gets in!
Labor don't actually have to match anything if they get in :) The Howard Government keeps harping on about this massive budget surplus they have... that would be because they are not spending money where we need. Its all good and well for them to keep reducing tax, but the only reason they have the surplus is because they are not funding the things that desperately need it, like hospitals, aged care, daycare, education, etc. I don't know about you, but my $12 per week tax cut last year didn't get me very far, and it certainly didn't put a dent in any of my bills for the above.


Inflation will rise, we all want everything "now" so TAX CUTS are needed its part of "life" especially when you live in one of the richest, under populated, popular and admired country in the world. Whilst under Liberal tax cuts will always be coming.
Wages should rise with inflation to compensate, not taxes being reduced. Also, tax cuts cannot go on being a consistent yearly thing, as we would eventually end up not paying tax at all.

[IAdoreYou]

We are a pack of whiners aren’t we?, we are the 1st to complain about petrol prices, but happily pay 3 times more for a litre of bottled water!?

The official cash rate was 7.5% when this government came to power, the fact that it is still at a LOWER level then that 11 years later is great!

You can’t say that about the cost of living or the booming property market all around us,
You could buy a lot of food for $100 lets say 11 years ago, today that gets you 4 meals if your lucky, 11 years ago you could live off one wage and buy a 1st home and raise that family, today – NOWAY, inflation will keep rising, immigrants will keep coming and YOU don’t want tax cuts? Confused …

YES, that $34 billion going to hospitals, schools, TAFEs and universities would be fantastic, I have a DD and that would be fantastic, but pleaseeeeeeeeeeeeee, show us some “good management” behind all these infrastructures 1st and then maybe I will hand over my tax cuts!

1stly, I do like the 50% childcare rebate Labour are proposing, I do! My only concern is will the fee’s rise?

I'm also basing my vote solely on my "family" and how it will effect us in the long run, My Dh is in a union, a great union and it isn't affected by the new IR Laws, he is looking for a fresh face this election. I am however, putting family 1st when I vote and taking inconsideration that "I" can't afford to take a gamble and vote Labour in with the price of everything else around us today. Maybe nothing will change if Labour get in, maybe a fresh face is needed for the country, maybe we all need a "shake up" and Labour is meant to get in, so we STOP spending, because there will be NO more money given back to us if they do get in, I can't predict the future, whatever happens is meant to be.
I do know that I'm definately not ready for Julia in a couple of years to tell us that she wants to take on Kevin Rudd for the top spot -- noway, didn't they just do that with Kim? hmmmmmmmm

Okay, back to the original Question?

[charlen49]

IT's easy to say - yes they will be reversed, but has anyone actually thought of what this will involve?? It's not just a matter of saying this won't exist anymore, the legalities of it all come into play? Can you say yes it will be done and not cost us thousands in court cases to sort everything out? I just don't see it as being feasible. It's not a light switch that can just be turned out.

Have there been any examples of this in the past (an honest q, as i really don't know)?Its the same as what took to put them into place..oh thats right..they set up a hotline just before this election to look like they are doing the right thing by workers..pff..What do you think has been happening since they were introduced..there are still court cases going on etc..why cant it be reversed? Its not like they were introduced and everything was hunky dory..i know you have been on leave Tania but come on....you'd have to be living in a bubble if you think its all peaches and cream with changes that Howard is torturing us with!!!!!!!!

[Sheer Bliss]

I NEVER once said i AGREE with the IR laws. I only asked the question is it feasible to reverse them (thanks for the 'REAL' info pinkpirate & BJelly! :yelclap: )

I was thinking that from a management POV was it possible?, NOT is it the moral/right thing to do! It was merely a Q about feasiblity. Which some lovely hubbers have quite nicely provided the info about, without getting personal.

[forbetoel]

Sorry, maybe you didn't state the rules of the thread clearly enough.:)

[Sheer Bliss]

Sorry, maybe you didn't state the rules of the thread clearly enough.:)

:laughing: You crack me up you cheeky girl!!

But seriously - I haven't stated anywhere that I LIKE the IR laws, just that I was not sure how on earth they would go about reversing them. It irks me that people 'perceive' your opinion/stance on issues and see fit to comment in an unflattering way. I like/dislike policies from many different parties - and I don't see why insulting comments are thought to be necessary. Like I said to you in another post - it's lovely to see that some people can discuss these issues without resorting to gutter talk, but disapointing that others can't. :)

[forbetoel]

:laughing: You crack me up you cheeky girl!!

But seriously - I haven't stated anywhere that I LIKE the IR laws, just that I was not sure how on earth they would go about reversing them. It irks me that people 'perceive' your opinion/stance on issues and see fit to comment in an unflattering way. I like/dislike policies from many different parties - and I don't see why insulting comments are thought to be necessary. Like I said to you in another post - it's lovely to see that some people can discuss these issues without resorting to gutter talk, but disapointing that others can't. :)


:wave: I think threads often do run like a conversation, so it is only natural that they will sometimes run off track a bit, some times people are passionate about something, and let their emotions type the post iykwim? When they wouldn't normally be so personal. Anyway, great thread, I have enjoyed it. :thumbsup: :)

[charlen49]

t some people can discuss these issues without resorting to gutter talk, but disapointing that others can't. :) hey tania ive looked back through this thread and im looking for the the gutter talk..did i miss something..hope your not refering to my post:eek: ..which incidently really did ntsay much. now i look at...so i think i might stay away from these type of threads where the the OP can be easily misinterupted and influenced by the posters views in similar threads:) :wave:

[Sheer Bliss]

hey tania ive looked back through this thread and im looking for the the gutter talk..did i miss something..hope your not refering to my post:eek: ..which incidently really did ntsay much. now i look at...so i think i might stay away from these type of threads where the the OP can be easily misinterupted and influenced by the posters views in similar threads:) :wave:

I wasn't speciifically refering to gutter talk in this thread - more so others - i was just using it as a point of reference to the amicable way 4boys manages to express her feelings, but in a respectful way. I enjoy 'discussions' like that and was merely commenting on it.

As she said - sometimes emotions can get out of hand when perhaps people don't really mean it. On that note - your post did seem a little personal and implying I lack understanding of the IR laws, simply because i am a SAHM ATM.

For the record - i have not decided which party will be getting my vote - hence why i am asking these questions - to get get a broader view to make a decision. :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

[lotti]

Yep 4boys is actually very fun to have a debate with..too bad she's a Rudd supporter really. :D

[forbetoel]

Yep 4boys is actually very fun to have a debate with..too bad she's a Rudd supporter really. :D

Dont you just love those smiley icons :D

They can make even the most sarcastic quote sound like a compliment! :p
NO, seriously, thanks for the compliment :thumbsup: I will take them any way they come, especially on a political thread from a Liberal supporter.

[Roopee]

Yep 4boys is actually very fun to have a debate with..too bad she's a Rudd supporter really.

Good god i agree.

Wonderful woman- shame about your taste mate:yes::hair::shame::banghead::cool::laughing:

[charlen49]

I wasn't speciifically refering to gutter talk in this thread - more so others - i was just using it as a point of reference to the amicable way 4boys manages to express her feelings, but in a respectful way. I enjoy 'discussions' like that and was merely commenting on it.

As she said - sometimes emotions can get out of hand when perhaps people don't really mean it. On that note - your post did seem a little personal and implying I lack understanding of the IR laws, simply because i am a SAHM ATM.

For the record - i have not decided which party will be getting my vote - hence why i am asking these questions - to get get a broader view to make a decision. :thumbsup: :thumbsup::) cooleroonies!!!!!!!!!!!!

[forbetoel]

Good god i agree.

Wonderful woman- shame about your taste mate

Right back at ya! ;)

[Roopee]

Right back at ya! ;)

:hugs::laughing::cool: