SA Footy

So what is (was) so evil and scary about unions that the Liberal campaign was based on "but he was a union organiser" 25 years ago?

So what?

Seems like the voters didn't care?

Yes, some (very) bad eggs in Unions, just like life, politics, sport and big business. Yes, some union "types" push it way too far and believe their own publicity, or don't realise we have moved on from the 60's and 70's tough man tactics. But on the other side, some of our biggest employers do not give 20 cents for the welfare of their staff and if they could get away with it, would happily bring in a 50% pay cut for all employees.

I could easily name more "rogue" employers then union organisers.

No, i'm not a member of a union but i was for 22 years while employed by one of Australia's biggest (and baddest) companies.

Disclaimer: My (very) late Grandfather was on the original 40 hour working week committee many many decades ago.

I don't think it was a case of "not caring" or "so what" but as I've said after the previous four elections the vast majority Australians aren't dumb and can see through the hype of election campaigning.

The vote for who can they think individually will provide them with the safest economic future for themselves and their kids.

The Coalition had to try every PR trick in the book to get support similar to Keating in 96 demonising Howard as yesterdays man in '96. When your behind the Polls you get desperate and a negative campaign is what results but it always ends in a poor election result. Australian's by and large don't like negative campaigns.

If the Coalition is brutally honest they will reaslise with their policies they gifted the valuable middle ground of Australian politics to the ALP with their workchoices policy. People don't like seeing their economic future compromised whch is what they perceived/believed.

Speaking with ALP and industrial relations consultants over the pat year they have no real problem with Workchoices apart from one major fundamental point, the removal of the power of an independant arbitrator (the Industrial relations Commission) - umpire if you like to decide if an agreement is fair or not. The fact the fairness commission (whatever it is called) basically public servants compared to the Judiciary ("independant" third arm of govt) is deciding on wether an agreement is fair was a glaring mistake IMHO.

To sit on the right side of the speaker in Australian politcs you have to capture the hopes and minds of middle class Australia, the Coalition didn't do that this time.

PS Once again Rushby you're spot on there are rogue elements of the Liberal party (extreme drys - despite popular opinion most people in the Liberal Party are decent hard working individuals) just like their are rogue elements of the ALP (extreme left wing unionists). For the sake of this country one can only hope that despite who is in govt the extreme elements of both major parties never gain a sphere of influence or control.

I like what Rudd said last night with regards to getting a happy balance between unions and business leaders/work flexibility and fairness etc. etc. That middle ground and taking the better points from Liberal and Labor is appealing to the voter. If he can carry that out, that would be great.

It looks like every union candidate has won seat contesting in house of reps, still not sure about senate but am hoping Doug Cameron gets a spot (ex AMWU national secretary).

As said there is a bad element in unions with the thugs but there is many more rouge employers that just don't care about the safety and conditions of their employee's.

TroyGFC wrote:but there is many more rouge employers.

Are you saying they're Communist employers?

1980 Tassie Medalist wrote:I don't think it was a case of "not caring" or "so what" but as I've said after the previous four elections the vast majority Australians aren't dumb and can see through the hype of election campaigning.

The vote for who can they think individually will provide them with the safest economic future for themselves and their kids.

The Coalition had to try every PR trick in the book to get support similar to Keating in 96 demonising Howard as yesterdays man in '96. When your behind the Polls you get desperate and a negative campaign is what results but it always ends in a poor election result. Australian's by and large don't like negative campaigns.

If the Coalition is brutally honest they will realise with their policies they gifted the valuable middle ground of Australian politics to the ALP with their workchoices policy. People don't like seeing their economic future compromised whch is what they perceived/believed.

Speaking with ALP and industrial relations consultants over the pat year they have no real problem with Workchoices apart from one major fundamental point, the removal of the power of an independant arbitrator (the Industrial relations Commission) - umpire if you like to decide if an agreement is fair or not. The fact the fairness commission (whatever it is called) basically public servants compared to the Judiciary ("independant" third arm of govt) is deciding on wether an agreement is fair was a glaring mistake IMHO.

To sit on the right side of the speaker in Australian politcs you have to capture the hopes and minds of middle class Australia, the Coalition didn't do that this time.

PS Once again Rushby you're spot on there are rogue elements of the Liberal party (extreme drys - despite popular opinion most people in the Liberal Party are decent hard working individuals) just like their are rogue elements of the ALP (extreme left wing unionists). For the sake of this country one can only hope that despite who is in govt the extreme elements of both major parties never gain a sphere of influence or control.

Good post Tassie, spot on!