Comments on: Talleys: Corporate scum

By: Open Country polluting our rivers too at The Standard

Open Country polluting our rivers too at The Standard — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 00:26:18 +0000

[...] its long record of bad behaviour like this I’m strongly of the opinion that the Talleys should be stripped of their right to [...]

By: National-linked dairy company threatens six week lockout at The Standard

National-linked dairy company threatens six week lockout at The Standard — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 00:30:41 +0000

[...] major players though, are the infamous Talleys, who are possibly the worst employers in New Zealand. As The Standard has documented, they’re the ones of Hollow Men fame who offered Don Brash $1 [...]

By: Fisking Farrar at The Standard

Fisking Farrar at The Standard — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 01:03:20 +0000

[...] In fact last term Anne Tolley asked a series of questions on behalf of Affco, which is owned by the Talley family, to try and get them out of a $1 million contractual obligation to ACC relating to a shooting that [...]

By: Frank

Frank — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 18:30:49 +0000

No I think the unionizing thing is a good idea unfortunately most people have been carefully conditioned to reject the best way to protect themselves and hold corporate shit bags in check… strangely enough.
The only populace with any balls what so ever are the French and Italians they unlike the former British colonies stand up for themselves while we grovel and scrape or give up before we start and let these vermin corrupt our political officials despoil our children’s world and do what ever they want essentially. No wonder why these scum laugh at us all they must be thinking ” what else will these sheep stand still for, let’s find out” I have had enough, I treat these scumbags like the shit that they are and have extracted my revenge many many times and as they say it is a sweet sweet dish to savor indeed. Is there any body else out there with an ounce of guts to stand up for themselves or are you all just talking. If the former then good for you, you should be proud and know you are not alone as they like you to think. If the latter then please spare us the pathetic posturing and please shut up and go back to your pathetic Televisions your masters are calling.

By: Frank

Frank — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 18:05:29 +0000

No I think the unionizing thing is a good idea unfortunately most people have been carefully conditioned to reject the best way to protect themselves and hold corporate shit bags in check… strangely enough.
The only populace with any balls what so ever are the French and Italians they unlike the former British colonies stand up for themselves while we grovel and scrape or give up before we start and let these vermin corrupt our political officials despoil our children’s world and do what ever they want essentially. No wonder why these scum laugh at us all they must be thinking ” what else will these sheep stand still for, let’s find out” I have had enough, I treat these scumbags like the shit that they are and have extracted my revenge many many times and as they say it is a sweet sweet dish to savor indeed. Is there any body else out there with an ounce of guts to stand up for themselves or are you all just talking. If the former then good for you, you should be proud and know you are not alone as they like you to think. If the latter then spare us the pathetic posturing and please shut up and go back to your pathetic Televisions your masters are calling.

By: Questions at The Standard

Questions at The Standard — Thu, 16 Apr 2009 00:24:08 +0000

[...] Why is Shane Jones accepting money from possibly the most reactionary business family in New Zealand, the [...]

By: ripp0

ripp0 — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 02:04:09 +0000

jtf,

is that there is no way that any company should be held liable for the actions of an outside force or influence

How come you never told all the corps who fell victim to cds/cdo about this BEFORE it happened..?

yeah, I know you’re in a thread relating acc stuff, but it also has the words ‘corporate’ and ‘scum’ in the title..

By: Pascal's bookie

Pascal's bookie — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 10:57:47 +0000

This doesn’t make sense jtf.

On the one hand you say you only want to discuss the facts, rather than what the law is. But ‘what the law is’ is the relevant fact of this case. On the other hand you seem to be wanting to discuss (though it is unclear), the merits of the no fault system and ACC. But you tell me that should be left for another thread. I agree.

When you say what you you think ‘should’ be the law, and who ‘should’ have insurance, and what that ‘should’ cover you are moving away from the facts and into opinion about the things you think should be left for another thread. Strange.

It honestly seems to me that you are the one avoiding the facts. The facts of this case are the contract and what it left AFFCO legally liable for. The courts are the judge of that, and the contract was quite clear. It really is simple, you are entitled to think that some laws are stupid, but that is not a fact, that’s opinion. Opinion about the merits of the ACC system.

Feel free to talk about the facts of this case anytime you feel up to it, and we’ll leave, as you suggest, opinions about the merits of ACC for another thread.

By: Steve Withers

Steve Withers — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 10:35:21 +0000

If you boycott Talley’s they may end up being bought out by some foreign company who won’t give a rat’s arse about anything to do with NZ….and engineer their “costs” so they end up not paying any tax in NZ…..as so many of our foreign-owned corporates do. I used to work for one that paid a 40% “royalty” to head office in the US. This was their way of transferring local profits out of NZ. This company is not intended to make a big profit in New Zealand….and they usually don’t. The aim to make as close to nothing as possible…..

A Talley’s like that would be worse than the one we have now.

By: BLiP

BLiP — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 09:42:33 +0000

Might as well say WINZ is broke for all the sense you make.

By: mickysavage

mickysavage — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 09:32:50 +0000

There is a saying about how the tories want losses to be socialised and profits privatised. If Talley was willing to socialise its profits I am sure that we could look at socialising the losses that it may have suffered from this deal.

By: mickysavage

mickysavage — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 09:16:05 +0000

Well put BLip

I could not have put it better myself …

By: Draco T Bastard

Draco T Bastard — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 09:14:17 +0000

ACC isn’t broke.

By: mickysavage

mickysavage — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 09:12:23 +0000

justthefacts

Felix’s analysis is very good and very relevant. Insurance companies every day take money from citizens promising to protect them from the effects of criminal behaviour. Imagine what would happen if your insurance company refused to pay out for the burglary that you suffered on the basis that it was “the actions of an outside force or influence”.

The market and the rule of law applies. If a private entity chooses to assume the risk that an adverse event may occur why should the state (ie all of us) pick up the tab if the bet was not a good one?

If AFFCO did not want to cover its employees from being shot then it should first look to its lawyers to see why the contract it signed did not say this.

This is a classic example of why ACC must be preserved and cover not trusted to insurance companies. Otherwise every third claim will be disputed and will need to be litigated.

By: BLiP

BLiP — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 09:09:40 +0000

Its not about fault, or ACC Its about contract law. Its about Talleys saying one thing and then wriggling like John Key in a pile of money when having to keep its word.

If there’s any fault in the car park shooting scenario its Talleys’ lawyers not recognising the exposure to liability in the (apparently) sweetheart deal they negotiated. Any decent brief would have elminated the car park zone from the contract. However, Talleys’ usual practise is to do everything on the cheap so they must have got some bozo ambulance chaser to draft the contract.

And now you’re telling us the tax payers, having been short changed in the first instance, should also pay for Talleys’ fuck up? You twat.