Chloe King – John Key, I am a low waged worker, and neither “lazy” nor “drug addled”

Written By: - Date published: 2:39 pm, September 9th, 2016 - 254 comments
Categories: business, class, jobs, john key, national, paula bennett, Politics, same old national, unemployment, wages, workers' rights - Tags:

Reprinted with permission from Millenialposse.

Prime Minister John Key is making international headlines for all the wrong reasons again. In a recent Radio New Zealand interview he shamed low waged workers, calling them, “drug addicts” and describing them as being “lazy.” Okay, I am one of the hundreds of thousands of low waged workers in this country and I feel devastated by his comments which further included stating we, the apparently lazy and low waged workers, also have no work ethic. Key is using these reasons to justify bringing in record numbers of migrant workers into New Zealand, to take up roles in work considered unskilled, such as fruit picking, hairdressing, labouring, baking, driving trucks, managing cafes, and working in hospitality.

“[…] go and ask the employers, and they will say some of these people won’t pass a drug test, some of these people won’t turn up for work, some of these people will claim they have health issues later on,” Key told Radio New Zealand reporter Jesse Mulligan,

“So it’s not to say there aren’t great people who transition from Work and Income to work, they do, but it’s equally true that they’re also living in the wrong place, or they just can’t muster what is required to actually work.”

I want to be very clear here: I support immigrant workers. I embrace the diversity they bring to Aotearoa. I stand firm in solidarity with migrant workers for many reasons, the most important being that nearly always the migrant workforce is subject to low wages and exploitation, something of which I also have personal, plentiful, painful experience. What I do not embrace is John Key pitting workers like myself, already being paid poverty wages, against immigrant workers being exploited as cheap labour, all to further suppress wage growth and help his corporate mates get richer.

Most low waged workers who I know are some of the hardest working people you will ever meet. We undertake multiple jobs, which is hard, I promise you, and we have no choice other than to do this. There has been a major rise in the casualised and part-time economy, and full-time work is almost impossible to come by. We are left stitching multiple jobs together to make up full-time work. We give up our nights, days and weekends to pour your pints, flip your burgers, to serve food we can’t afford ourselves, and to clean your damn toilets. Yeah, you know all those jobs people don’t want to do? We do them. We work twice as hard as CEOs and workers considered “highly skilled,” for measly paychecks in high stress environments, and we endure the poverty shaming which comes with underappreciated low waged work. Being poor is to incur ridicule and constant put-downs from strangers, people we know, the mainstream media, and now, even our own political leaders.

So many of our most vulnerable and precarious workers, nearly always women, new migrants and people of colour, typically have no protections, no benefits and nowhere to turn. In part this is because consecutive governments have actively undermined and weakened unions through laws such as the 1991 Employment Contracts Act, which made it much harder for them to operate. This has restricted workers’ ability to negotiate pay and access the most basic of benefits like sick leave and holiday pay, and we are routinely denied breaks.

So, if we don’t work our fingers to the bone for ruthless employers, we get fired or our shifts get cut. This leaves us scrambling to find other work in a stagnant and flooded job market. In response we become desperate and therefore easier to coerce into accepting offers for pay below minimum wage and having to deal with workplace injustices like harassment and assault. I have PTSD from the number of times I have had guys attempt to assault me and feel me up on shift when working in nightclubs and late night bars. There is almost no direct course of action I can take over this as the hospitality sector is unregulated and has no real union representation. So, if I seem “lazy” or wasted on shift it is likely because I am feeling depressed and anxious in response to a demeaning and sometimes dangerous work environment.

It is important to note that, while Key calls low waged workers “drug addicts” and “drug addled” in his RNZ interview, he fails to mention that drug addiction is a symptom of poverty, and low wages combined with insecure work induces poverty.  Wanting to check out of this grinding reality is a perfectly normal, albeit harmful response to an absolute feeling of hopelessness and despair. Comments like Key’s, which shame an entire class of people, make me want to pick up a bottle of booze and down every last drop, until I can feel nothing but that warm numbness wash over me.

Honestly, this type of shaming of low waged workers like myself makes me cry. I’m serious. It hurts. It hurts because no matter how hard I try, I can’t seem to secure even low paid and unskilled work for long periods of time. I am not alone in this struggle. It was Key’s government which introduced the 90 Day Trial law in 2009, which only serves to compound the rising issues associated with precarious and low waged work. The Waikato Times reported in 2013 thousands of workers had been sacked under this law (this is a conservative estimate) and many were simply told they “did not fit in.”

Five weeks ago, I was personally subject to the harder edge of the 90 Day Trial legislation when I was not offered an ongoing contract only five days out from the trial period end date. The reason? I was told that I did not “perform my duties as a receptionist up to standard.” I had worked incredibly hard for this company, having gone above and beyond my job description. I’d lost considerable amounts of weight during my time in this role as I had spent so much time running between the multiple levels of the building to clean, run coffee and tea, and undertake errands for other employees. I often felt stressed and overworked, during and after work hours. Still, I was told my hard work was not good enough. When is our hard work ever fucking good enough?

Being fired under this law was a major blow to my confidence and since then I have struggled to get out of bed. I feel depressed and hopeless and I am battling suicidal ideation daily; I don’t want to die but I cannot keep bouncing from one job to the next with no chance of economic stability or progression. My experience of insecurity has been ongoing for years and years, and no matter how hard I work I have little hope that my situation will ever change.

Yet John Key has the audacity to call those living in poverty because of low wages, bad luck and under/unemployment “lazy” and “drug addicts.” His rotten rhetoric blames us alone for our circumstances, when it is his government that further entrenches poverty into the lives of blue collar workers and the working class. It was his National party’s MP, Paula Bennett, who enacted sweeping welfare reforms and sanctions which made getting a benefit a humiliating experience, not to mention the measly state payout barely covers rent, let alone rapidly rising living costs.

When you rip gaping holes in social security nets such as welfare, those with lesser means are left to drown under the rising tide of inequality, structural unemployment, and underemployment. So many of us who are bodily abled or not, and mentally well or not, are left with no choice than to take anywork, no matter how dangerous, precarious, and sub-human the wages. What sort of a choice is that?

Young people who are born poor or fall into poverty and downward mobility are denied a future, or at least any economic and personal well-being. This is not the kind of future anyone deserves, especially our young, and no-one should just accept it as a given.

No matter what John Key tells the masses, the problem with New Zealand’s work economy is not our being “lazy” or “drug addled” workers who lack “work ethic.” I’d call him a cunt for what he said about workers like me but he has neither the depth nor the warmth. The problem is low wages. The problem is a rise in a culture of precarious and casualised work which has created structural unemployment and job scarcity. The problem is the laziness, incompetence and widespread sociopathy of both right and nominally left wing governments who have failed, dismally, to protect those of us who were not born into wealth and privilege. The problem is that Key is a millionaire who has absolutely no idea about, nor care for, the daily struggles and injustices the working class and migrant workers endure every single day. Perhaps then, aside from finally starting to deal with any of these very real issues, at the very least, John Key should simply stop talking about us as if he knows us.

Chloe is freelancing which means she has no secure income and relies on donations from the wider public to keep herself economically afloat. If you like what she has to say and want to support her you can make a direct contribution via her bank account – 12-3040-0580277-01.

254 comments on “Chloe King – John Key, I am a low waged worker, and neither “lazy” nor “drug addled” ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. McFlock 1
    9 September 2016 at 3:01 pm

    I took Key’s comment to mean that it was the unemployed who were lazy drug addicts, that there weren’t enough NZers like Chloe to be exploited by sub-living wage abusers (sorry, “employers who pay market rates for hard work”), so we needed to import the deserving-oppressed.

    Complete bullshit, of course.

    • Bob 1.1
      9 September 2016 at 4:02 pm

      “I took Key’s comment to mean that it was the unemployed who were lazy drug addicts, that there weren’t enough NZers like Chloe”
      As did I, but it’s hard to argue against someone in Chloe’s position.

      Chloe, if you read this, the one thing I will say, talk to a lawyer:
      “Five weeks ago, I was personally subject to the harder edge of the 90 Day Trial legislation when I was not offered an ongoing contract only five days out from the trial period end date. The reason? I was told that I did not “perform my duties as a receptionist up to standard.””
      Under the 90 day trial your employer would not be able to exploit you in this way without showing that they have taken reasonable steps to help you settle into the role. If they have not helped you to ‘perform your duties as a receptionist up to standard’ and they let you go, you will likely be able to bring an ‘unjustified disadvantage’ case against them.

      Try someone like these guys: http://www.unfairlydismissed.co.nz
      They take a % if you win, but do not charge if you don’t.

      • Lanthanide 1.1.1
        9 September 2016 at 11:50 pm

        Incorrect, unjustified disadvantage requires an active role by the employer. It’s quite plausible to hire someone for a receptionist role based on their past history and find that they aren’t up to the requirements of the role, without there being an unjustified disadvantage.

        Also, the “no win, no fee” places screen the cases that they take on, naturally – if they simply took on every case that crossed their door, they’d go out of business If they think you have a case that is unlikely to result in success, they won’t represent you, because it takes a lot of time and if they don’t get a fee for that time, then it makes it hard for them to pay their mortgage etc. Regular lawyers will take any case no matter how tenuous – because they get paid regardless of the outcome.

        • Craig H 1.1.1.1
          10 September 2016 at 11:56 am

          The ERA and Employment Court have been interpreting Unjustified Disadvantage very liberally in 90 day trial cases, so I think there may be a reasonable case depending on the precise circumstances.

          In particular, if someone is dismissed from their employment for performance issues with no employer feedback on the substandard performance during the course of the employment (which may have been the case here, but hard to say without more information), the ERA has held that this is not acting in good faith on the part of the employer, and therefore that this would fall under unjustified disadvantage. The longer the employment duration, the more likely this is.

          Also, this assumes that the 90 day trial clause in the employment agreement complies with the Employment Relations Act – the ERA and the courts have been very strict in their interpretation of these, and have thrown many of them out for seemingly minor technicalities.

          • Lanthanide 1.1.1.1.1
            10 September 2016 at 12:56 pm

            Yip, all true. There’s not really enough information here to judge either way, and even if there were more written, it’s just the authors opinion of what happened. There’s always two sides to every story.

            And yeah, the courts generally water this sort of legislation down over time, just like they’re trying to do at the moment with the stupid 3 strikes law that was passed, which has a ‘get-out’ clause that the punishment not be manifestly unjust. So far in the few cases that have gone to a 3rd strike, the judge in each case has found life imprisonment as mandated by the 3rd strike to be manifestly unjust and so have ignored it when sentencing. In other words the law has achieved precisely nothing except extra paperwork.

  2. Bill 2
    9 September 2016 at 3:16 pm

    Thank you to whoever cross-posted this.

    Finally a piece that isn’t blaming immigrants or migrant workers – an absolute relief.

    The problem is low wages. The problem is a rise in a culture of precarious and casualised work which has created structural unemployment and job scarcity. The problem is the laziness, incompetence and widespread sociopathy of both right and nominally left wing governments who have failed, dismally, to protect those of us who were not born into wealth and privilege.

    I’d call that a fair description of class war and note that it has no place for blaming foreigners – it’s structural, it’s political, it’s class.

    Oh. And I’m just cutting and pasting this next bit about John Key because I like it 🙂

    I’d call him a cunt for what he said about workers like me but he has neither the depth nor the warmth.

    • Rosie 2.1
      9 September 2016 at 3:31 pm

      “I’d call him a cunt for what he said about workers like me but he has neither the depth nor the warmth.”

      True. Key’s no pleasure zone………………

      Wonder if I should stop calling people twats…………?

      • Macro 2.1.1
        9 September 2016 at 4:03 pm

        I’d call them a “heel” or an “ankle” – it’s about as low as you can get.

      • reason 2.1.2
        11 September 2016 at 11:22 pm

        He’s a dirty thieving arse hole Rosie …… so in support of Chole I’ve compiled some info on our bent Key…… the leader mentioned in the Panama papers because of his work to help dirty money get washed in Nacts shiny New Zealand tax haven Inc …..

        Tax haven John has claimed not to remember where he stood on Nationals support of racist south africa ( he was for it), when New Zealand was the last country supporting their murderous apartheid regime…………. with the help of our all blacks ( but not Gaham mourie who stood down as captain and would not play them ).

        John key is a swindler and liar who has been supporting and building a system of economic Apartheid that tax havens and money laundering bring….. Rich criminals are speculating NZ kids out of houses and into homelessness ……

        His former employer Merrill Lynch was one of the worst investment banks committing wholesale fraud in the lead up to the global financial crisis ……
        they were about to go bankrupt and bring down the rotten u.s.a finance industry

        ‘senior official at the Richmond Fed, had sent an e-mail to his colleagues: “Merrill is really scary and ugly.”

        “The CEO of Bank of America, agreed to swallow one of the country’s most toxic investment houses. The deal was not altogether voluntary; as details have slowly emerged, the coercive role of the Fed and Treasury has loomed larger.

        “Merrill Lynch became the largest issuer of CDOs. By the end of 2008, Merrill Lynch had issued CDOs worth $136 billion.”

        “”In December 2008, Paulson and Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke put a gun to the head of Bank of America’s CEO and Board of Directors in order to force through a merger with Merrill Lynch”

        “The Treasury and Fed stated strongly that were the corporation to invoke the material adverse clause in the merger agreement with Merrill Lynch and fail to close the transaction, the Treasury and Fed would remove the board and management of the corporation,”…. acccording to minutes released by the committee Wednesday evening.’

        “were it not for the serious concerns regarding the status of the United States financial-services system” and the consequences that would have befallen the financial system as “articulated by the federal regulators,” Bank of America would have invoked the MAC clause’

        ” The government would invest another $20 billion into Bank of America—bringing the total TARP funds at the bank to $45 billion—and would also “provide protection against further losses” on $118 billion in toxic assets, primarily taken from the Merrill Lynch balance sheet.”

        ********************************************

        So John Key once worked anhd got fairly rich iin Merrill Lynch ….. but he was more of a double irish tax dodge artist helping corporations and rich criminals stiff their home countries and evade tax ……

        But I believe the next bit of info explains how john key came to own all of his Bank of America shares …… and ripped off the american public at the same time …….

        ‘Merrill Lynch was sold to Bank of America for 0.8595 shares of Bank of America common stock for each Merrill Lynch common share “…..

        No information about Merrill’s growing losses was provided to Bank of America’s shareholders before the vote, as several members of Congress noted at a June hearing to investigate the merger.

        Three months later—even before the deal closed—the engagement was on the rocks, the mood soured by staggering losses at Merrill, and Bank of America’s executives were looking for a way to break it off.

        Bank of America’s generosity allowed Merrill to dodge a bullet, as it was just days away from following Lehman into bankruptcy court.”

        ………… So to me it appears John Key had a shitload of Merrill shares which were about to be worth nothing as Merrill went bankrupt and truely reflect the value of bankster workers like john key ……….. but the forced share swap allowed him to rip off U.s tax payers and investors

        “Bank of America’s fraud resulted in “one of the biggest reverse transfers of wealth in history – from pensioners to financiers.”

        “lousy deal for Bank of America and its shareholders. On January16, the bank’s stock closed around $7 per share, as investors worried about both the size of the losses and the need for another government bailout. It reached its nadir of $3.14 per share six weeks later, a collapse of 90 percent since before Lewis decided to do the Merrill deal”

        No information about Merrill’s growing losses was provided to Bank of America’s shareholders before the vote, as several members of Congress noted at a June hearing to investigate the merger.

        “

        Some observers say Lewis’s failure to disclose to his shareholders the extent of the problems at Merrill before the shareholder vote may have constituted securities fraud: a violation of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s rule 10b-5, which prohibits any act or omission resulting in fraud or deceit in connection with the purchase or sale of any security. ….. “He committed classic securities fraud,” the senior Wall Street mergers banker says flatly.”

        John Keys work ethic is that of a greedy nasty swindler and I think he got very lucky and ripped of u.s.a citizens for millions and millions when Merrill was saved …..due to threat it could take down the u.s.a economy.

        Unfortunatly for New Zealand there will be no one to rescue New Zealand when our sub-prime bubble blower has trashed our economy and enviroment ………..

        He should be forced to drink his filthy fecal river water until he shits himself to death …..

        In the meantime I’d like to know the value of his Bank of America shares and if he ever brought any with his own money ………….

        I’d like to know how many of his merrill shares that he sold when he claimed to be alarmed at the risks merrill were taking during the 2000’s up until their fraud generated implosion ……..

        I’d like to know if any of the All blacks are now paying zero tax since Key has become their pony tail perv mascot ………….

        I’d like to know how much of the drug Alcohol he is drinking ….

        I’d put money on him being under the influence and pissed in parliament after some boozy lunches ……

        What else would make him belligerent, unable to understand simple questions ??

        Chole is a far far better New Zealander than our rich white trash sub-prime corrupt bubble blower …………………

        • Rosie 2.1.2.1
          13 September 2016 at 10:01 am

          Whoa! Yes, I know. I also wonder if he is a bit pissed sometimes too btw. Not that I can judge but I’m not running a country.

        • srylands 2.1.2.2
          13 September 2016 at 2:27 pm

          Much if this is slanderous lies.

          “Tax haven John has claimed not to remember where he stood on Nationals support of racist south africa ( he was for it), when New Zealand was the last country supporting their murderous apartheid regime…………. with the help of our all blacks ( but not Gaham mourie who stood down as captain and would not play them ).”

          At the time of the 1981 tour, John Key was completing his mid year third year accountancy exams at the University of Canterbury. He had started to date his now wife, and was working most of his other spare time in a stables to make enough money to live on. Paying attention to the Springboks tour was the last thing on his mind.

          As for all the other crap on this list – it is pure fantasy. You should have some standards and respect for the office. Posting gibberish like this will get you nowhere in life.

          • reasonh 2.1.2.2.2
            17 September 2016 at 9:22 am

            Srylands …. the only person in the history of the internet to admit donating money to lost sole slater for the running of his sewer blog points his smelly finger and whines ‘slanderous lies’ ….. he’s gone all golem with key as his precious ….

            I do apologize for mistyping the name of New Zealands greatest ever All Black captain ……Graham Mourie http://pukeariki.com/Learning-Research/Taranaki-Research-Centre/Taranaki-Stories/Taranaki-Story/id/629/title/springbok-tour-forces-brave-decision

            He should have gone to Mandelas funeral instead of the Key carpet baggers who supported the racist regime …. I wonder why Key overlooked him…

            The 81 rugby tour where rugby and the national party again supported Apartheid South Africa ….so soon after after ruining the Montreal Olympic games with a mass boycott for our previous support were extraordinary times ….where National divided the country and smeared our international reputations for cynical political reasons …. do we think it’s reasonable to think key supported the nats …. …..

            “In April 1973 Labour Prime Minister Norman Kirk abruptly called that tour off, fearing “the greatest eruption of violence this country has ever known”. But then Opposition leader Muldoon’s 1975 election promise to welcome a South African team helped him into Government.”

            ‘The entire Royal New Zealand Air Force, for example, was to be mobilised to transport police around the country on what turned out to be 881 flights involving 20,902 staff movements ….. For its part, the army undertook logistics, providing meals and installing barbed wire at match venues.’

            ‘Parliament, too, was plunged into chaos as protesters sought access and jumpy police prevented MPs without identification from entering the building’.

            ‘More than 1100 police were on hand in Palmerston North, compared with the 278 proposed at the outset of the tour.’

            ‘Muldoon, who had returned by this time, inflamed the mood further by releasing an SIS report claiming communist influence over the protest movement.’ ….( does key like communists ? )

            ‘The Red Squad in particular gained infamy, as its testosterone-charged personnel were set loose on hotspots around the ensuing games.

            Demonstrators were often clubbed before they were arrested.’

            “first test in Christchurch, 1473 police were on hand. Protesters who ran onto Lancaster Park were savagely dispatched.”

            “second test in Wellington’s Athletic Park, 1611 police were on duty, almost 1000 more than had been planned at the outset. So great were security concerns that the Springboks slept under the grandstand before the test.”

            “in the madness of the last game, the third test at Eden Park, Auckland, as missile-throwing protesters battled with police. By now staff ranks had ballooned to 2134. ….

            A Cessna aircraft buzzed the ground, dropping flour bombs on the crowd and the pitch, famously felling All Black prop Gary Knight”……

            I do not believe Key our Nact prime minister ‘can’t remember …… He knows the tour and support of Apartheid were wrong ……. just like his building tax havens for the rich and criminals is wrong ….. which he also tells lots of lies about ……

            Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I cannot confirm whether the Bahamas is a tax haven or not—I simply do not know.

            3) The Bahamas
            The Bahamas became widely popular as a tax haven in the 1990s after passing legislation that enabled the incorporation of offshore corporations and IBCs. It remains one of the preferred tax havens for residents of the United States and European countries. The Bahamas provides offshore banking, registration of offshore companies, registration of ships and offshore trust management. Offshore companies are not required to submit any accounting records to tax authorities.

            The Bahamas was the first Caribbean nation to adopt strict banking secrecy laws.

            Countries like the Bahamas make tax haven status an integral part of their marketing–relocate to Nassau, and you’ll fear no tax man. That’s because, for Bahamians and resident aliens there are no taxes on personal income, capital gains, inheritance or gifts.”
            *********************************

            So its obvious from Blips list and other sources that key is a tax haven building bullshitter …………. who has also clearly been pissed in parliament …. or been hit with a big angry stupid stick that makes him appear drunk……….

            The facts regarding Merrill being a toxic mess and at the center of the GFC is established fact ….The Bank of America was forced to buy it …..to prevent its bankruptcy and a feared chain reaction of financial collapse

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merrill_Lynch#Sale_to_Bank_of_America

            “Congressional testimony by Bank of America CEO Kenneth Lewis, as well as internal emails released by the House Oversight Committee, indicate that Bank of America was threatened with the firings of the management and board of Bank of America as well as damaging the relationship between the bank and federal regulators, if Bank of America did not go through with the acquisition of Merrill Lynch.[54][55][56]””

            It is also established fact that John keys major paper wealth ( that we know of) is Bank of America Shares ……. and this is how I’m picking he got them ….

            “The Wall Street Journal reported later that day that Merrill Lynch was sold to Bank of America for 0.8595 shares of Bank of America common stock for each Merrill Lynch common share,” ….

            So again the questions …… How many worthless Merrill shares did key have to swap?

            How many did he sell when he claimed to shocked at how naugthty merrill had become in the 2000’s since he left them ???…

            I doubt he sold any as their share price growth was impressive ( based on fraud ) and almost hit $100 per share …..

            the greed and cunning Key has would not have forewarned him of the GFC and Merrills spectacular collapse …….. http://money.stackexchange.com/questions/28490/merrill-lynch-historical-stock-prices-where-to-find

            Key is a dishonest greedy man who has made conditions hard for honest New Zealanders ….. and then blames the victims for their plight.

            He has a mean side to his corruption ………….

            He believes in economic Apartheid where the rich have different laws

            ” a contentious exemption of professional services firms – mostly lawyers, accountants and real estate agents – from being covered by anti-money laundering laws passed in 2009.”

            http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11706741

  3. Kay 3
    9 September 2016 at 3:17 pm

    Chloe, thank you for voicing what so many can’t. This essay needs to get onto the MSM sites which is probably wishful thinking, I know, but at the very least has to be circulated by all means possible to get the widest possible audience. Forget the politicians- we can’t reason with psychopaths.

    Myself, I’m dreading the introduction of the rewritten Social Security Act next year with its work emphasis. It’s not going to be safe having a disability that really does make you unable to hold down a job anymore- a lot of us a dreading the prospect of mandatory work testing and a replication of what’s going on in the UK.

    In the meantime all the talk of lazy and drug addled etc- I know that isn’t the case for me and many of my friends but the PMs words and these constant attacks are against us too. They can say no, of course we’re not talking about genuinely disabled people (as do their redneck supporters) but of course they are. The more all of us are beaten down- workers, beneficiaries, the more despondency and depression. Sometimes it’s a good idea to go on a media blackout for a while. Not easy with the internet but stay clear of NZ news and you can spare yourself being bashed for a while. It’s often necessary to save your sanity. I’m still trying to understand how the population at large has allowed this to happen, and doesn’t even seem to care?

    • Rosie 3.1
      9 September 2016 at 3:29 pm

      +1 Kay.

    • Bill 3.2
      9 September 2016 at 3:34 pm

      I’m still trying to understand how the population at large has allowed this to happen, and doesn’t even seem to care?

      There’s been a fair amount of liberal commentary to the effect that the shit Chloe has described is all down to migrant labour and immigrant workers. One effect of that line of argument is that it renders many working people invisible and denies the structural element behind crap situations. That, in turn, precludes the possibility of solidarity forming behind a push to change things.

      • AmaKiwi 3.2.1
        9 September 2016 at 4:37 pm

        “I’m still trying to understand how the population at large has allowed this to happen” . . . because we live in an elected dictatorship. There is NOTHING we can do between elections. National’s game plan for the next election includes:

        1. A lolly scramble to promote “the brighter future.”
        2. Manufacture a crisis so National gets re-elected.
        3. Discredit the personalities of opposition leaders so people ignore opposition policies.
        4. Promise “stable government” by warning any coalition will be chaos.
        5. Warn that the opposition will raise taxes. (Remember the CHC debate when Key pointed at Cunliffe and said, “Five new taxes.”)
        5. Lies, lies, and more lies about the phantom successes of National.

        We learned nothing from dictator Muldoon. Two Labour governments did ZERO to curb our parliamentary dictatorship. Until the people take power OVER parliament, we will always get screwed.

      • whispering kate 3.2.2
        9 September 2016 at 4:41 pm

        Chloe’s comment is what I find difficult to understand too. We have become a population of mean spirited cruel people who bury their heads in the sand and pretend everything is okay – if you are okay that is. It honestly staggers me when in conversation you have people you consider as being acquaintances or even friends ,and they come out with exactly what the PM has reiterated. Basic human kindness has disappeared from our communities – I often wonder why – all I can think of is God has deserted us – that spiritual benefactor of whatever religion you believe in – that this Godhead has given up on us all and left us to “dog eat dog”.

        I try every day to do a little something for people – I shop for an elderly lady and get great pleasure from it – what’s so hard about being actually kind to one another, there is such hatred of everybody everywhere. Young people are filled with hate and beat each other up and nearly kill each other – its not just older people who should know better. This Government and the previous Labour Government have created a terrible place to live in and the 1% are the only inhabitants who get any joy out of it.

        • AmaKiwi 3.2.2.1
          9 September 2016 at 4:53 pm

          @ whispering kate

          I am sorry you find so much anger, selfishness, and hatred in the world around you. The individuals I speak to daily have not lost their humanity.

          • jcuknz 3.2.2.1.1
            10 September 2016 at 8:24 am

            Since I started to need a walking stick I am frequently helped by complete strangers so WK is both correct and wrong in their estimation of NZ.

          • whispering kate 3.2.2.1.2
            10 September 2016 at 9:00 am

            Of course AmaKiwi there are citizens who care and are considerate of each other but the vitriole I hear from people around me who are less fortunate than us upsets me – all of us are a heat beat away from being put out of employment, beset with ill health and having to pay for expensive drugs, miss out of mortgage repayments, husband/wife walks out on the family unit. Life is pretty precarious at all times, these people with cold hearts have obviously never been in the same situation – heaven help them when it hits them, they will be ill prepared for it.

            Just as there is plenty of hatred and disrespect around us all the time so its a joy when we do meet people who will offer assistance to those in need.

          • The New Student 3.2.2.1.3
            11 September 2016 at 7:03 pm

            I’m sorry you feel the need to minimise somebody’s real life experiences. Good for you.

        • Chris 3.2.2.2
          9 September 2016 at 5:14 pm

          A lot of right wingers don’t understand that how a government runs a country, how it views citizens through laws, policies etc, is what influences culture and values, what we think is real and true how things are. So the right wingers’ mantra of self-reliance and less or no government translates into the belief that it’s okay to treat people like shit.

        • Draco T Bastard 3.2.2.3
          9 September 2016 at 5:14 pm

          This Government and the previous Labour Government have created a terrible place to live in and the 1% are the only inhabitants who get any joy out of it.

          QFT

          Labour have always been a capitalist party. They actually fully support capitalism and won’t do anything to remove it.

        • Bill 3.2.2.4
          9 September 2016 at 5:23 pm

          We’re all meant to be rationally optimising economic units these days, not crying, and celebrating, hurting and loving people or human beings.

          A lot of effort has gone into cementing that economically reductionist norm in place…it’s become banal now and even passes unmentioned at such levels as the format of game shows (Temporary co-operation with a constant eye out for the moment presenting the opportunity to ‘fuck ’em over and get ahead’…)

          It was a good crack for those who saw apparent improvement in their lives result from espousing such ideas as ‘no such thing as society’ or ‘equal opportunity’ before the impartial market; for those who ditched the vestiges of their humanity for the prospect of shinier baubles and rounds of applause clapping on their blame-free gains…

          And maybe many of those who didn’t jump aboard the bandwagon are now quite reasonably suspicious of those who did what they did to ‘get ahead’ given that their actions are institutionally sanctioned and encouraged.

          And anyway… what you doing that woman’s shopping for? Don’t you care that your actions are robbing someone of an opportunity to offer a money spinning service? Shame on you! /sarc

        • Liberal Realist 3.2.2.5
          9 September 2016 at 8:46 pm

          Your comments resonate whispering kate.

          I too have noticed over the years that our society has become inconsiderate, unkind and sometimes nasty. Especially toward those less fortunate than themselves. The attitude some New Zealanders display toward people in poverty, in distress or those on benefits is nothing short of narcissistic.

          The society being created is individualistic, selfish , myopic, bigoted & greedy. Human kindness, thoughtfulness, honesty, integrity, ethics, community, inclusiveness and diversity are seriously wanting in modern 21st century New Zealand. Key and National have set the stage for social malaise, poverty and class war for decades to come, even should we wake up and send National packing the damage may never be undone. Labour are also guilty to a lesser extent but guilty none the less.

          New Zealanders are guilty as a whole. We keep electing governments based on “what’s best for me” rather than “what’s best for all New Zealanders”.

    • Draco T Bastard 3.3
      9 September 2016 at 5:10 pm

      In the meantime all the talk of lazy and drug addled etc

      The lazy and drug ad;ed are the rich. They’re the ones that have real alcohol problems and their complaining about others not working hard enough is really them complaining that they’re not making enough profit from others work.

    • mickysavage 4.1
      9 September 2016 at 3:20 pm

      *whoosh

      • BM 4.1.1
        9 September 2016 at 3:24 pm

        Why whoosh?, the author is struggling to get ahead and the only way her situation is going to improve is if she gets some skills that pays better.

        She’s got heaps of hospitality experience combine that in with management skills and she’ll no longer have to work multiple jobs because she’ll be making enough coin to live and probably live quite comfortably.

        • mickysavage 4.1.1.1
          9 September 2016 at 3:27 pm

          She is very skilled. She is writing about the plight of many in the community and how Key insulted them this week. Seems her argument went way over your head.

          • Chuck 4.1.1.1.1
            9 September 2016 at 4:51 pm

            “She is very skilled” I agree she seems to of had a board range of jobs over the years. Which begs the question why has she not become a small business owner? For example domestic / commercial cleaning…a good operator can earn a reasonable income. And yes at a point in my life I did do exactly that to support my family (cleaning other peoples toilets).

            However Chloe’s article is full of rhetoric that undoes most of her argument.

            • Draco T Bastard 4.1.1.1.1.1
              9 September 2016 at 5:17 pm

              For example domestic / commercial cleaning…a good operator can earn a reasonable income.

              Chances are, competition and lack of funds.

              However Chloe’s article is full of rhetoric that undoes most of her argument.

              Then lets see you actually do that rather than making unsubstantiated assertions.

            • Shona 4.1.1.1.1.2
              9 September 2016 at 5:32 pm

              She’s a single parent! She’s a woman without the means to pay off a loan. Running a business while raising a young family is recipe for stress and serious health problems down the line. I have two offspring with serious anxiety/depression as a result of the stress of their parents absences( running a small business) when they were young. Running a business without a partner in the family home is difficult road for the most robust of us . The family is always negatively affected. Despite material wealth.

              • maninthemiddle …
                11 September 2016 at 2:01 pm

                “She’s a single parent! She’s a woman without the means to pay off a loan.”

                An yet she has time to be “an artist, teacher (currently looking for secondary teaching work), political writer, community activist” and “working in the low waged service industry for ten years and counting”. (https://millennialposse.wordpress.com/about/).

                Here’s some advice, and it’s free. Get a real job.

                • One Anonymous Bloke …
                  12 September 2016 at 8:43 am

                  Is illiterate, innumerate, and thinks teaching isn’t a real job. Without social activists, he’d be keeping slaves.

                  • One Anonymous Bloke …
                    12 September 2016 at 9:22 am

                    …without political writers, he’d have nothing to rote-learn, and without artists, no way to express other people’s opinions at all.

                  • maninthemiddle …
                    12 September 2016 at 11:32 am

                    She isn’t teaching. She’s “currently looking for secondary teaching work”. She’s perfectly free to be a social activist. But not to moan when it doesn’t pay the bills.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      12 September 2016 at 12:21 pm

                      Here’s illiterate, innumerate, hypocritical, lying nanny mitm to tell her what she can and can’t say.

                    • maninthemiddle …
                      12 September 2016 at 1:44 pm

                      “mitm to tell her what she can and can’t say.”

                      Not so. I’m simply pointing out she shouldn’t moan that not enough people want to read her rantings to earn an income. She has a child, supposedly. Get a real job and pay the bills.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      12 September 2016 at 2:23 pm

                      …and I’m just saying that even if you weren’t a vicious little poison-troll, you still wouldn’t be competent to offer advice.

                      Your malice towards the author of this post is all you have to offer.

                    • maninthemiddle …
                      13 September 2016 at 11:45 am

                      “Your malice towards the author of this post is all you have to offer.’

                      ‘Malice’? Huh? Questioning her misrepresentation isn’t malice. It is honest interrogation. Her’s was a public post after all.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      13 September 2016 at 11:49 am

                      No. In comment 17 you outright accused the author of dishonesty, twice, rather than even allowing for the possibility of her justifying her position or being honestly mistaken.

                      Malice.

                    • maninthemiddle …
                      13 September 2016 at 12:01 pm

                      ” In comment 17 you outright accused the author of dishonesty, twice, rather than even allowing for the possibility of her justifying her position or being honestly mistaken.”

                      You need to look up the definition of mailce. I mean Chloe no ill will. She is just dishonest, and I’m calling bs on it.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      15 September 2016 at 6:11 am

                      😆

            • DoublePlusGood 4.1.1.1.1.3
              9 September 2016 at 5:34 pm

              You miss the point – why isn’t she able to get secure work that pays enough to live on?
              You can’t have everybody in the country own a business.

              • maninthemiddle …
                11 September 2016 at 2:02 pm

                Why? Simple. She made poor choices in her tertiary education (at our expense by the way), and decided being a community activist was more important than actually earning a decent living.

            • jcuknz 4.1.1.1.1.4
              10 September 2016 at 8:36 am

              However Chloe’s article is full of rhetoric that undoes most of her argument.

              sadly that is true and I remember more vividly a similar article by an American woman who was also on the bottom rung pointing out the hopelessness of her situation and why she makes bad choices out of that hopeless state.’

              I did cleaning at one stage but latest report I heard was that it too suffers from cost cutting with subcontracting sub-franchises.

        • Psycho Milt 4.1.1.2
          9 September 2016 at 3:54 pm

          Why whoosh?, the author is struggling to get ahead and the only way her situation is going to improve is if she gets some skills that pays better.

          The “whoosh” part is that the post isn’t about one individual being in the position of having to put up with the shit that comes with low-wage jobs, and what she might do to get out of that situation. It’s about the shit that comes with low-wage jobs and its effect on the people doing those jobs.

          If this particular individual does a managerial course and gets a better-paying job, does that mean no-one in the country from that point on has to put up with the shit that comes with low-wage jobs? Pretty obviously not, which is why people are writing “whoosh” or “facepalm” under your comment.

        • TopHat 4.1.1.3
          9 September 2016 at 3:57 pm

          You’re a heel.
          That’s 3 foot lower than a cunt!

        • Draco T Bastard 4.1.1.4
          9 September 2016 at 5:15 pm

          Why whoosh?, the author is struggling to get ahead and the only way her situation is going to improve is if she gets some skills that pays better.

          Being a secretary actually requires a high level of education and skill. I wouldn’t be surprised if she knew as much about how a business works as the bloody managers that just dismissed her.

          • BM 4.1.1.4.1
            9 September 2016 at 5:19 pm

            It’s all about the bit of paper though.

            Unfortunately if you don’t have documented skills you’re considered to have no skills.

            It sucks but that’s the way the world has gone.

            • McFlock 4.1.1.4.1.1
              9 September 2016 at 5:25 pm

              Nah.

              The bit of paper is easily ignored when you “fit in” with the bosses or the team.

              That’s the way the world has always been, but it’s slowly changing…

              • BM …
                9 September 2016 at 5:26 pm

                It’s when you apply for a job, if you don’t have documented skills or the necessary job title your cv goes straight in the bin.

                Doesn’t matter how much experience you have no one will get to hear about

                • McFlock …
                  9 September 2016 at 5:38 pm

                  unless you know someone who says “hey we’ve got this job opening up, if you’re interested”.

                  I’ve gotten more jobs that way than formally applying based just on the advert. But even those ones I’ve had interviews while being patently underqualified, or even been hired even though my skills and experience were tangentially (at best) related to the job. Soft skills and patronage are a thousand times more useful than a formal qualification.

                  Lots of people have generic “manager” or “computers” bits of paper that got them nowhere. Playing the “oh, I’ll get another certificate, then everything will be fine” game is falling for the con.

                • One Anonymous Bloke …
                  9 September 2016 at 5:42 pm

                  Word of mouth is still the best form of advertising I’ve ever come across. This applies to the job market as it does to any other.

                  I’d suggest you reflect on the implications of that, if you weren’t a signpost.

                • Stuart Munro …
                  10 September 2016 at 9:54 am

                  Getting on for 3/4 of jobs don’t go through the CV mill. Word of mouth and personal recommendations. This is how the worst woodwork teacher in Christchurch grew up to be NZ’s worst public sector manager. No skills, no brains, no soul and no application. And we’re paying for him massively upfront, under the table, and in reconstruction delays.

            • Shona 4.1.1.4.1.2
              9 September 2016 at 5:37 pm

              My offspring all have bits of paper. Trades or degrees. They have been treated like shit under this government.No permanent full time jobs for the 2 with degrees. Teaching the only option for them. Both had the 90 day sacking no breaks low pay , RSI, back injury no pay joy of working in shitty old NZ! All headed to Aussie to get permanent full time jobs! I hope they never come back to NZ. I have always regretted doing so.!

          • James 4.1.1.4.2
            10 September 2016 at 8:16 am

            If she knew so much and was so good – they may not have let her go.

            Perhaps – just perhaps she was not good enough.

            Neither of us have the information to know how good or not she was – but just as their are bad employers there are poor employees – she might just be one.

            • Draco T Bastard 4.1.1.4.2.1
              10 September 2016 at 9:09 am

              If she knew so much and was so good – they may not have let her go.

              I get the feeling that they would have let her go just to avoid the pay rise that would have been coming up. It’s pretty much how our useless managerial class works these days – they’re a bunch of fucken morons.

            • The New Student 4.1.1.4.2.2
              11 September 2016 at 7:12 pm

              If there was actually such a disconnect between perceived performance then why did management not bring this up sooner? Pretty shoddy way to run things.

        • UncookedSelachimorpha 4.1.1.5
          9 September 2016 at 7:15 pm

          Bullshit Merchant. Missing the point on purpose. Plenty of money in this country for everyone to live comfortably already.

          • BM 4.1.1.5.1
            9 September 2016 at 7:29 pm

            No there isn’t too many people with a entitlement attitude.

            Saw an interesting video, explains where this problem comes from.

            • b waghorn 4.1.1.5.1.1
              9 September 2016 at 7:38 pm

              ha ha he goes on about working for everything then he asks for donations , fucking classic , what a bludger

            • Ch-ch Chiquita 4.1.1.5.1.2
              10 September 2016 at 12:21 pm

              Are you that stupid?
              The reason students were happy to be able to stay on their parents’ health insurance is because otherwise they would be left without healthcare as it is so expansive and if your employer doesn’t have (or doesn’t want to provide) a good scheme you are left on the street.

              And all those things he lists as awful socialism that creates selfishness? might as well say he would like to go back to slavery.
              I don’t think capitalism is the mother of all evil just as I don’t think socialism will solve all of our problems, but the system we currently have is not capitalism and we are abandoning socialism. The system we currently have is feudalism where the biggest bludgers who shout the loudest about the hand of the free market, are the first ones to ask for the government to intervene on their behalf so they will not loose money.

              • ropata …
                11 September 2016 at 2:06 am

                At least under feudalism the landed gentry had some responsibilities to the peasantry, and they didn’t have to work like robots year round, day and night. We don’t even have that, we have debt/wage slavery and mercenary exploitation. More like Dickensian England.

                Western governments have become completely mercantile and focused only on the needs of their donors, the people subjects unwashed masses are a resource to be plundered just like the rest of the planet.

        • North 4.1.1.6
          9 September 2016 at 9:11 pm

          Really BM……..Chloe has immeasurably more skills than you. Chief being to help and care for others. Really BM……. your gratuitous career advice = spam.

          Thank you Chloe ! Arohanui Chloe ! Emotion brought up is powerful. Lets me know that I know and reminds me I don’t know. Greatest respect to you Chloe !

          • BM 4.1.1.6.1
            9 September 2016 at 9:56 pm

            Can you program in multiple languages,? strip down and fix a car/truck?, build a house and I mean all facets of the build?, landscape your yard.?

            Like to hear your skills, cock.

            • UncookedSelachimorpha 4.1.1.6.1.1
              9 September 2016 at 10:33 pm

              Sounds like some insecurity showing through there, BM. Some of us can’t do much, but we are still of value.

            • One Two 4.1.1.6.1.2
              9 September 2016 at 11:28 pm

              It makes no difference what you claim you’re capable of because with the attitude you exhibit I would say it’s highly likely you’re embellishing at best

              You come to this site as an agitator looking down on others through weasel words and which reek of low self esteem

              There are some low levels of awareness exhibited on this site and you’re right at the bottom end…and then some

        • The New Student 4.1.1.7
          11 September 2016 at 7:07 pm

          You’re missing the point. Why should those without these “management skills” be treated like crap?

    • Anno1701 4.2
      9 September 2016 at 3:23 pm

      “Go do a managerial degree”

      *facepalm…..

      Id call you a c*#t , but you appear to lack the depth or the warmth….

    • Rosie 4.3
      9 September 2016 at 3:57 pm

      BM. It pains me to have to respond to you.

      Let me tell you as someone who has been a retail manager in small and large stores most of my working life, as well as repping on the road as a sales manager, these managerial courses only line the pockets of private so called education providers whose sole purpose is to strip you of your cash.

      A good employer knows the worth of a good worker and promotes them. You can’t take a phoney corporate model and stick it over a hospitality and service industry model. It doesn’t fit.

      But promotion doesn’t pay these days. If you think Chloe is going to earn more money because she attended a course you’re dreaming.

      17 odd years ago I used to be on $19 an hour as a floor manager. Now days I haven’t had offers over $16 per hour. Wages in the service industry are dropping. Conditions are dropping, and they are more appalling than ever, as Chloe pointed out. Work is precarious, life feels cheap and you feel cheated.

      Just quit blaming the victim. You’re like a freaking broken record.

      • Draco T Bastard 4.3.1
        9 September 2016 at 5:23 pm

        17 odd years ago I used to be on $19 an hour as a floor manager. Now days I haven’t had offers over $16 per hour. Wages in the service industry are dropping.

        Yep. I’ve had similar experiences. When I was first working on a help desk I was getting $40k base pay with another $10k bonus. Nowadays a help desk job starts at around $35k and you might get $5k bonus.

        Wages go down. This is actually the correct thing for them to do but the flip side of that is that society is then able to utilise those people with higher paying jobs as the economy is developed. We don’t do the latter because that cuts in to profits.

    • vto 4.4
      9 September 2016 at 4:04 pm

      BM, that has nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with what Chloe is talking about.

      Your point is also a complete nonsense… how on earth could all such people run businesses? Do you think a world could exist where there are no cleaners, drivers, tea-makers etc.

      This is about the low-paid sector.

      It is not about those who can get ahead.

      wake up silly

      • UncookedSelachimorpha 4.4.1
        9 September 2016 at 7:21 pm

        “Do you think a world could exist where there are no cleaners, drivers, tea-makers etc.

        This is about the low-paid sector.

        It is not about those who can get ahead.”

        That is the exact proper answer to the BS from Bullshit Merchant. There are always some people who are less well-off, and they need to be treated much better than they currently are in NZ.

  5. Rosie 5
    9 September 2016 at 3:28 pm

    Firstly Chloe, thank you for your articulate fact filled post which has come blazing from your heart and your head.

    Secondly, I’m sorry to hear of the psychological damage that work has done to you. Are you feeling safe and do you have help and support?

    Thirdly, you are not alone in your despair at the insult Key hurled at ten’s of thousands of us. I’m unemployed. I’m not lazy, stoned or otherwise. I am unwell, but I do try to find appropriate work. It is so hard these days to be treated with respect by employers let alone common decent good manners, that’s not even on the cards.What he said angered me so much I physically reacted. My cheeks actually burned with anger. If he had any fucking clue he wouldn’t have said that, but he doesn’t.

    All we can do is work together to send him packing next year.

    Kia Kaha Chloe. Be well.

    • righty right 5.1
      9 September 2016 at 4:40 pm

      well instead moaning the low wage workers must vote and get rid of the wanker

      • Rosie 5.1.1
        9 September 2016 at 4:47 pm

        And you think we’re not already doing that? And we’ll moan all we like thank you very much. We will not shut up because you find our voices tiresome.

  6. Sabine 6
    9 September 2016 at 3:37 pm

    + 1 to this post

    and i guess these guys here have just all to go and get themselves a managarial degree and then they won’t be exploited and short changed.
    right?
    right?

    http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/top/312808/migrant-workers-paid-$8-hr,-exploited,-report-reveals

  7. Eralc 7
    9 September 2016 at 4:00 pm

    I recently worked with a global recruitment company that had a large business division that specialised solely in recuitment for the trades, labourers etc. Of all the divisions in the company, this one had the most challenges in finding NZ-based people resources for one-off roles to small, medium and large scale projects (particularly Christchurch and Auckland).

    Like Chloe and Rosie, there are some fantastic people in NZ who are motivated and want to work and who get out there and do it despite any challenges they may face, but there are not enough of them. Hence, the need to source and bring in people from overseas to fill the roles and maintain business momentum.

    I’ve actually seen with my own eyes people coming in looking for work or reporting for work via employment agencies as part of their conditions, eyes glazed, who could barely stand up. The staff needed to be pretty tough and resilient in dealing with them. Not a job for the faint-hearted.

    • McFlock 7.1
      9 September 2016 at 4:22 pm

      A few points spring to mind:

      Firstly, what you describe is classic WINZ bs – making people apply for work that they’re patently unsuited for, rather than helping them find work they can do well. I had it, my family had it, and it was just another form of bullying of the poor, as far as I was concerned.

      Secondly, there is not a shortage of competent low/semi-skilled workers in NZ. There’s a shortage of employers who are prepared to treat them like people, so some prospective employees respongd in kind. Keeping wages down with low-skilled immigration just continues the problem.

      The old saying is that if you pay peanuts you get monkeys. Well, more accurately, if your paycheque tells people they’re shit, you’ll get a shit response. I’ve seen workers pilfering, turning up drunk, ignoring customers and other staff… but only in workplaces that nobody wanted to be in, neither the staff nor the managers. Companies with good conditions don’t just get better employees, they don’t even have to work hard to get good recruits (word of mouth from current staff about vacancies generally fills the position). No need to use WINZ and their “apply for this job or you lose your benefit” at all.

      • Rosie 7.1.1
        9 September 2016 at 4:25 pm

        +1 McFlock

      • Stuart Munro 7.1.2
        10 September 2016 at 11:45 am

        The Russians have a saying: ” As long as they pretend to pay us, we will pretend to work.”

        • McFlock 7.1.2.1
          10 September 2016 at 5:25 pm

          Years ago I was talking with a self-employed barista – when the minimum wage was around $10/hr.

          He reckoned, if I recall correctly: “For $11/hr I’ll turn up to work. For $12/hr I’ll turn up on time. For $13/hr I’ll do the job as if I care. For $14/hr I’ll pretend to enjoy it. And for $15/hr, I’ll actually give a damn and try to use my initiative for the company. But because every fucking employer expected me to do all that while paying $11/hr, I got this coffee cart. It’s not the best paying job in the world, but if I want to tell a wanker to fuck off, I can.”

          • Craig H 7.1.2.1.1
            11 September 2016 at 3:27 pm

            Reasonable points. I’d argue that minimum wage entitles the employer to a staff member who turns up reliably and on time at normal hours, but that’s about it. If an employer wants experience, qualifications and/or less normal hours, they pay more.

      • Shane 7.1.3
        22 September 2016 at 8:51 pm

        DiZagreb. My experience as an employer is often the better you treat people the more you get ripped off or they take advantage.
        Example. 10 years ago. Help desk started at 35k ish. We paid 45k. We also had 10%of the working week as paid mandatory training with course fees paid and rebates over a period of time.
        4 weeks holidays, unlimited sick leave (welless policy), workers told to bugger off home if they cracked 45 hours per week – and that was repaid as time in lieu as we value home and life more than working people into the ground.
        In return we expect people to work hard and diligently.
        We got more than a few who wanted the perks but couldn’t or wouldn’t complete basic check listed jobs. Tried retraining, warning, changing work but as soon as you enforced basic standards like turning up on time and saying eating breakfast from 8.30 till 9.30 is not working then all he’ll broke loose.
        Cost me thousands. Hired an immagrant who turned up at my door one day. Best worker..and together we got him his residency. I’m now god father to his son and he is running his own business – because he didn’t take stuff for granted. Too many young nzers want to win *got talent and run the business with out putting in set equity.
        Better conditions and better wages does not equal better workers.

        • McFlock 7.1.3.1
          26 September 2016 at 11:48 am

          From my point of view, the problem is that you viewed those conditions as “perks” for which you expected hard and diligent work in exchange. Those raise red flags about your actual relationship with your employees, as does the breakfast schedule – wtf??? And TOIL for overtime? that’s big of you /sarc

          Yes, there will always be a few dropkicks in the workforce, the question is why you seemed to hire so many of them.

    • Rosie 7.2
      9 September 2016 at 4:45 pm

      Hi Eralc.

      The thing is we don’t know people’s life stories, we can’t judge them on face value. Is that recruitment company applicant person hungover from last night because they’ve given up hope or have they had a poor sleep due to sleeping on a mattress, not enough bed coverings in a cold mouldy room in an over priced flat, who then got up and didn’t have a healthy breakfast or even the basics because they have no money?

      It’s hard to know isn’t it?

      I, at least, have a warm comfortable dry home, so no complaints there – but it costs a fortune to have a warm dry home. Thanks for the acknowledgement but I’m less disadvantaged in respect of healthy housing – which makes a real impact on a person’s well being.

      I’m also interested to know if you think Key’s statements are appropriate for a leader regardless of our views on whether NZ workers are any good or not (And I think we are, I think we’re troopers who give a huge amount for little in return). Do you think it’s offensive that he speaks of his fellow citizens this way?

    • mauī 7.3
      9 September 2016 at 5:16 pm

      I’ve found some recruitment companies to be exploitative with a callous attitude. After explicitly telling them I was only interested in office based skilled work, a couple of days later with few details one company told me to report for work for unskilled labouring. Then after I left the worksite as it wasn’t what I signed up for, I was lambasted on the phone and told not to bother with their company any more. They continued to give me unsolicited texts for months afterwards about new unskilled jobs they wanted me to do. The assholes, it definitely cuts both ways.

    • The New Student 7.4
      11 September 2016 at 7:34 pm

      “…there are some fantastic people in NZ who are motivated and want to work and who get out there and do it despite any challenges they may face, but there are not enough of them.”

      Utter rubbish. I know of so many who fit this description perfectly who are struggling. And when they are FINALLY thrown a bone, guess what? Turns out they’re the best damn worker that lucky employer has had in a long time. Like, really? This same story is on repeat and seems like it will be for a long time to come. The blame lies squarely with shonky employers who either fail to recognise and reward good talent; or who actively choose to ignore it.

      All of us know of at least one person in this situation or in Chloe’s situation. I’m sorry but it’s real. You can shout it down all you want but until its properly fixed it won’t go away. So why not be part of a solution instead of perpetuating an unnecessary problem?

      • The lost sheep 7.4.1
        11 September 2016 at 7:41 pm

        Why would an employer actively ignore the ‘best damn worker they have had in a long time’?

        I’m an employer myself, and know very many others, and without exception the one thing we all want for Xmas is that best damn worker. There is no logic at all in deliberately ignoring what you most want …..

        • One Anonymous Bloke 7.4.1.1
          13 September 2016 at 8:01 am

          Why? Because our managerial culture is shit, and infested with Talleyism?

          Not you, of course, you’re a great boss and a paragon of virtue, in spite of your Tory vacuity and self-regard.

          No, wait, you voted for this shit.

          • The lost sheep 7.4.1.1.1
            13 September 2016 at 8:09 am

            Why? Because our managerial culture is shit, and infested with Talleyism?
            Vacuous as usual OAB. Your lips are moving, but the noises you are making have no meaning.

            • One Anonymous Bloke 7.4.1.1.1.1
              13 September 2016 at 8:28 am

              That it means nothing to you says something about you. The employment court is full of cases where good workers are being deliberately shafted and you have the insolence to come here pretending everything is rosy.

              You asked: “Why would an employer actively ignore the ‘best damn worker they have had in a long time’?”

              Ask any union member at AFFCO, airbag.

              • The lost sheep …
                13 September 2016 at 9:26 am

                I see the way your red herring is swimming, but, back to the contention I actually raised.
                The New Student claimed that employers were actively ignoring ‘the best damn workers’.

                You are an employer aren’t you OAB? Is that how you conduct your employment policies?

                Or, where you have a job you need done, do you actually put a significant amount of effort into ensuring that the person you employ is actually ‘the best’ possible fit for that role?
                Because getting the wrong person is almost always extremely counter productive to what your business is trying to achieve isn’t it?
                So why would you deliberately sabotage your own business?

                It’s like suggesting that most employees deliberately turn down the best damn job they were ever offered. The logic is?

                • One Anonymous Bloke …
                  13 September 2016 at 11:42 am

                  The example demonstrates that you don’t really know how good someone will be until after they’ve got the job. Your argument not only ignores the Talley reality, it fails to address the point at all.

                  • The lost sheep …
                    13 September 2016 at 12:51 pm

                    The example demonstrates that you don’t really know how good someone will be until after they’ve got the job.

                    Exactly. Hence trial periods?
                    Which brings us back to the point.
                    If you have a job you need doing, and over 90 days someone has proved themselves the best damn worker ever….why would you not give them the job?

                    You ARE an employer aren’t you OAB?
                    If so, you will understand all the many reasons that good staff make a business and bad staff breaks it, and why you would never arbitrarily refuse to employ the best damn worker ever.

                    With your employers hat on, you will also have a fair idea what Chloe’s issue is likely to be won’t you?

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      13 September 2016 at 1:16 pm

                      Chloe doesn’t have an “issue” – If you’re looking for a problem try Tory incompetence and malice.

                      You’ll blame your employees, you’ll blame economic conditions. You’ll ignore NZ economic reality and blame “the Left”. You’ll blame the unions, you’ll blame overseas labour conditions, you’ll blame the market. The thing you lot never do is take personal responsibility for your personal failures.

                      Exhibit a: Peter Talley’s gong.

                    • The lost sheep …
                      13 September 2016 at 3:37 pm

                      You ARE an employer aren’t you OAB?

                    • reason …
                      18 September 2016 at 3:23 pm

                      the lost sheep has a VIP job in marketing for rugby unions super 15 competition….

                      He’s done some fantastic work advertising old school rugby traditions ….. like the team bonding celebration where players lick arse-holes ……… and a stolen lick is worth the most.

                      De-motivational management by judgemental arse-holes is his other area of knowledge …. getting the right mix of desperation and fear in employees his specialty……

                      Creepy around women and a hatred of unions are also parts of his business success …………..

                      He’s a Non creative guru sheep ……….

  8. alwyn 8
    9 September 2016 at 4:08 pm

    What a terrible waste of her time.
    If she had actually read what John Key had said she wouldn’t have had to write this work.
    She might have been able to complain about how low-paid workers are treated but she wouldn’t have had to bother about Key’s own remarks. He wasn’t, after all, talking about hard-working people. He was talking about those who won’t work.
    Shame really. Such a waste of her effort.

    • Anno1701 8.1
      9 September 2016 at 4:15 pm

      id call you a c*#t but….

      nah your just a c*#t…..

    • mickysavage 8.2
      9 September 2016 at 4:17 pm

      Really Alwyn? You get that much precision from what Key said?

      He was quoted as saying:

      “But go and ask the employers, and they will say some of these people won’t pass a drug test, some of these people won’t turn up for work, some of these people will claim they have health issues later on. So it’s not to say there aren’t great people who transition from Work and Income to work, they do, but it’s equally true that they’re also living in the wrong place, or they just can’t muster what is required to actually work.”

      Looks like Key was referring to people who were working as well as those not working. And the legislative minefield that he has created traps people like Chloe into low paid and unsecure jobs.

      • TC 8.2.1
        9 September 2016 at 4:37 pm

        We need better tr&lls mickey, also the shonky one needs to work on his act to provide more succinct material for his acolytles and shills to work with.

        Sloppy work all round from the neoliberal militia.

      • Bill 8.2.2
        9 September 2016 at 5:31 pm

        It’s the repeated reference to ‘these people‘ as though he’s talking about something dangling off the end of some jobby stick he’s holding that gets me.

      • One Anonymous Bloke 8.2.3
        9 September 2016 at 5:46 pm

        health issues

        He’s talking about everybody.

        Ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls. your Prime Minister.

      • mosa 8.2.4
        9 September 2016 at 10:07 pm

        Legislative minefield designed to trap +100 Mickey
        First English with his “young guys have no brains” and now Key with his latest instalment about lazy and drug addicted low wage workers…
        Christ we deserve better than this…. it just gets worse day by day

      • Lanthanide 8.2.5
        10 September 2016 at 12:08 am

        Micky, I listened to the interview at the time. That answer was to the question of why we are bringing in foreigners to do these jobs when we have lots of unemployed people in New Zealand already. Guyon specifically mentioned fruit picking as a job that these people could be doing.

        Alwyn is correct, Chloe has interpreted Key’s remarks as an attack on hardworking NZers, when in context, they weren’t.

        • Incognito 8.2.5.1
          10 September 2016 at 12:50 am

          I think this should be seen in a larger context. The context in which Bill English refers to Kiwis looking for work as “pretty damned hopeless”, in which homelessness and poverty are on the increase and at unacceptable levels, in which inequality is on the rise, etc.

          This Government has shown it cares very little for the Precariat to which Chloe King and many thousands of Kiwis belong.

          To justify its own actions and inactions it invents arguments and sticky labels that resonate well with the uncritical masses; labels such as “lazy” and “druggy”. If these are not enough it can and does always fall back on “unqualified”, “poor decisions”, “bad choices”, “self-responsibility” and other neo-liberal ‘mantras’ or memes.

          None of this Government’s actions or its PR spin makes one iota of difference for the Precariat and what Chloe King wrote about in her post. The sad thing is that so many people get sucked in by John Key, his CT-scripted BS and his ‘definition’ of hardworking Kiwis.

        • fisiani 8.2.5.2
          10 September 2016 at 4:37 pm

          Key’s comments were about the people who are choosing not to work or making themself unemployable.

          • One Anonymous Bloke 8.2.5.2.1
            12 September 2016 at 6:18 am

            Then he was lying, because their numbers are insufficient as a reason to bring in migrant workers.

    • vto 8.3
      9 September 2016 at 5:08 pm

      that’s really very ignorant alwyn..

      Imagine Key having the same sort of interview about, say sharebrokers, and replacing “drug-addled” with “crooked”

      or, say farmers, and replacing “drug-addled” with “polluters”

      or, say .. pretty much any other group of workers

      very ignorant alwyn

      • mosa 8.3.1
        9 September 2016 at 10:20 pm

        Or all National MPs are corrupt !! well put VTO

      • Draco T Bastard 8.3.2
        10 September 2016 at 2:05 am

        Imagine Key having the same sort of interview about, say sharebrokers, and replacing “drug-addled” with “crooked”

        or, say farmers, and replacing “drug-addled” with “polluters”

        Sorry, really can’t imagine Key actually telling the truth.

    • Shona 8.4
      9 September 2016 at 5:47 pm

      She’s a paid blogger you Tory
      shithead!
      That is she’s a professional writer. Right now this is is her only income due to the inexcusable incompetence of her last employer. No doubt they were arsehole National voters just like you!

      • One Anonymous Bloke 8.4.1
        9 September 2016 at 5:52 pm

        She’s self employed and pursuing the market dream* and still these toadies can’t contain their hatred and resentment.

        *terms and conditions apply.

      • James 8.4.2
        10 September 2016 at 8:23 am

        I wonder if this professional writer – paid blogger is indeed declaring any income from this to WINZ ?

        • One Anonymous Bloke 8.4.2.1
          10 September 2016 at 8:33 am

          …and malice. Don’t forget malice.

        • reason 8.4.2.2
          12 September 2016 at 12:31 am

          John Key builds a New Zealand tax haven where rich criminals and cheats pay zero ….as in no tax plus they speculate on our homes to wash their dirty money …..

          Unemployed citizens on a benefit get taxed at 80% for every dollar they earn when the exceed $80 gross from part time work etc…… this is roughly $65 in the hand …

          James uses this as a threat against chole

          James supports keys economic Apartheid …………

          Go drink some dairy run off james ………… otherwise known as NZ river water.

          you’ve earned it

    • b waghorn 8.5
      9 September 2016 at 6:12 pm

      He may not of been talking about people like Cloe, but instead of being a leader and saying that he is going to actively find ways to help these people that are struggling to become functioning members of society ,( because it is only the government that can do that sort of work)he decides to keep pouring the hate out of his shitty little gob, he isn’t fit to lead a country and should fuck off back to grubbing money for a living.

  9. roy cartland 9
    9 September 2016 at 4:19 pm

    “reporter Jesse Mulligan”.

    Really?

    • left for dead 9.1
      10 September 2016 at 11:57 am

      That is my thought too Roy, Jesse Mulligan is a host of what used to be must listen show..
      He (Jesse) has poor general knowledge, NZ history is poor, and he had know idea who John A Lee was, thats nearly has bad as a certain South Dunedin MP, who didn’t know which former Prime Minister was buried in Waimate cemetery.

      I kid you not. I was there to witness.
      So why let him loose on the current PM, Radio NZ. geesh

      👿

  10. RedBaronCV 10
    9 September 2016 at 6:24 pm

    So someone who has a BAR serving alcohol at their workplace ( how many workplaces have that!!) has the nerve to call low income workers drug addled. Sort yourselves out Nact and stop calling other people names.

  11. Little Kiwi 11
    9 September 2016 at 6:54 pm

    Chloe, your story is so familiar, very similar to mine. Lets hope we can do better for ourselves as freelancers. I had to wait 2 months for my last boss to pay me while he went on a trip to the Bahamas. Another boss spent the trial period threatening us, and firing nearly all of us at the end of the trial for no reason at all. This is fairly standard in hospitality with staff turnover being higher than ever. Where is the department of labour in all of this? We truly have become second rate citizens because of our need to work.

    • Craig H 11.1
      10 September 2016 at 12:03 pm

      MBIE (Labour Inspectorate) can’t intervene in these because it’s not a breach of minimum employment standards.

      However, the ERA and Employment Court have been interpreting Unjustified Disadvantage very liberally in 90 day trial cases, so there may well be a case for unjustified disadvantage if the employer is not giving constructive feedback during the employment on how to improve to meet the employer’s expectations.

      In particular, if someone is dismissed from their employment for performance issues with no employer feedback on the substandard performance during the course of the employment (which may have been the case here, but hard to say without more information), the ERA has held that this is not acting in good faith on the part of the employer, and therefore that this would fall under unjustified disadvantage. The longer the employment duration, the more likely this is.

      Also, this assumes that the 90 day trial clause in the employment agreement complies with the Employment Relations Act – the ERA and the courts have been very strict in their interpretation of these, and have thrown many of them out for seemingly minor technicalities.

  12. emergency mike 12
    9 September 2016 at 8:03 pm

    What else to expect from a sociopath who made his millions siphoning money from the middle class into his bank account with a computer, a telephone, and a suit?

  13. Observer Tokoroa 13
    9 September 2016 at 9:49 pm

    .
    . It is not funny watching New Zealand slip into third world Poverty.

    . It is sickening that it is always Tory (National) politicians who plan for and organise the degradation of good people. They have many cruel ways of achieving that. One such way is making sure that employers pay pitiful wages. So that ordinary people cannot afford rents. But that the wealthy can become more wealthy. Thereby getting Knighthoods.

    They swamp the employment market with foreigners and soak up the jobs. They smugly abuse low income people pronouncing they are worthless.

    In addition, they encourage the wealthy to avoid paying Tax at the level the poor pay.

    One day the wealthy will be held to account. They will pay dearly for their rubbishing of fellow New Zealanders. Their assets and their million dollar houses will be given to the needy. They will become the untouchables.

    For after all, the Assests of New Zealand belong to New Zealanders and not to John Key’s wealthy greedy thugs.

    .

    • Chuck 13.1
      10 September 2016 at 4:35 pm

      “Their assets and their million dollar houses will be given to the needy.”

      You do understand that now includes a large number of “middle NZer’s” that can now lay claim to a million dollar house…and not the “wealthy greedy thugs” that you are targeting for extermination Observer.

      And I need to pull you up on this “It is not funny watching New Zealand slip into third world Poverty.”

      Have you been to a third world country?? I have…in fact a handful of them. Stick to relative poverty, and don’t embarrass yourself in trying to say NZ has or is even remotely falling into third world country poverty.

      • joe90 13.1.1
        10 September 2016 at 4:52 pm

        Pertussis, rheumatic fever, skin diseases, pneumonia, urinary tract infections and meningococcal disease on the rise, thousands poisoned by shonky water supply and nearly 7 million cattle, the equivalent of 90 million people, shitting outside.

        Ticks all the boxes.

  14. mosa 14
    9 September 2016 at 10:37 pm

    A lot of people call themselves Managers but dont know the first thing about managing people and having respect for those who do the hard graft.
    Its endemic in this country like the arrogance spreading down from this National government.

  15. Keith 15
    10 September 2016 at 7:16 am

    Its also worth noting the difference between our bullshit official unemployed stats and the actual numbers will mean REAL unemployment is substantially higher, bearing in mind the latest rort to hide the true number whereby the Chief Statistician simply erased half a percent for having the audacity to look for work online.

    And does narky, blame shifting, sell his grandmother, yellow John say that this large amount of people are all useless drug addicts? And even though tens of thousands are out of work we need to import more labour to fill shortages? Whatever!

    NZ is screaming out for an honest government as this current lot of liars and their hangers on are dragging us all down.

  16. Philj 16
    10 September 2016 at 7:34 am

    World class Rockstar going forward hundred percent pure actually iconic economic market lead Kiwi can do lol, oh and don’t forget the growth

  17. maninthemiddle 17
    10 September 2016 at 3:44 pm

    Hi Chloe

    1. You imply John Key labelled all low waged workers lazy and drug addicted. He did not. He made an observation about SOME low waged workers which is actually well known. You’re implication is blatantly dishonest.
    2. You have been writing for some time about being in a low wage position. You claim to “undertake multiple jobs” and that you “have no choice other than to do this”. Why do you have no choice? You seem articulate. The dishonest implication you assert clearly shows you are shrewd. So what are you doing about your predicament? Are you studying? Looking at a career change?

    • Keith 17.1
      10 September 2016 at 3:57 pm

      SOME is Keys usual broad brush attribution and justication for ALL the migration that we apparently need to cover for our drugged up lazy unemployed, numbering in the 10’s of thousands and low paid workers numbering in the 100’s of thousands. You know just enough of a soundbite for lazy talkback listeners to think, but not too much, that Nationals crap immigration policy, which is being used to supress wages and conditions, NOT cover for low quality workers, is needed!

      I’ve lost count of the amount of times that misleading prick does this and you’ve proven, for some, it still works.

      • maninthemiddle 17.1.1
        10 September 2016 at 4:26 pm

        From Chloe’s own reference:

        “But go and ask the employers, and they will say some of these people won’t pass a drug test, some of these people won’t turn up for work, some of these people will claim they have health issues later on. So it’s not to say there aren’t great people who transition from Work and Income to work, they do, but it’s equally true that they’re also living in the wrong place, or they just can’t muster what is required to actually work.”

        Some means some. Chloe has implied some means all. It’s a dishonest tactic that seems to have you fooled.

        • Chuck 17.1.1.1
          10 September 2016 at 5:38 pm

          “Some means some. Chloe has implied some means all. It’s a dishonest tactic that seems to have you fooled.”

          Maybe not “fooled” rather it fits the narrative of many on this blog…that Key and National are evil etc etc…

      • Incognito 17.1.2
        10 September 2016 at 6:22 pm

        Dead right! “Some” is inexact and could mean anything between “none” and “all”. The other problem with John Key and other National MPs stigmatising low-paid workers and unemployed is that the labels might be accurate for some (!) but we won’t know for which. Thus all get tainted with the same brush and this is entirely intentional if you ask me.

        • ManintheMiddle 17.1.2.1
          11 September 2016 at 12:05 pm

          What you seem to be suggesting is we should not make a factual statement about people for fear of tainting others who share a common people group. I’ll bet you haven’t thought through the logical consequences of that position.

          • One Anonymous Bloke 17.1.2.1.1
            11 September 2016 at 12:14 pm

            What you seem to be suggesting is that despite your illiteracy and innumeracy and well-earned reputation for stupid lies, you expect your blithering drivel to be taken seriously.

            Not to mention attacking an author…

            • maninthemiddle 17.1.2.1.1.1
              11 September 2016 at 1:56 pm

              Why is this particular author exempt from critique?

              • One Anonymous Bloke …
                11 September 2016 at 2:21 pm

                I said “attacking”. Learn to read.

                • maninthemiddle …
                  11 September 2016 at 6:42 pm

                  Why is this author exempt from critique?

                  • McFlock …
                    11 September 2016 at 7:00 pm

                    This is an example of “critique”:

                    mitm could have chosen to demonstrate how their comment was a reasonable criticism (in the sense of “analysis and judgement of the merits and faults of a literary or artistic work”) and address the points raised in the post, rather than immediately attack the author, apparently choosing to blame her for her predicament and accuse her of lying.

                    This is an example of an “attack”:

                    mitim is a lying, stupid piece of shit who pretends to be completely unfamiliar with the English language in order to string out their interminable bullshit and maximise the attention they crave because they were so obviously abandoned as a baby, which is one of the few good life choices their mother-aunt ever made

                    Does that help illustrate the difference between “critique” and “attack” for you, mitm? I hope I have been of some assistance to you.

                    • maninthemiddle …
                      12 September 2016 at 11:36 am

                      Let me help you. Your latter example contains unsubstantiated invective. None of my comments about Chloe’s post have done that. Let me give you an example. Chloe’s article is largely predicated on the notion that Key implied ALL unemployed are drug addicts etc. That is patently untrue, based on a quote referenced in Chloe’s own post. That is dishonest misrepresentation by Chloe. I wonder if you are capable of absorbing that example.

                    • McFlock …
                      12 September 2016 at 12:16 pm

                      No. In comment 17 you outright accused the author of dishonesty, twice, rather than even allowing for the possibility of her justifying her position or being honestly mistaken.

                      That’s not a “critique”. That’s an attack, attributing intent to the author that you have no basis for selecting in preference to either you or the author realising and admitting an honest error.

                      ^^all of that is criticism. Here comes the attack:

                      You’re a hypocritical, lying, and above all stupid individual. I’ve had haemorrhoids with greater personal appeal and intellectual capability than you.

                    • maninthemiddle …
                      13 September 2016 at 12:06 pm

                      “In comment 17 you outright accused the author of dishonesty, twice, rather than even allowing for the possibility of her justifying her position or being honestly mistaken.”

                      There is no possibility of mistake…the author’s implication permeates her entire rant.

                      “That’s not a “critique”. ”
                      Yep, it is.

                      “…attributing intent to the author that you have no basis for selecting in preference to either you or the author realising and admitting an honest error.”

                      Honest error? Are you kidding? Her entire piece is predicated on her dishonest misrepresentation of Key’s statement. I even went to her reference and quoted Key’s words for her….FROM HER OWN REFERENCE.

                    • McFlock …
                      13 September 2016 at 12:36 pm

                      Whether the error was located at the beginning of an author’s consideration, poisoning the entire work, or merely a detail at the end, there is no indication of the author’s intent.

                      You ascribed the author’s intent to be dishonest.

                      This attribution of intent is in itself an error, because there is insufficient information for you to make that claim.

                      lol

                      My, what a lovely petard you’ve been carrying…

                    • maninthemiddle …
                      13 September 2016 at 12:59 pm

                      “Whether the error was located at the beginning of an author’s consideration, poisoning the entire work, or merely a detail at the end, there is no indication of the author’s intent.”

                      So 1> you admit it was an error. Good. 2> Intent is obvious, because Chloe was kind enough to provide the actual source of Key’s words.

                    • McFlock …
                      13 September 2016 at 3:51 pm

                      1: nope. If I gave you that impression I apologise for my poor choice of words.
                      2: nope, unless explicitly expressed intent is always inferred. You have made it clear in previous discussions that you have significant difficulty understanding basic English, especially when used informally, and that you also have difficulty with empathy and logic. Taking those disabilities into account, I suggest that you make no accusations about another person’s intentions without first asking them whether your inference is correct.

          • Incognito 17.1.2.1.2
            12 September 2016 at 10:37 pm

            “Factual” is a qualitative adjective while “some” refers to a quantitative metric in this particular case.

    • Psycho Milt 17.2
      11 September 2016 at 2:44 pm

      You imply John Key labelled all low waged workers lazy and drug addicted. He did not. He made an observation about SOME low waged workers which is actually well known. You’re implication is blatantly dishonest.

      The blatant dishonesty is Key’s. If “some” unemployed are lazy and drug-addicted, his statement is an irrelevant statement of the obvious – irrelevant because we have a large pool of unemployed, and if only some of them are lazy and drug-addicted, that still leaves a plentiful supply of not-lazy and not-drug-addicted people to take the jobs. By presenting his “lazy and drug-addled” claim as an argument for bringing in migrant workers, Key includes all local unemployed people in that claim.

      You claim to “undertake multiple jobs” and that you “have no choice other than to do this”. Why do you have no choice? You seem articulate. The dishonest implication you assert clearly shows you are shrewd. So what are you doing about your predicament? Are you studying? Looking at a career change?

      Are right-wingers thick? Do they struggle with grasping abstract concepts? Or are they just disingenuous? Maybe all three? To spell it out for you really simply: if Chloe works her way up from working class to middle class, the working class still exists, low wages and poor working conditions still exist, and Key is still a lying piece of shit.

      • Draco T Bastard 17.2.1
        11 September 2016 at 3:22 pm

        +111

      • Chuck 17.2.2
        11 September 2016 at 6:00 pm

        “By presenting his “lazy and drug-addled” claim as an argument for bringing in migrant workers, Key includes all local unemployed people in that claim.”

        It seems to be the norm these days that people get out of bed in the morning and look for something that “offends and outrages them”. Get over it!

        We all know some unemployed are drug users that prevent them form taking jobs that require drug testing. And that some are lazy and don’t want to do labour intensive jobs.

        However, I believe that most are doing all they can to find a job.

        • Psycho Milt 17.2.2.1
          11 September 2016 at 7:50 pm

          We all know some unemployed are drug users that prevent them form taking jobs that require drug testing.

          Leaving aside the scam that is drug-testing, that’s why I called it a “statement of the obvious.” What’s missing is why these “some” wasters mean it’s necessary to bring in migrant workers when we have a large pool of unemployed. If he’s not saying all unemployed are wasters, his argument doesn’t exist.

          • McFlock 17.2.2.1.1
            11 September 2016 at 7:59 pm

            131,000 “unemployed” (i.e. who meet the strict criteria, rather than how a normal person would view it).

            69,000-odd migrants

            So, basically, Key was saying that as many as half of all unemployed people are drug-addled lazy bludgers who can’t pick a plum.

            But that still leaves the other half who can and want to do the fucking job. where’s their brighter NZ?

            • maninthemiddle 17.2.2.1.1.1
              12 September 2016 at 11:37 am

              That would only apply if all of the 69,000 migrants were coming in to do these jobs. A rather stupid assumption on your part.

              • McFlock …
                12 September 2016 at 12:06 pm

                Not an assumption, an outside parameter.
                If say only 30k of the immigrants were needed to replace drug-addled indolents, that means that there are 100,000 people ready, willing and able to take the jobs. Why then are we importing low skilled labour?

                The lower the number of unskilled migrants, then the bigger the question as to why we’re importing them at all.

                • maninthemiddle …
                  12 September 2016 at 1:40 pm

                  All your numbers are assumptions. Come back with some hard data when you have some.

                  “…that means that there are 100,000 people ready, willing and able to take the jobs. ”

                  Really? Every single person unemployed is ‘ready, willing and able’? You obviously don’t run a business or employ people.

                  • McFlock …
                    12 September 2016 at 2:01 pm

                    yawn. Immigration and unemployment are hard numbers, providing the bounds of possible values.

                    Key has said that we import some of those immigrants to make up for the drug addled and indolent.

                    When the number of unemployed outstrips the number of migrants, everyone who can’t find a job is in that position because they’re worse than a migrant worker. Apparently, that’s how markets are supposed to work…

                    • maninthemiddle …
                      13 September 2016 at 11:43 am

                      You’re diverting from your original claims. You said “So, basically, Key was saying that as many as half of all unemployed people are drug-addled lazy bludgers who can’t pick a plum.” He never said, he didn’t even imply that.

                      “Key has said that we import some of those immigrants to make up for the drug addled and indolent.”

                      That’s a bit closer to an honest representation. At least you’re now using the word ‘some’.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      13 September 2016 at 11:53 am

                      pretends to be completely unfamiliar with the English language in order to string out their interminable bullshit…

                      …again.

                    • McFlock …
                      13 September 2016 at 12:30 pm

                      You said “So, basically, Key was saying that as many as half of all unemployed people are drug-addled lazy bludgers who can’t pick a plum.” He never said, he didn’t even imply that.

                      .
                      Yes he did. Half of all unemployed is within the bounds established by his statement that said immigration was related to substandard unemployed people.

                      That’s how math and the English language works…

                    • maninthemiddle …
                      13 September 2016 at 1:03 pm

                      “Yes he did. Half of all unemployed is within the bounds established by his statement that said immigration was related to substandard unemployed people.”

                      Nope. His statement contained no numbers whatsoever. What they did contain was the word ‘some’. A number of times.

                      “But go and ask the employers, and they will say some of these people won’t pass a drug test, some of these people won’t turn up for work, some of these people will claim they have health issues later on. So it’s not to say there aren’t great people who transition from Work and Income to work, they do, but it’s equally true that they’re also living in the wrong place, or they just can’t muster what is required to actually work.”

                    • McFlock …
                      14 September 2016 at 12:25 pm

                      Nope. His statement contained no numbers whatsoever. What they did contain was the word ‘some’. A number of time

                      Indeed. Put together a fucking venn diagram, with one circle labelled “69,000 immigrants” and another labelled “130,000 unemployed”, and the maximum and minimum intersections of the two give you the “some” key referred to.

      • maninthemiddle 17.2.3
        11 September 2016 at 6:44 pm

        “By presenting his “lazy and drug-addled” claim as an argument for bringing in migrant workers, Key includes all local unemployed people in that claim.”

        No he didn’t. His comments were very specific, based on very specific evidence.

        “if Chloe works her way up from working class to middle class, the working class still exists, low wages and poor working conditions still exist, and Key is still a lying piece of shit.”

        Perhaps you are just thick, so I’ll spell it out. Chloe wrote her rant, no-one else. It was replete with the words “I” and “we”. Chloe doesn’t give a damn about the low waged, she just decided to have a self indulgent rant and I’m calling her on it.

        • Psycho Milt 17.2.3.1
          11 September 2016 at 7:57 pm

          No he didn’t. His comments were very specific, based on very specific evidence.

          OK, so his comment was irrelevant and tells us nothing about why we need to bring in migrant workers when we have a large pool of unemployed. Thanks for clearing that up.

          Chloe wrote her rant, no-one else. It was replete with the words “I” and “we”.

          I guess you’re unfamiliar with the concept of “example.” Still, maybe you’re familiar with the concept of analogy, so here’s one: suppose an author uses their own case as an example when writing about cancer, and you notice that their cancer was caught early and they will likely recover with appropriate treatment. This doesn’t mean a) that the author is a fake, b) that they are merely attention-seeking, or c) that cancer therefore doesn’t exist.

          • maninthemiddle 17.2.3.1.1
            12 September 2016 at 11:30 am

            “OK, so his comment was irrelevant and tells us nothing about why we need to bring in migrant workers when we have a large pool of unemployed. ”

            They precisely addressed why we bring in migrant workers, becasue there is a group of the unemployed who are virtually unemployable. What part of this don;t you understand?

            “I guess you’re unfamiliar with the concept of “example.””
            Very, thanks. If Chloe’s post had reflected more broadly on the issue, you may have a point, but she didn’t. Why she thinks she should be let off the hook from poor educational choices, and bludge off others to carry out her social justice bs is beyond me.

            • Psycho Milt 17.2.3.1.1.1
              12 September 2016 at 11:46 am

              1. See McFlock above.

              2. Some of the country’s managers and employers are lazy and drug-addicted (not to mention incompetent and malicious). So far the PM hasn’t felt it necessary to comment on this or to set up a scheme to bring in replacement managers and employers from the Third World. If you think really hard, you might figure out why that is.

              • maninthemiddle …
                12 September 2016 at 1:39 pm

                2. Even if you are right, it is irrelevant. The PM was commenting on migration and the unemployed. The unemployed draw an income from the tax payer. That’s the difference.

                • One Anonymous Bloke …
                  13 September 2016 at 6:50 am

                  Which means that importing migrant workers costs us more in social welfare payments as well as shitting on New Zealanders. Thanks for pointing that out.

                  • maninthemiddle …
                    13 September 2016 at 12:02 pm

                    You can’t have it both ways. Either migrant workers are taking NZ’ers jobs or they are on benefits. Which is it?

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      13 September 2016 at 1:26 pm

                      You misunderstand (it’s becoming tedious, and everything McFlock said).

                      New Zealanders, willing and able to work, are being passed over in favour of migrant labour. Some of these New Zealanders therefore stay on the dole, costing more of my ‘precious’ tax dollars (they spend yours on bribes and kick-backs).

                      Meanwhile, the Prime Minister lies, and pretends that 0.275% (drug test failure rate) is a significant problem and explains the need for migrant labour, and you wear a sign saying “I agree with Dear Leader”, and a T-shirt that says “hate”.

                    • maninthemiddle …
                      13 September 2016 at 2:10 pm

                      “New Zealanders, willing and able to work, are being passed over in favour of migrant labour.”

                      So? It’s called competition. It makes people work harder, and it has been part of the global economy for decades.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      13 September 2016 at 2:31 pm

                      🙄

                      So you’re pretending to fail at English again.

                    • maninthemiddle …
                      13 September 2016 at 3:35 pm

                      “So you’re pretending to fail at English again.”

                      Nope. I’ll ask again. Either migrant workers are taking NZ’ers jobs or they are on benefits. Which is it?

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      14 September 2016 at 2:28 pm

                      Repeating your misunderstanding won’t magically change my meaning. Learn to read.

                    • maninthemiddle …
                      14 September 2016 at 3:33 pm

                      “Repeating your misunderstanding won’t magically change my meaning. ”

                      It is a simple question OAB. One you are running from.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      14 September 2016 at 4:08 pm

                      Ok then. Here are some charitable baby steps for you.

                      1. The unemployed draw an income from the tax payer…

                      2. …so them finding work saves my ‘precious’ tax dollars, whereas yours go in bribes and kickbacks.

                      3. When instead, cheap migrant labour undercuts the local labour market, my tax dollars are still being spent on aforementioned unemployed.

                      4. I didn’t say that migrant workers are on benefits, so your witless drivel is moot.

                      5. As for whether migrant workers are “taking jobs”, according to the Prime Minister, that’s exactly what they’re doing.

                      6. You even pretended to understand it yourself in some of your various contradictory confused remarks about supply and demand.

                      7. ,,,and everything McFlock said, especially the descriptions of your abilities and character.

                    • maninthemiddle …
                      14 September 2016 at 4:24 pm

                      You haven’t answered the question. Are migrant workers taking NZ’ers jobs, or are they on benefits?

                      “3. When instead, cheap migrant labour undercuts the local labour market…”
                      There is no -undercutting. This is, by your own definition, minimum wage work. Error number 1.

                      “5. As for whether migrant workers are “taking jobs”, according to the Prime Minister, that’s exactly what they’re doing.”
                      Nope. They are doing jobs kiwi’s won’t do. Which also makes a nonsense of your claims about benefits. Error numbers 2 and 3.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      14 September 2016 at 4:29 pm

                      See point 4.

                      When will you stop fucking your pet goat?

                    • maninthemiddle …
                      14 September 2016 at 4:43 pm

                      “4. I didn’t say that migrant workers are on benefits, so your witless drivel is moot.”

                      Actually you did.

                      “Which means that importing migrant workers costs us more in social welfare payments…”

                      So which of your two contradictory claims do you stand by?

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      14 September 2016 at 4:47 pm

                      Actually, I didn’t: it costs us more in social welfare payments because it means that unemployed NZers don’t get those jobs. See the original comment, where I followed on: Some of these New Zealanders therefore stay on the dole, costing more of my ‘precious’ tax dollars…

                      Once again, learn to read.

                      You’re running from the question: when did you stop fucking your pet goat?

                    • maninthemiddle …
                      14 September 2016 at 4:50 pm

                      “Actually, I didn’t: it costs us more in welfare benefits because it means that unemployed NZers don’t get those jobs.”

                      1. That’s not what you said.
                      2. If unemployed NZ’ers wanted those jobs, they’d get them. That’s the point.

                      Now answer the question.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      14 September 2016 at 5:03 pm

                      Here’s the entire paragraph as posted at 1:26pm:

                      New Zealanders, willing and able to work, are being passed over in favour of migrant labour. Some of these New Zealanders therefore stay on the dole, costing more of my ‘precious’ tax dollars (they spend yours on bribes and kick-backs).

                      Also, see point 4: a normal person would be safe to infer that I don’t believe something I didn’t say.

                      If unemployed NZ’ers wanted those jobs, they’d get them.

                      Pay is a function of supply and demand. If there was no supply, wages would rise.

                      There is no -undercutting.

                      Which of these three contradictory claims do you stand by?

                      Does it bleat a lot?

                    • maninthemiddle …
                      14 September 2016 at 5:11 pm

                      Here’s what you said BEFORE that, yesterday at 6.50am:

                      “Which means that importing migrant workers costs us more in social welfare payments …”

                      Got you.

                      “Which of these three contradictory claims do you stand by?”

                      You really need to learn to read for comprehension. None of those statements are contradictory.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      14 September 2016 at 5:46 pm

                      It costs more because the NZers stay on the dole. Repeating your misunderstanding won’t magically change my meaning.

                      I’ve answered your question many times over. You just don’t like the answer, which is that you failed to comprehend English again.

                    • maninthemiddle …
                      14 September 2016 at 6:06 pm

                      “It costs more because the NZers stay on the dole. ”

                      You have presented NO evidence that is the case. If NZ’ers were prepared to do those jobs, there is nothing preventing them doing so. As these jobs are often minimum wage, there is no ‘undercutting’. You’ve blown your own foot off, and don’t even realise it!!

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      14 September 2016 at 6:52 pm

                      Pay is a function of supply and demand. If there was no supply, wages would rise.

                      The increase in “supply” is the migrant workers (whose numbers have increased), this prevents wages from rising. Hence “undercutting”.

                      It’s called competition. It makes people work harder, and it has been part of the global economy for decades.

                      Thankyou for making my point for me.

                    • maninthemiddle …
                      15 September 2016 at 11:44 am

                      “The increase in “supply” is the migrant workers (whose numbers have increased), this prevents wages from rising. Hence “undercutting”.”
                      WRONG. This increase in supply only occurs if kiwi’s don’t want the work.

                      There, another lesson in economics for you.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      15 September 2016 at 12:27 pm

                      😆

                      All you’re demonstrating is everything McFlock says about you.

                    • maninthemiddle …
                      15 September 2016 at 1:40 pm

                      “All you’re demonstrating is everything McFlock says about you.”

                      All you’re demonstrating is that you know as little as McFlock.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      15 September 2016 at 2:41 pm

                      😆

                      I wish.

                    • McFlock …
                      15 September 2016 at 4:01 pm

                      flattery’s one way to get me pants off 🙂

                      The funny thing about mitm is not so much the stupid things he says, as much as it is the things he ,i>doesn’t say.

                      For example:

                      This increase in supply only occurs if kiwi’s don’t want the work.

                      There, another lesson in economics for you.

                      Before his premature gloating, mitm ommitted the other half of the equation: the supply [substitute immigrant labour] only occurs if kiwi’s don’t want the work [at that price] and immigrants do.

                      If immigrants don’t want the work at that price, the wages would have to increase or the work wouldn’t get done.
                      If NZ workers wanted the work at that price, there would be no immigrant labour market.
                      But the sweet spot key was talking about is where immigrants will do the work at a price lower than where NZ workers are willing to supply the labour.

                      So yeah, whether it’s taking an illegal below-minimum wage, or taking minimum wage but paying a portion back to the employer in overpriced rent and board, immigrant labour is undercutting NZ labour. Because that’s how markets work.

                    • maninthemiddle …
                      15 September 2016 at 10:05 pm

                      “If immigrants don’t want the work at that price, the wages would have to increase or the work wouldn’t get done.”
                      Yep. That’s what I said.

                      “If NZ workers wanted the work at that price, there would be no immigrant labour market.”
                      Yep. That’s what I said.

                      “But the sweet spot key was talking about is where immigrants will do the work at a price lower than where NZ workers are willing to supply the labour.”
                      Nope. If there are NZ workers willing and able to supply the labour, it would be extremely difficult for employers to ‘import’ the labour. The ‘sweet spot’ Key was referring to was where NZ employers have labour shortages, of a variety of reasons.

                      Once again you have shown you have no idea about what happens in the real world.

                    • McFlock …
                      15 September 2016 at 10:28 pm

                      I bet if the jobs paid $100/hr then there’d be no shortage of nz applicants.
                      So yeah, the immigrants are undercutting local workers.

                    • maninthemiddle …
                      16 September 2016 at 10:05 am

                      “I bet if the jobs paid $100/hr then there’d be no shortage of nz applicants.
                      So yeah, the immigrants are undercutting local workers.”

                      So you apply a totally unrealistic scenario to justify your delusions.

                      You just don’t seem to understand the idea that immigrant workers come to NZ to do jobs NZ’ers don’t want to do. If more NZ workers were prepared to work at those jobs, there would be no need for immigrant workers. It really is that simple.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      16 September 2016 at 12:22 pm

                      ..and if there were fewer immigrant workers, wages would have to rise, to make the jobs more attractive to your betters, It really is that simple.

                    • The lost sheep …
                      16 September 2016 at 12:31 pm

                      Then the North-Going Zax puffed his chest up with pride.
                      “I never,” he said, “take a step to one side.
                      And I’ll prove to you that I won’t change my ways
                      If I have to keep standing here fifty-nine days!”
                      “And I’ll prove to YOU,” yelled the South-Going Zax,
                      “That I can stand here in the prairie of Prax
                      For fifty-nine years! For I live by a rule
                      That I learned as a boy back in South-Going School.
                      Never budge! That’s my rule. Never budge in the least!
                      Not an inch to the west! Not an inch to the east!
                      I’ll stay here, not budging! I can and I will
                      If it makes you and me and the whole world stand still!”

                    • maninthemiddle …
                      17 September 2016 at 1:42 pm

                      “..and if there were fewer immigrant workers, wages would have to rise, to make the jobs more attractive to your betters, ”

                      Really? Yet there is no indication kiwi’s want to do these jobs. Your assumption this is only about $$’sis naive in the extreme.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      17 September 2016 at 1:51 pm

                      🙄

                      What a stupid strawman. Of course the wage rate isn’t the only factor.

                    • ropata …
                      17 September 2016 at 1:54 pm

                      your convoluted BS can never justify slave labour.

                    • maninthemiddle …
                      17 September 2016 at 5:18 pm

                      “Of course the wage rate isn’t the only factor.”

                      And yet that is what your comment implied.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      17 September 2016 at 6:21 pm

                      Shall I let you in on an open secret? I’ve been deliberately mimicking the language and arguments you employ. “It really is that simple” 😆

                    • maninthemiddle …
                      18 September 2016 at 1:54 pm

                      “Shall I let you in on an open secret? I’ve been deliberately mimicking the language and arguments you employ.”

                      You don’t have either the wit or the intellect, old man.

        • reason 17.2.3.2
          12 September 2016 at 12:05 am

          Our village idiot troll poster calls someone thick while supporting dishonest nasty lies from dirty john ……. our dishonest tax haven building disgrace of a leader ………. :O

          Have a glass of dirty johns 100% relatively clean river water maninthemiddle 🙂 ….. your full of it and I’m calling you on it ……a funky glass of Nationals water will have it spraying out of your bum …….. instead of your finger tips 🙂

    • UncookedSelachimorpha 17.3
      11 September 2016 at 11:55 pm

      Man in a muddle

      “So what are you doing about your predicament? Are you studying? Looking at a career change?”

      Irrelevant – if Chloe changes job, the old jobs will still be there and the people doing them will still not be abused, desperate and not able to live on the wages. This is what needs fixing, and this is what the lousy Key government is in denial about and doesn’t give a damn about.

      • maninthemiddle 17.3.1
        12 September 2016 at 11:34 am

        “…if Chloe changes job, the old jobs will still be there…”

        Picture this. Chloe changes jobs and earns more money. Many other Chloe’s follow suit. A labour shortage develops. The market meets that shortage by immigration or an increase in wages. Problem solved.

        • UncookedSelachimorpha 17.3.1.1
          12 September 2016 at 7:01 pm

          Duh!

          “The market meets that shortage by immigration”….in which case wages remain low and we still have desperate people in poverty jobs

          or

          “an increase in wages.”….along with improved conditions etc, this solves a lot of problems. But this bit has nothing to do with Chloe getting another job – the poverty jobs are not a simple function of supply and demand, but instead result from deliberate policies to shift money from the poor to the rich – i.e. laws that destroy collective bargaining, take away workers rights, allow the rich to avoid paying tax etc.

          • maninthemiddle 17.3.1.1.1
            13 September 2016 at 12:17 pm

            “in which case wages remain low and we still have desperate people in poverty jobs”

            Ah no.

            “But this bit has nothing to do with Chloe getting another job – the poverty jobs are not a simple function of supply and demand, but instead result from deliberate policies to shift money from the poor to the rich”

            Geeez. Pay is a function of supply and demand. If there was no supply, wages would rise. The sort of jobs we are talking about have always been lower paid.

  18. Observer Tokoroa 18
    10 September 2016 at 7:41 pm

    .

    Do you actually live in New Zealand? If you did you would know full well that Wages are low. Rents are high and House owning is now out of the reach of most people.

    You also know that your friends have rubbished the good people of New Zealand calling them useless.

    You and your friends have pillaged the form of life we use to live in New Zealand.

    I will continue to say that your smug friends will eventually have to return the wealth and the assests.

    Get real Chuck. Get out there and help.