National’s real rolling maul

40 comments on “National’s real rolling maul ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Edna 1

   3 March 2009 at 8:12 am

   Forget the rolling maul and the hand on arse you [homophobia deleted].Great to see the Maori gifted companies like Sealord shutting up factories. Do these people understand the impact on their people? No, because greed is blind. Dog eat dog eh bro!
2. ieuan 2

   3 March 2009 at 8:34 am

   Closing the wage gap? Haven’t you noticed we are in a recession.

   Shit, people are just happy to hang on to their jobs.

   If the foundations are wobbly there is little point in painting the roof.
3. Akldnut 3

   3 March 2009 at 8:36 am

   Edna. 1. Sealord was not gifted to Maori, it was part of a treaty settlement.(Payment) 2. The decision is being made due to the current economic situation for and on behave of their people. Wise business if it saves money and they come out of this recession/depression in a strong position
   kia ora bro/sis
4. BLiP 4

   3 March 2009 at 8:36 am

   John Key is over the Tasman fellating his mate Rudd so now would be a good time for him to mention his plans to close the wage cap – wouldn’t you think? But, no. Unable to send any Kiwis to their death in Iraq, he’s promising to send more of our young people to Afghanistan. Perhaps that’s the master plan for dealing with the unemployed – send them off to a foreign war. Worked in 1918 – and in 1936 – and in 1972 and in 2001 . . .
   • higherstandard 4.1

     3 March 2009 at 9:18 am

     Arghhhhhh Key and Rudd hideous mind picture ……
     • Travellerev 4.1.1

       3 March 2009 at 10:35 am

       To hear that Labour leader Rudd and Neo liberal ex-banker John Key tell us, the punters that they feel like blood brothers in the struggle to save our countries is already nauseating, let alone picture them in ….. truly yuk.
5. Stan 5

   3 March 2009 at 9:28 am

   Kiwis leaving nz to live in Australia reached a record high in Jan of 1,0000 per week. Figures are NZ satisitcs. The majority of these people made the long term decision before the election and the subsequent decision of the voting public to remove labour from the treasury benches. With very few New Zealanders opting to join a union the Unions have become almost irrelevant.Small business people can soon try out an employee without old fashioned and draconian labour laws which mean they get stuck with that person even if the person is lazy, unreliable and a liability.
   Until the Labour Party wakes up in this Century they will find their political base and support marginalised into non existence.
   • Matthew Pilott 5.1

     3 March 2009 at 11:31 am

     Crikey, 10,000 a month eh? And you know them all, and know why they made that decision, Stan? How do you find the time to write here? Haven’t you got another ten thousand people (leaving for Australia this month) to ask if they made the decision to leave a long time ago? Or are you making small-minded assumprions as to why people are leaving NZ and presenting them as fact?

     Why does the right persistently castigate ‘small business’ as run by idiots who can’t speak or write a letter? Y’see, that’s all you need to be able to do to fire someone, if they are genuinely lazy, unreliable or a liability. You speak to them (verbal warning) and then write to them (written warning) and then you fire them.

     Yet Stan thinks our business people are just too stupid to do this. How insulting. Infused supportes Stan – I wonder if infused can have a better go at making the point.

     P.S. Stan – get with the RWNJ lines – remember that all the smart people are going overseas, and the bludgers are staying here, so Labour’s likely to do well. Well that’s what all the bigots say – are you suggesting, in your own bigoted way, that Labour’s support are all “lazy, unreliable or a liability”?
     • Strathen 5.1.1

       3 March 2009 at 11:47 am

       ‘Y’see, that’s all you need to be able to do to fire someone, if they are genuinely lazy, unreliable or a liability. You speak to them (verbal warning) and then write to them (written warning) and then you fire them.’

       You have just got a PG against you and it will now cost you a minimum $10K with no guarantee that the employee will be asked to leave.

       Where the current legislation doesn’t work is there is no process to follow. The employee has to consider they have been dealt with fairly. The tribunal sits on the side of the employee and in this situation because you didn’t offer appropriate incentive for the employee to work, didn’t offer them additional training, and/or didn’t give them the appropriate tools for the job (read: latest and most expensive technology), you will be found to have unfairly dismissed them. Probable ruling: Pay them lost legal fees, wages, plus compensation AND take them back in to employment.

       I don’t like it, but this is how it works. An easier fix than the 90 day probation would be to make the tribunal fairer and more impartial, perhaps get them to apply equal rights. This would allow the current legislation to work.
       • Matthew Pilott 5.1.1.1

         3 March 2009 at 12:43 pm

         “You have just got a PG against you and it will now cost you a minimum $10K with no guarantee that the employee will be asked to leave.”

         $10k minimum? Where’d you get that figure from?. If you follow the process then such a case will be tossed out easily enough. There are PG cases where they’ve found process wasn’t followed, and people were awarded compenation. There are even more cases where the ruling was against the employee.

         I’m not sure what case law you’re writing about, apart from perhaps a collective list of reasons that cases have been found in favour of the employee. Let’s look at what you’ve said.

         The employee has to consider they have been dealt with fairly.

         No, the tribunal has to consider the employee has been dealt with fairly. As I mentioned above, if the employer can speak, and write, then they have all the tools at their disposal to do so. There is a process to follow and it is damn easy

         The tribunal sits on the side of the employee and in this situation because you didn’t offer appropriate incentive for the employee to work,

         What does this mean? ‘Incentive to work’? Are you suggesting someone lost a case because they didn’t remunerate their employees? unkilely… I genuinely don’t understand how this could be an issue or what you mean.

         didn’t offer them additional training,

         This does come up. If the employee said they were trained are are not, they can be fired for misrepresentation of their abilities.

         I have, however, heard of examples where someone was fired after their work duties changed, they were not able to do the job and were fired, without being trained for their new role. The proper thing to do would be to train someone, or give them a full redundancy package and hire a new person – friing the old employee is simply trying to dodge paying what’s due. That’s when the employer fails to follow the process, and loses. Fine with me…

         and/or didn’t give them the appropriate tools for the job (read: latest and most expensive technology),

         Sort of similar to your above comment, but more far-fetched. I can’t see that having happened, can you give an example? Otherwise, are you saying that it is not the employer’s duty to provide the tools to do the job?

         you will be found to have unfairly dismissed them. Probable ruling: Pay them lost legal fees, wages, plus compensation AND take them back in to employment.

         The example you gave just doesn’t stack up. If you get rid of someone because they are not performing, and you make it a performance issue, then the points you mention won’t be a problem. You’ve mashed every complaint against the system into one ‘example’ that is outright wrong.

         The employment court system isn’t perfect, and there are always going to be cases where things don’t look right. But then when a proper ruling is made, it doesn’t make the news very often, see below for a rare example:

         I do remember Air NZ winning a case after they fired someone for selling flights at staff discount to friends. The employment court did not decide against Air NZ because the ’employee didn’t consider themself to have been deal with fairly’, nor did the employment court rule against Air NZ for not training the person fully or not giving them the most expensive ‘tools’.

         Air NZ did not have to pay them lost legal fees, wages, plus compensation and take them back in to employment. that’s because they followed a simple process. Happens all the time.

         The old law really was fine – it allowed you to get rid of someone when there was cause for their dismissal. The new law merely allows an employer to get rid of someone when there is not due cause for dismissal.
         • senzafine 5.1.1.1.1

           4 March 2009 at 11:25 am

           All Very well MP.

           However, Such process’ does not work for low turnover small business in the service sector.

           Take a Cafe for example. You are served by a sneering, unkempt young woman who grunts at you and screws up your order. You try to find a seat at a table that is not filled with dirty dishes, but you cant. You look up, and said young woman is busy yakking with someone wearing an apron and dishwashing gloves, behind the counter, and in full view.

           You will not go back, and if you do, and you get the same service, You most certainly wont. Possibly, 25 of your friends wont go there, either.

           The girl by the way has been employed for 3 weeks and is on her first warning. Since her employ, there has been a noticible downturn in profit.

           Thats 3 weeks where there has been a noticible loss of profit, and unquantifiable damage to the reputation of the business.

           But the girl dosent care, because she knows she gets 3 warnings and is only in it for the short term.

           Its here where the old laws REALLY fell over, and its these types of business’ that the law was ultimately targetting.

           And about time too, having worked in the industry, there’s far too many employers having their reputations damaged by such people.
6. roger nome 6

   3 March 2009 at 9:38 am

   Not banned any more dad?
7. vto 7

   3 March 2009 at 9:44 am

   That’s not right. The Maori/National government has just put up the minimum wage.

   Now if the … wooooh …. ‘secwet agenda’ was a reality as you kept banging dip-headedly on about last year then a depression such as this is the perfect excuse to not put the minimum wage up. Didn’t happen did it. Doesn’t exist does it. Thread is a jack up like secwet agendas isn’t it.
   • Travellerev 7.1

     3 March 2009 at 10:33 am

     FFS vto,

     You’re way smarter than that. Even if you believe that John Key is squeaky clean and has survived 20 years of swimming with sharks while he really was just a fumbling, bumbling, tumbling dolphin you ought to be able to recognise a bait and switch.

     First you give the minimum wagers (low or no training jobs) a minimum raise after you screwed them out of a tax cut and than you tell them that in order to save their jobs and those of their mates they ought to take one day of without pay. Not one day a week but only one day a fourth night, that’s not to bad is it?
     Bingo 10% wage cut. That is one of the major suggestions from the “job summit anyway. Another one was to ease up on immigration. Huh?

     Whose immigration? Perhaps that of those Islanders who can be used to drive pay even lower? It sure won’t be the higher educated and trade trained workers because they all seem to leave new Zealand by the 1000 a day to escape poverty and depression here.

     Oh and another gem of financial generosity: Giving tax exemptions for workers upskilling (Huh?. So, Joe the “shelfstacker” takes a day of because he wants to keep his job and that of his mates, while new immigrants fresh of the Island are cuing up to take his job and work five or perhaps six days for Joe’s four day pay (but it’s all the recession’s fault) and Joe get’s a 50 buck refund if he spends a couple of hundred dollars on “upskilling” whatever the fuck that means.

     That’s not even a secret agenda any more mate, it’s as out in the open as you can get.
     • vto 7.1.1

       3 March 2009 at 10:50 am

       If you’re right travellerev then it will astound NZers. It will be a blockbuster bestseller. And Key will have to live in exile somewhere (like Hawaii).
       • Travellerev 7.1.1.1

         3 March 2009 at 11:30 am

         vto,

         Why the petulance? Have you started drinking because like I said oh, about a year ago that it would all turn to shit.

         Bestseller? Why the scorn? Because I point out some pretty obvious facts? It’s not about me being right vto, it’s about a known tactic to bring in cheap competition in order to drive wages down, in both the educated sector and the cheap untrained labour force. It’s as old as the roads to Rome my friend, it’s called divide and conquer.

         If in the next say 12 months to come, more and more angry populations will riot and rebel and God forbid think about that old and trusty executioners tool, the Guillotine for the revolutionary culling of our ruling elite and the banksters in particular, Hawaii might very well be the place where John Key and his palls might end up. What’s more by that time you might, as a representative of the New Zealand bourgeoisie, like the French bourgeoisie during the revolution before you be there to help him get on a plane.

         I thought that his little wiki entry about the French Revolution resembled in remarkable detail what is happening in America.

         France at the time of the revolution was one of the richest, nay the richest country too, brought to bankruptcy by waging wars, inequality, famine and taxing it’s population to the max. amongst others.
         • vto 7.1.1.1.1

           3 March 2009 at 12:12 pm

           I wasn’t trying to be petulant etc. Just busy and no time to make bigger posts. Just firing them down quickly (and badly it seems).

           I agree re your thoughts on revolution riots and the like. Or along similar lines. What I struggle with is the wide spread conspiracy aspect. That’s what I was getting at.

           And backing up my own convictions on this whole matter – have just today taken some of our little remaining savings and turned the paper money into gold and silver. First time ever. Will be stashing it in the hills.
       • Travellerev 7.1.1.2

         3 March 2009 at 2:11 pm

         vto,

         If I had any savings I would have done the same but I don’t (Long story) but what I did do was buy seed and a still, I figured I can always grow my own food and people will always want a wee dram to ease the burden. LOL.

         By the way I think this is a a good documentary about what is actually a conspiracy.

         The narrator is G. Edward Griffin who also wrote the Creature of Jekyll Island about the origins of the Federal Reserve of New York. I met this man and he is an eminently erudite man and a specialist on the workings of the International Finance world.

         The beginning is a bit pedantic but on the whole it makes a good point.
   • Draco T Bastard 7.2

     3 March 2009 at 11:54 am

     People haven’t forgotten this. I can pretty much guarantee that if NACT hadn’t put up the minimum wage (even if it was only the absolute minimum needed to cover inflation) that would have been all over the blogosphere again in a matter of minutes.

     The only reason JK and Co. put up the minimum wage was to prevent that from seeming true.
     • vto 7.2.1

       3 March 2009 at 12:15 pm

       Draco, the minimum wage was put up. Now that could be due to simple politics and the maori/nats trying to cut into labours territory etc. It could also be that they see it as the right thing to do. Or it could also be along the lines you say. I see no evidence of what you suggest though.
     • Strathen 7.2.2

       3 March 2009 at 12:30 pm

       That post is a little out of context. Key said they would like to see wages increase because of productivity increases rather than inflation because the long term effects of the current process will equal higher interest rates.

       Key was referring to investing in infrastructure to help productivity levels. To decrease the wage gap and make it sustainable we need to increase productivity, not increase wages to make the stat’s look good.
       • Draco T Bastard 7.2.2.1

         3 March 2009 at 3:28 pm

         Hypothetical:
         Inflation running @ 5%
         Productivity increasing @ 1%
         After intense negotiations the unions finally secure a pay rise of 3%

         Have wages increased with productivity?
8. infused 8

   3 March 2009 at 9:56 am

   Stan is pretty much on to it here.
9. Billy 9

   3 March 2009 at 10:04 am

   You guys need to get your story straight. Either this government is riding on the coat tails of the last and undertaking no real new initiatives or it is implementing Freedom from Serfdom line by line. You can’t have it both ways.
   • Ari 9.1

     3 March 2009 at 10:11 am

     Oh, it can easily do both. These anti-worker bills have been of member’s bill quality and brevity. Not to mention they don’t even need to do anything to freeze wages and promote unemployment.
     • Billy 9.1.1

       3 March 2009 at 10:20 am

       Oh, it can easily do both.

       Both continue the worker-friendly policy of the peoples government of Helen Clark and follow a hard right neo-liberal agenda? Neat trick.

       These anti-worker bills…

       What are they? List them out for me so I can look them up.
10. Ianmac 10

    3 March 2009 at 10:12 am

    Stan: Most people believed 12 months ago that the Govt would change. Funny that since Labour was endlessly blamed for the “exodus”, surely the flood would become a trickle once a change became clear. But 1000 in January!? Getting worse!
    Of course the endless blame from National may have caused people to say “Hey! Must be something in this move to Australia lark. Lets have a look and lets get packing.”
    Or maybe the state of Government has nothing to do with the shifting population. Lets not talk about closing the gap. Embarrassing.
11. Tigger 11

    3 March 2009 at 10:29 am

    Keep the homophobia and racism to yourself ‘Edna’.
12. toad 12

    3 March 2009 at 11:14 am

    The ref should penalise them for a “truck and trailer”!

    Tigger, couldn’t agree more re Edna’s comment. They may be par for the course on Whaleoil or Kiwiblog, but let’s not descend to that level here.
13. Matthew Pilott 13

    3 March 2009 at 11:36 am

    Mocking the rolling maul is all well and good – but a cartoon accusing the NACTs of hopoate-ism? That’s a bit harsh. (I believe that’s what Edna (D4J?) was referring to…)

    Billy – you can’t imagine a government publicly announcing measures that are percieved to be worker friendly, yet undermining them with other actions that aren’t so well pubicised?
    • rave 13.1

      3 March 2009 at 12:23 pm

      Oh what a shock, homoeroticism suddenly appears in a gang bang. Where have you been for the last few thousand years?
      When the workers are getting screwed in every orifice you can allow for a bit of irrational exuberance on the home side.
14. Tigger 14

    3 March 2009 at 12:26 pm

    Am I going to have to give posters here lessons in what is a ‘grab’ and what is ‘penetration’? The cartoon is saying that wage freezes and fire at will are literally ‘pinches’ on the worker. There’s no Hopoate type behaviour shown – all fingers are above clothes and visible!

    Gee, even a gay whore like me didn’t see anything sexual in that drawing…well, nothing more sexual than the typical maul…
15. Snail 15

    3 March 2009 at 3:08 pm

    BTW ieuan _ there is little point in painting the roof. westcoasters would likely object to this assertion.. and what about those poor blighters on the news this morning.. floods keeping them out of house and home.. not even a roof to stand under under let alone paint.

    “fourth night”, EV, gotta a touch of the Shakespeare have we.. (like Twelfth Night) or is this part and parcel of the double dutch rap to revolution? And do watch that bait and switch of yourn gal.. mistook amounts to crook..
    • Travellerev 15.1

      3 March 2009 at 3:26 pm

      Snail,

      When you speak Dutch, my language as well as I speak yours you are entitled to make fun OK but if, like I suspect, you only speak your own language, that of Kiwi English, than kindly Sir hold your tongue.
16. Snail 16

    3 March 2009 at 3:32 pm

    kindest thing I can say, EV, is I will if you will..
    • Travellerev 16.1

      3 March 2009 at 5:23 pm

      I take it that means that you don’t speak Dutch? In which case you can say whatever you like. Sticks and stones and all that.
      Just so long as you don’t expect me to react to it.

      If on the other hand you’d care to add something to of importance to the discussion going on here be my guest.
17. Snail 17

    3 March 2009 at 5:41 pm

    No intention whatsoever in taking the last word from EV, who of course has right of reply anyway.

    Importance is it.. right… really..?? In this reply I’m taking up your offer of being your guest (something the excellent facility of ‘reply’ permits.

    Twas the importance of words.. our little contratemps.. as also the importance of this particular blog’s title: National’s real rolling maul. And that graphic backed it up..

    Yet to me there seems little question that the intent of discourse/debate/deliberation hereon is to assert national’s reality: a mauling roll. In terms of the government’s actions upon the subjects of those terms written on the backs of the (graphic) scrum..

    Meaning to say how meaning/s are the wherewithal of good blogging.. all the easier from correct expressions.. by commenters thereto.
18. Snail 18

    3 March 2009 at 5:45 pm

    Oops! contretemps I think..
19. Travellerev 19

    3 March 2009 at 6:17 pm

    Don’t bother Petruchio, this screw won’t be tamed.
    LOL. but you write beautifully if somewhat convoluted.
    • Snail 19.1

      3 March 2009 at 8:03 pm

      Thank ye, EV, for the compliment — “writes beautifully if somewhat convoluted”

      Good summation, the last bit a lifetime’s heed the need for accuracy wherever possible.

      Now, as the saying goes, one compliment deserves another (or something similar) and I hereby invite you and all of your friends and associates (and even your enemies whose need can only be cleared up 🙂 ) to look over the very beginning of something truly great (and right up your alley if your comments are anything to go by). Enjoy!

      Stick with it, and enjoy. RV is not a genius and needs a little time to compile, but what gives is mcCoy!

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS