Alasdair Thompson lolz

34 comments on “Alasdair Thompson lolz ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Stephen Day 1

   24 June 2011 at 8:14 am

   I wonder if he manages to hold onto that friendship you show at the left of his facebook page?
2. Akldnut 2

   24 June 2011 at 8:54 am

   I’m wondering if menopause may be a time he’s indirectly refering to and how it might be recorded or whether it may show it as being an unproductive time in a womans life.
3. pollywog 3

   24 June 2011 at 9:11 am

   hahaha….Alasduhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

   whatafuckwit!!!
4. ianmac 4

   24 June 2011 at 9:22 am

   And I guess that must be why women are paid 11% less than men for the same work done. Really?
5. ianupnorth 5

   24 June 2011 at 9:22 am

   Let’s all send friend requests – he’s only got 91 and most of them will be in the Cabinet. My mates dog has more Facebook friends than that, and is also more politically astute.
   • grumpy 5.1

     24 June 2011 at 5:53 pm

     ….your mate’s dogs fleas will be more politically astute……
6. jackal 6

   24 June 2011 at 9:29 am

   Some people believe men have a cycle as well.
   • Carol 6.1

     24 June 2011 at 9:32 am

     Yes, in the UK I used to know a big athletic rubgy playing bloke who swore he had a monthly cycle similar to women’s (without the bleeding of course).
     • grumpy 6.1.1

       24 June 2011 at 5:54 pm

       Most pommie rugby players fit that category.
7. Craig Glen Eden 7

   24 June 2011 at 9:34 am

   So productivity is the issue Alasdair, so a CEO who is out socializing who is then late for their job in the morning one should definitely expect to have their pay cut.

   If the EMA keeps this patronizing bumbling bully of an idiot they deserve nothing but contempt in political circles

   “Its so and so from the EMA” Oh really is it that time of the month.LOL.

   I love who he is friends with, its National MP HECK YEAH Hekia. How fitting!
8. PhilBee 8

   24 June 2011 at 1:22 pm

   Alasdair stated a fact – that some women take time off for bad periods, or for looking after sick children. He NEVER said:
   + that he SUPPORTED lower pay for women because of this.
   + or that pay rates should be DIFFERENT between men and women.
   + or that he felt women had a lower work OUTPUT simply because of their biology.
   But some employers DO pay women less because of their biology, or their child-nuturing, or don’t promote/train them too highly (in case they fall pregnant and thus be off-work and a loss to the company)…or just ‘because they’re women and that’s the way the pay scale’s always been’ (I briefly studied this issue last year at uni).
   Yes, it’s sexist. Yes, it’s a sour part of the current employment reality. Yes, it should be changed. And no, I don’t have the solution. However, sacking Thompson is not the answer. The debate should be about how to remove sexism in the workplace.

   [ http://yardyyardyyardy.blogspot.com/2011/06/thompsons-tampon-talk-realistic.html ]
   • rosy 8.1

     24 June 2011 at 4:08 pm

     The serious incompetence in both the radio and TV3 interviews are pretty good reasons to be hauled over the coals, and maybe sacked without even going into the validity of the sexist stuff. With all the media exposure, and I assume media training he’s had he still manages to bring his organisation into disrepute and when given the opportunity to fix it, makes the situation worse.
     • grumpy 8.1.1

       24 June 2011 at 5:56 pm

       Correct, it’s the Richard Worth Syndrome – it’s not what you do or say, it’s being a f**kwit for doing it in the first place.
   • QoT 8.2

     24 June 2011 at 10:48 pm

     Remember kiddies, the right think that “productivity” can be measured by sheer output rather than quality of output or flow-on effects of output. Which is why in Phil’s head, spamming multiple blogs with the same irrelevant copypasta is actually productive.
9. ron 9

   24 June 2011 at 1:48 pm

   “The debate should be about how to remove sexism in the workplace.”
   …and a bloody good place to start would be to remove the sexists….like Thompson.
10. PhilBee 10

    24 June 2011 at 1:56 pm

    At no point in that interview did AT say anything sexist. He was HIGHLIGHTING that these things happen: he was not ADVOCATING that they should continue.
    • felix 10.1

      24 June 2011 at 2:05 pm

      Actually he said he doesn’t know why women are paid less than men. But he also said it’s because they have periods.
      • QoT 10.1.1

        24 June 2011 at 10:49 pm

        And also we shouldn’t be able to tell that men are paid more anyway, because we shouldn’t know what our coworkers are paid.
11. PhilBee 11

    24 June 2011 at 2:09 pm

    And that’s the big question, isn’t it, Felix: why ARE they paid less than men, if they can do the same job, as well or better?
    AT’s reference to “sick problems” was to highlight one of the excuses some out-of-touch employers use to pay women less.
    AT is too much of a gentleman to actually use the word “period”, bless him!
    • felix 11.1

      24 June 2011 at 4:00 pm

      Oh dear.

      So Alasdair was only making stupid, vacuous, sexist excuses so as to highlight how stupid, vacuous, and sexist the excuses of employers can be.

      That’s the best lolz since burt tried to explain that his favourite pop star Roger Douglas did bludge public money for his vanity publishing project, but only because he wanted to show us all how easy it would be for others to rort the system in exactly the same way.

      You’re gorgeous, Phil.

      p.s. the answer to your question is that we live in a patriarchy. It ain’t fucking rocket surgery, genius.
    • rosy 11.2

      24 June 2011 at 4:16 pm

      I’m sure there is a bit of useful information here to help you in your quest for an answer. Maybe AT could have liaised with them as well instead of producing an anecdote about a couple of women in his own office to extrapolate to all women in the workforce.

      Note also how he said a man who was sole childcarer was given flexible work arrangements to maintain his income. Didn’t hear him suggest this was available for women. BTW it would be interesting to know if he had permission from his employees to talk about their situations on national TV.
      • The Voice of Reason 11.2.1

        24 June 2011 at 4:56 pm

        I suggested yesterday that all his female staff now have grounds for personal grievances, for both a discriminatory pay regime and the hurt and humiliation that his comments have caused them. I’m now thinking that it might possible for his male staff to sue as well. Not just that poor solo dad who has a clear privacy breach case to take if he wants to, but all of them because the basis of their pay is not genuinely related to their individual performance, but related to Thompson’s prejudices. In other words, the pay discussions were not fair and reasonable nor grounded in good faith behaviour as the law requires.
        • McFlock 11.2.1.1

          25 June 2011 at 12:35 am

          To hell with personal grievances, his two highest paid lawyers (both women, according to him – I got the impression they were in the room) got a front row seat (off camera) to his meltdown and at no point intervened.
          I can’t help thinking that maybe he’d given them instructions to on no account interrupt him because he’d handle the interview, and they merely followed his orders to the letter. Including when he was standing over a reporter, on camera. Something Shakespearean about that . . . obedience to instruction. But I would have paid for those seats.
      • Vicky32 11.2.2

        24 June 2011 at 11:52 pm

        Note also how he said a man who was sole childcarer was given flexible work arrangements to maintain his income. Didn’t hear him suggest this was available for women.

        According to my observations through out my life (especially the 20+ years I spent as a solo mother on benefit and off it, life is much easier for solo fathers. Everyone falls over themselves to help them, as if they are such special wonderful people. Even when they turn out to not be, as in the case of my sister’s neighbour to turned out to have actually custodially stolen his children (by means of an ex-parte hearing when his wife was away getting cancer treatment). This is a very bad thing.
         
12. Rich 12

    24 June 2011 at 3:07 pm

    I just feel sorry for Scoop founder Alastair Thomson, who’s a nice guy and must suffer from getting confused with his near-namesake.

    Also, for those of us who have a business and aren’t reactionary cnuts, is there some sort of progressive business association one could join, just to show that the EMA/Business Roundtable/Federated Farmers types don’t speak in our name?
    • Bunji 12.1

      24 June 2011 at 3:53 pm

      Yes, the New Zealand Manufacturers and Exporters Association.
13. Jum 13

    24 June 2011 at 4:03 pm

    http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1106/S00291/business-woman-slams-kellys-tactics-in-support-of-thompson.htm

    Then of course the proof that speaks of women being their own worst enemies. She said she ‘listened’ but did she watch what everyone else has. If she honestly believes that Alasdair Thompson is the sort of CEO that should front the EMA then possibly she has never been threatened, or stood over. What I do know is that business woman is the perfect example of why women will never be treated with respect by men. The other example is the daily bashed female who says he does it ‘cos he loves me…

    Someone needs to tell her that there is little likelihood he will reward her toadying with a seat at his table, which is only reserved for men just like him; maybe a cushion on the floor will do – just the right height… I hear they’re bringing back the playboy bunnies in London and lovely ladies to New Zealand for the rugby boys.

    What number backlash against women by men and women are we up to now? When Susan Faludi wrote her book there were four. I’m afraid to read it again in case it was like the one Marilyn French wrote (The War Against Women) sounding as if it had been written last month, instead of decades ago. I always think back to the women who worked in a machinery factory in America who were forced to wear diapers because they were not allowed to leave the work floor to go to the toilet. What was worse – they complied. How desperate do women have to become to do that? Will New Zealand women find out?
    • rosy 13.1

      24 June 2011 at 4:19 pm

      Money and privilege shout loud, don’t they?
      • Tigger 13.1.1

        24 June 2011 at 4:55 pm

        Classic eh, if a white, heterosexual male makes a sexist comment get a woman to refute, if it’s anti-Maori get someone Maori to refute, similarly get a gay person if it’s homophobic.

        MSM – one person does not represent an entire group. The default tory white hetero male persective is that all X are the same but surprise, it’s not true.
    • Descendant Of Smith 13.2

      24 June 2011 at 11:06 pm

      I remember the factory in the US where men worked on one chain and women worked on the other for lower pay.

      In order to get the higher pay, after women won the case to be allowed to work on that chain, the company decided that it was too dangerous and only women who were unable to bear children could work there – apparently the chemicals used hadn’t affected men’s sperm over the years. As some of these women were sole income earners for the family several had hysterectomy’s. When Regan got in and appointed tame judges they all got sacked when the company took the case back to court.

      Bunch of wankers. And our business leaders aspire to be like the US – I’ve never understood why we have got from world leaders in social justice to halfwit followers of others bad habits.

      I’ll have to dig that case out – pre-interenet so I’ll have to go through some old documents.
      • Frank Macskasy 13.2.1

        27 June 2011 at 12:35 am

        Jeez, so much for “Truth, Justice, and the American Way”…
14. dupdedo 14

    24 June 2011 at 7:28 pm

    I see ECCC (Formerly EMA Wellington) and keeping their heads low.
15. Frank Macskasy 15

    27 June 2011 at 12:34 am

    On the positive side to Thompson’s stupid comments, at least young women – who never experienced the feminist-led struggle against sexism in the ’60s and ’70s – now have a glimpse as to what their older sisters fought against, not too long ago.

    Who knows – maybe the term “feminist” will make a comeback.

    Thank you, Alasdair. (Ok, you can go back to your cave now.)

Links to post

1. Check their assumptions: equal pay edition « Ideologically Impure: posted on 28 June 2011 at 6:56 pm

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS