Trade in your lunch breaks, Costello urges

[Violet_Crumble]

The federal government's industrial relations overhaul will allow workers to trade their lunch breaks for extra money or shorter hours, Treasurer Peter Costello says.

Defending the controversial plan on Southern Cross radio today, Mr Costello said many people would be "quite willing" to consider the trade-off.

"How many of us today stop for a smoko? Not many," he said.

"The reason why many of them are much happier to work say a 36-hour week without smokos is because you leave for home earlier ... what we want to do is give people maximum flexibility in relation to hours and the right to negotiate.

"You'd be foolish if you took away that right to negotiate."

http://www.theage.com.au/news/business/trade-in-your-lunch-breaks-costello-urges/2005/07/27/1122143877462.html

Did OH&S legislation cease to exist while I wasn't looking? Nothing like a whole lot of fatigued workers not having regular breaks and suffering accidents in the workplace...

[lynettebro440]

1. China

in the making!

[acmavm]

2. Pretty soon this douche bag will come up with a reason to give up

your nights and weekends. And at no cost to the employer.

This guy is a perfect example of why the American worker is so abused. Even when you're not working, your employer has you by the throat (not my first choice of words but since I'm female, the other one wouldn't work).

They can fire you for internet activity, they can fire you for your political activity, they can fire you for bumper stickers on your car, the American worker has absolutely no rights whatsoever. And this was predicted when mandatory drug testing was first allowed. I know that this is strange to associate the two, but believe me, when drug testing came up and people were being tested who didn't perform hazardous job duties, or those involving public safety, a lot of us said that eventually workers would have no rights. That drug testing without a reason not only invaded one's privacy by encroached on our personal lives.

Well, here we are and here it is.

[fasttense]

3. The right to negotiate means the right of employers to not offer it.

No lunch breaks, 36 hour days, sounds like the 1800's. What next? the right to negotiate your eight year old's labor contract? We have both parents working long hours to make one living wage, why not send those kiddies to work instead of school? The public school system is no good anyway so put those kiddies to work.

[Matilda]

4. Howard's not trying to take us back to the 1950s.

This is the 19th century.

Whatever it takes to keep the big corporations on his side.

[foreigncorrespondent]

5. How long...

...before they make it mandatory for us to work through all our breaks?

Did we die and go to hell while I was sleeping?

[Matilda]

6. Who would have thought we might be grateful to Families First

and the Nats to stop this bill going through?

[anakie]

7. I'm afraid the Nats won't stop anything

despite Barnaby Joyce's mutterings prior to going to Canberra. He will be quietly pulled aside and told the ways of Canberra. And as for Family First, Johnnie will offer them something on either gays or abortion and they will then vote along government lines.

I see our only hope is that they will be unable to take over all the states IR laws.

[foreigncorrespondent]

8. Exactly!

Some opposition party we have. :(