- - - - - - - - - - - - -

Friday, February 27, 2009

Job summit a set up


Who the hell let John Key get filmed spinning around and around and around yesterday as he's trying to talk about not letting the economy spin out of control? You could see his Spin Dr's in the background wincing at the image of the PM spinning endlessly and the focus on his footing by the media as he tried to stand up desperately trying not to look wobbly on his feet.

Here is why the Job Summit is a set up

1: The Media are banned from sitting in on the sessions to see exactly what is said, why are they so frightened to let the media see that and the none transparency doesn't help ease concerns that this is a jack up with a pre-determined solution.

2: The largest opposition party has been banned from attending.

So National are calling a 'job summit' which the media won't be able to attend beyond the PR spin and the Opposition party is banned from turning up all together. Seeing as National have already passed a 90 day right to sack law, have raised the minimum wage by a pitiful 50cents and are about to redesign tenancy laws to benfit the landlord, let's not pretend National are the friend of working NZers and holding their 'job summit' in secret doesn't help shrug the feeling National have already made up their mind on a plan.

16 Comments:

At 27/2/09 7:16 am, Anonymous sdm said...

1) The 90 Day law encourages employment - so is a good move. Most sensible people agree, and it is used widely around the world.

2) A large raise in the minimum wage would have led to increased redundancies - national got the balance right - pushed it up but not by too much

3) Giving Landlords the right to protect their investment does encourage that investment to be made.

4) Why the fuck should Labour be invited? This is about the government working with employers, ie businesses, to create favourable employment conditions. Labour needs to stop thinking its the government and realise it doesnt get to call the shots anymore.

5) Banning the media might actually be a good thing - some of the hysterical reporting might be prevented and robust discussions take place.

 
At 27/2/09 7:42 am, Blogger Bomber said...

1) The 90 Day law encourages employment - so is a good move. Most sensible people agree, and it is used widely around the world.

BULLSHIT SCOTT! 105 000 NZers find themselves new workers every 3months within the NZ labour cycle, add the 7%-14% unemployment rate and what you get is an environment where workers will be exploited. Bosses will be able to exploit workers and that's why bosses (like scott) support it.

2) A large raise in the minimum wage would have led to increased redundancies - national got the balance right - pushed it up but not by too much
Nonesense - this Govt has screamed the most about catching up to Australia, their minimum wage is effectively $17 an hour, we are $12.50 - it isn't the tax rates that we need to compete with, it is the wage gap - funhny how Scott is more than happy to point out the exedus to Australia but not ready to tackle the wage reasons. Those minimum wages will need to feed many more mouths with higher unemployment and that money will do more to stimulate the economy than the tax cuts aimed at the welathy.

3) Giving Landlords the right to protect their investment does encourage that investment to be made.
Crap - at a time with such economic uncertainty and pain and with more NZers renting, the law should protect those who don't have the power rather than propping up Nationals land owning voters, many of whom were responsible for the over heated property market with their speculative investments.

4) Why the fuck should Labour be invited? This is about the government working with employers, ie businesses, to create favourable employment conditions. Labour needs to stop thinking its the government and realise it doesnt get to call the shots anymore.
BULLSHIT - is this the worst economic recession we've seen Scott or are you another right winger pretending it won't be bad - this is an emergency meeting, and the representatives of the people need to all be there, or do Labour represent no one under Scott's world view now. National's born to rule mentality is coming to the surface and by ruling Labour out it means those who find themselves increasinly on the scrap heap will see the job summit for what it is - an old boys network getting together to look after their interests, not the interests of NZ.

5) Banning the media might actually be a good thing - some of the hysterical reporting might be prevented and robust discussions take place.
So now we should have the views of those in power censored and hidden from public scrutiny? After John Key has repeatedly pointed to this summit as the solution, now we aren't allowed to see it? I never thought you'd be supporting Government secrecy in the face of a crises Scott, what other things shouldn't the people of NZ be allowed to see Scott?

 
At 27/2/09 8:12 am, Anonymous sdm said...

"BULLSHIT SCOTT! 105 000 NZers find themselves new workers every 3months within the NZ labour cycle, add the 7%-14% unemployment rate and what you get is an environment where workers will be exploited. Bosses will be able to exploit workers and that's why bosses (like scott) support it."

Complete nonsense. You think employers just hire people for shits and giggles? In small firms where this law applies? I dont have time for that. This makes sure when I do employ, I get a good one. It removes the risk.

"Nonesense - this Govt has screamed the most about catching up to Australia, their minimum wage is effectively $17 an hour, we are $12.50 - it isn't the tax rates that we need to compete with, it is the wage gap - funhny how Scott is more than happy to point out the exedus to Australia but not ready to tackle the wage reasons. Those minimum wages will need to feed many more mouths with higher unemployment and that money will do more to stimulate the economy than the tax cuts aimed at the welathy."

How are you going to pay for a $17 dollar minimum wage? Where does that money for the wage increase come from? Explain to me how its affordable?

"Crap - at a time with such economic uncertainty and pain and with more NZers renting, the law should protect those who don't have the power rather than propping up Nationals land owning voters, many of whom were responsible for the over heated property market with their speculative investments."

The Law does protect tenants at present. A landlord cant just kick them out if they dont pay. I think a landlord should be able to recover the costs of any damage done to their property - dont you agree? Most NZers would.

"BULLSHIT - is this the worst economic recession we've seen Scott or are you another right winger pretending it won't be bad - this is an emergency meeting, and the representatives of the people need to all be there, or do Labour represent no one under Scott's world view now. National's born to rule mentality is coming to the surface and by ruling Labour out it means those who find themselves increasinly on the scrap heap will see the job summit for what it is - an old boys network getting together to look after their interests, not the interests of NZ."

I've said dozens of times this thing is bad. I stick to my point - this is about businesses, because those are the people who do the employing. Nationals born to rule mentality? Such a statement could have been directed at Labour. This is about, or should be, creating conditions in which businesses can keep employing.

"So now we should have the views of those in power censored and hidden from public scrutiny? After John Key has repeatedly pointed to this summit as the solution, now we aren't allowed to see it? I never thought you'd be supporting Government secrecy in the face of a crises Scott, what other things shouldn't the people of NZ be allowed to see Scott?"

I was wrong on this and will concede the point.

 
At 27/2/09 8:26 am, Blogger Bomber said...

Complete nonsense. You think employers just hire people for shits and giggles? In small firms where this law applies? I dont have time for that. This makes sure when I do employ, I get a good one. It removes the risk.

What is nonesense, that 105 000 NZers find themslves as new employees once every 3 months? That the unemployment rate between 7%-14% will add massive numbers to that and that will lead to an exploitation of workers? How is that nonesense. You bitch about making it easier and yet NZ was rated as one of the best places to do bussiness before this law was passed.

How are you going to pay for a $17 dollar minimum wage? Where does that money for the wage increase come from? Explain to me how its affordable?
A dollar increase over the next 3 years, I'm not suggesting we do it all at once, I agree with the Citizens Inititated Referendum on this point.

The Law does protect tenants at present. A landlord cant just kick them out if they dont pay. I think a landlord should be able to recover the costs of any damage done to their property - dont you agree? Most NZers would.
Scott you are being disingenuous here - I have no issue with Landlords protecting their assett but moving away from a law weighted for tenants to landlords at a time of economic pain WILL cause upheaval and National are doing it to look after their land owning voters.

I've said dozens of times this thing is bad. I stick to my point - this is about businesses,
And I stick to my point, this is about PEOPLE

because those are the people who do the employing.
And the people who do the working, what about them?

Nationals born to rule mentality? Such a statement could have been directed at Labour. This is about, or should be, creating conditions in which businesses can keep employing.
This is and should be about the people who are about to get mauled, come on - YOU KNOW how bad this is going to get, by not including people National are making the rod to beat their own backs with - 7% unemployment is a lot of angry and hungry people, if they don't think they are being heard that will come back mon National, and banning Labour is just petty bullshit.

This job summit is a jack up.

 
At 27/2/09 9:01 am, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The job summit could start by hiring someone to proof-read their "workflow plans", they are riddled with spelling mistakes and grammatical errors. But then perhaps the correct use of English is too 'nanny state' for Mactional.

 
At 27/2/09 9:07 am, Anonymous Linseed Oil said...

There are are enough lefty numpties on the list of people attending the summit Bomber if you acctaully took the time to look

 
At 27/2/09 9:16 am, Anonymous John Holmes said...

Why jump up and down like a monkey over this! the job summit will do nothing to solve or alleviate this market correction. Even if Labour was involved it would achieve nothing! There is nothing any of the World's governement can do to solve this except step aside and let the markets correct. Yes there will be jobs losses and pain, but we will get through it faster and with less pain then with government intervention which is burdening future generations with excessive debt. The idea that you can spend your way out of a recession using debt has never worked and never will.

 
At 27/2/09 9:52 am, Anonymous Anonymous said...

By banning the media this ensures that only propaganda statements make it out to Joe Kiwi.

 
At 27/2/09 11:58 am, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Media are allowed at the break-out sessions, according to the live reporter on TV One's Breakfast. Th3ey have to observe the Chatham House Rule - that is, they can report the debate and the ideas presented, but can't attribute quotes or ideas to any of the participants. The idea for this rule is that it allows individuals to propose and discuss ideas that may not necessarily fit with the views of the organisations they represent. It's standrad at many high level fora.

 
At 27/2/09 6:08 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bomber you don't really believe sdm is an actual boss? No one running a company can spend all day on blog sites.

I didn't think you were that naive.

 
At 27/2/09 6:32 pm, Anonymous sdm said...

Anonymous 6.08pm: For a second you had us convinced you had a brain. Note that I did not post between 8am and now - cos I have been really busy.

Dont worry, our paths will never cross - you cant afford me.

 
At 27/2/09 6:53 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thanks for confirming my assumption sdm. You have shown you are a petulant loser who is insecure enough to create an online 'boss' persona to give your views more credibility.

As for the prostitution offer - thanks but no thanks.

 
At 27/2/09 7:27 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

LOL what a fraud sdm is

 
At 27/2/09 8:17 pm, Anonymous dr who said...

We need some Daleks to patrol the streets of South Auckland.

 
At 27/2/09 8:58 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

genius idea dr who!

 
At 28/2/09 10:56 am, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The 90 day law is not a bad idea.
People can present well during the interview process but then turn out to not be able to actually do the job you hired them for and unfortunately incompetence is not sufficient grounds to fire someone.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home