Thread: Our latest scheme for getting casual Workers

Originally Posted by Brian Hjelm

Jesus, where are you coming from? I only ever worked for the money like most everybody I know. To me the $$$'s were the most important factor in accepting a new position. I didn't work because I liked it but to buy the groceries.

Yes, nugge t is absolutely correct. There are other considerations that come above money in people's work motivations. I can't remember the name of the management study, but overall, money was surprisingly low down the list.

Don't forget we're all different Brian, otherwise we'd have no charity or volunteer workers.

Originally Posted by nugge t

When we were using employment agencies who were placing unemployed we had a massive turn over..and that was AFTER we screened out the druggies.

65% would take a day off in the first week hoping they would be sacked. We would employ them as 38hr casuals but they would tell Centrelink they were only getting 3 days. They would then take off 1 or 2 days a week until they were sacked and then go straight back on the dole.

Nearly had a stand up fight on the footpath with one guy who was demanding to be sacked and me refusing!!!!!!!

The bottom line is that the incentive to work has to be greater than the reward for not working. It was amazing how eager Indian students were to work as they had no fall back position. And before frantic jumps on the union bandwagon....they were paid exactly the same wages and had exactly the same conditions as the Aussies or anyone else. Ironically because of our bonus sytem, they earned more than the Aussies because they worked harder!

As Brian said, nothing to do with unions, more to do with dollars per hour reality.
Do the maths 26.50 v 8.50 staying home. For the work take out tax say 4-5$ ,transport $2(16 per day) Clothing, boots etc and the cash job of 1-2 days tor 2-300 or about $7 an hour. Add it up so your down to about $12.50 paid to $8.50 dole so for 4 bucks an hour or $160 a week they must attend your site for 38hours. Then as was said throw in child support and it gets lower.
Now if I said to you ,"work for around $4 an hour "what would you say?
Also with such a high turnover rate what does that mean?
I've never seen a person begging or fighting to be sacked here at port K or even in Sydney TNT. Only seen VR, retirement or moving to better jobs.

Originally Posted by Brian Hjelm

Jesus, where are you coming from? I only ever worked for the money like most everybody I know. To me the $$$'s were the most important factor in accepting a new position. I didn't work because I liked it but to buy the groceries.

I wouldn't comment on your specific situation but generally people who only work for the money have lots of jobs because everytime they are offered .50c and hour more they are on the move. Most employers are not looking for that sort of employee but it is probably more common amongst younger groups and probaly certain occupations. In out industry we are normally looking for longer term employees as we have to train the them so staff turnover is expensive.

My approach to selecting a job was:
1)Good working conditions and strong possibilities to learn more in the job.
2) working the lower hours a day that was possible so I can be more time with the family and see my kids. We cannot go back in time
3) Reasonable income that pay for the necessities of life plus compensate for the time away from home.
4) Job security.

Come to think about, there were no 1 to 4, they were all number 1.

Originally Posted by nugge t

I wouldn't comment on your specific situation but generally people who only work for the money have lots of jobs because everytime they are offered .50c and hour more they are on the move. Most employers are not looking for that sort of employee but it is probably more common amongst younger groups and probaly certain occupations. In out industry we are normally looking for longer term employees as we have to train the them so staff turnover is expensive.

There is an old outback saying, "The rolling stone may gather no moss, but the standing post gets ****ed on."

Never forget what you are doing when you work for someone on wages/salary/commission. You are selling your labour and expertise. You owe it to yourself to get the maximum rate for this.

My working life was about 50/50 employed/self employed. After I hung up my overalls in my 20's I had senior staff jobs in sales and marketing and had line haul trucks, a used car yard, and a machine shop. I left senior and well paid jobs mostly for more money, because I thoroughly disliked a new boss, a couple of upstart boy wonder managers, promises that were not kept, being told that commission would be withheld until the trade-in was sold and so on. I got sick of 60-70 hour weeks in my machine shop and aged almost 50 took to the public service. A job that would last as long as I wanted and had decent super.

Brian I am glad it works for you. cheers

frantic, not even going there with you. The swipe at staff turn is typical of your union biased uniformed comments and if all I wanted to do was listen to that sort of garbage I would watch the ABC

Originally Posted by frantic

As Brian said, nothing to do with unions, more to do with dollars per hour reality.
Do the maths 26.50 v 8.50 staying home. For the work take out tax say 4-5$ ,transport $2(16 per day) Clothing, boots etc and the cash job of 1-2 days tor 2-300 or about $7 an hour. Add it up so your down to about $12.50 paid to $8.50 dole so for 4 bucks an hour or $160 a week they must attend your site for 38hours. Then as was said throw in child support and it gets lower.
Now if I said to you ,"work for around $4 an hour "what would you say?
Also with such a high turnover rate what does that mean?
I've never seen a person begging or fighting to be sacked here at port K or even in Sydney TNT. Only seen VR, retirement or moving to better jobs.

Factor in people on the dole and pensions get discounts on rego rates and utilities and low paid work is a liaility.

Sorry my comma and a*c is not working.

Originally Posted by nugge t

Brian I am glad it works for you. cheers

frantic, not even going there with you. The swipe at staff turn is typical of your union biased uniformed comments and if all I wanted to do was listen to that sort of garbage I would watch the ABC

Again repeat- read my post NOTHING TO DO WITH UNION.
Higher staff turnover with "a standup fight "being threatened so they can go back on the dole is a reasonable indicator of issues, with pay springing to mind if the dole is more attractive.
My family has worked both ends of the spectrum from the upper management of a very large company to new home sales .then with me working both union and non union jobs and 24/7 shift work. You see a high turnover in certain jobs depending upon the economy and other factors but usually the first thing they offer when poaching a person is more $$$$ with conditions talked about later. As Brian said both my parents where poached , with both returning to their old employers,one with far better (national corporate manager)and one on the same conditions, but both for the same reason, the new manager was a Wayne , last name Kerr. This manager type caused a mass exodus at both places and the end result was both companies with Wayne's for managers was a large loss of business and in both cases an eventual closure of Aussie division other was bankruptcy.
Now getting back on subject as I don't know about dole, can they only partially reduce payments for peak workloads like Eian's situation, fruit pickets etc or do they cut then have to re-do all the paperwork each time casual work slows.