Thread: Welfare. Can't Get A Job,..Yeah Right.

12 hr shifts vs 8 hours. I'll take the 12 hr shifts thanks..

Means I won't go to work 20 times in 4 weeks. I'll only go in 14 times..

Or when I was DIDO - went to work for 8 out of 14... (but put in long hours which I enjoyed).

3x8 rosters suck - they provide NO lifestyle for the worker.. DNA roster has too many lost days to recover... and saves the company money at the expense of the worker..

I'm awake 18-20 out of 24 hours a day and to give 9 hours or 12 hours up for work is no biggie.. especially when on 12s you have a big block of time to yourself each rotation.

Shifting through DNA sucks...

Originally Posted by bblaze

If you had no 12hr shifts on mine sites and done 3 x 8 instead how many more would be employed, sure the big money is not there for the workers and the companies will say it cost more, well that's where the greed comes into it. I understand that not all situations are able to do this but a lot can. For most of my life I have been self employed and was more than happy will a $1000 a week, if I got my money in 3 days, that was it for the week, if I worked 5 and didn't get there so be it. Started in life with nothing and got a bit more than that now but its been a hell of ride on the way through
cheers
blaze

I can never get my head around the train of thought that if a business no matter how big or small cuts costs to make a profit it's seen as greed, Yet , someone can shop online and buy from overseas because they can get it cheaper than locally and that's seen as smart business.

Oh well guess That's what happens when your a high school drop out like me


Cheers Ean

I think a lot of the problem these days is that big business makes as much as it can to pander to their shareholders.

Originally Posted by jx2mad

I think a lot of the problem these days is that big business makes as much as it can to pander to their shareholders.

The whole reason why businesses offer shares in the first place, the more profit the more people will invest in that company's shares. A lot of people have super invested in shares so they don't want to see their money decline because the share price drops.

I don't see any reason why a business that has shareholders wouldnt pander to them.

Cheers Ean

All this goes to higher prices etc, so the cycle goes round

Yes that's the capitalist economy most of us seem to want. ...despite the fact that it's ultimately a winner takes all system.

...As such, higher unemployment in the future is a given.

When the winner takes it all, eventually there's none left for anyone else, or part thereof. ...especially the vulnerable, the elderly, the disadvantaged, the disabled and the many who don't want to live they're lives trampling on others to become the winners.

A social security safety net (welfare) makes sense to me in a civilised sharing caring society, although that will probably be scrapped by the winners one day too.

Originally Posted by jx2mad

I think a lot of the problem these days is that big business makes as much as it can to pander to their shareholders.

Which are often OUR Superannuation Companies...

Something to do with Having Cake and Eating it too

Very much like Aussie steel vs imports. Sell Ore OS and then get upset when it comes back as cheap steel..

Or purchase cheap Korean (etc) vehicles and then complain when they devalue quick/break down/no jobs locally... (I understand there is a LOT more to it)....

When imports far out way exports or domestic consumption of domestic products something has to give...

The great student swindle | Widespread underpayment & exploitation of young workers
Interesting, kids doing uni trying to work, getting screwed over