A typical Liberal IR story

[Raven]

The story unfolds... never mind fairness this is an example of a poor
employer legally dismissing an employee.

May I ask your indulgence and tell you my own view on the 2007
election. I have until recently worked for 3 years as a part time
casual at a large local camera store in Maroochydore. Being a
Professional Photographer it was beneficial to myself and I thought my
knowledge was valuable to my employer.

Earlier this year I was asked to vacuum the floor with an old vacuum
cleaner having done half the floor I found the electrical cable had
worn through and the wires were exposed, as per my responsibilities
under workplace health and safety I reported this to my employer and
was told he would fix it. A short time later the cleaner was returned
to me with some sticky tape round the damaged cord area. I considered
this to be unsafe and refused to use the equipment. I based this
decision on the fact that I had been a member of the Occupational
Health and Safety committee at the university where I was previously
employed for 16 years, My wife is a trained Occupational health and
safety nurse and my son is an Occupational health and safety manager
at a mine so Occ health and safety is a fairly common discussion in
our home, so I am fairly aware of my responsibilities.

My employer gave me a simple choice "Use the equipment or leave".
Rather than risk my life (I refuse to have "Died while vacuuming the
floor" inscribed on my tombstone :) and endanger the lives of
customers and other staff, I left. As soon as I got home I called the
local Occupational Health and Safety office and reported the incident.
They attended the scene and found the item to be faulty and dangerous.

Now the interesting part. If I had used this equipment under
Queensland Occupational Health and Safety laws I would be liable for a
fine not exceeding $20,000 and or up to 12 months in prison. However
after extensive discussion with the federal workplace minister Joe
Hockey and his office I have been informed under the federal law it is
neither unlawful or unfair dismissal for my employer to sack me for
refusing to use dangerous equipment. Let me repeat that It is not
illegal to sack a worker for refusing to break the law and endanger
their life and the lives of others.

I took this matter to the AIRC as there was no assistance available
from the government for sacked workers I had to attend by myself. I
managed to bluff my way through the meeting and negotiated a return to
work with 4 points agreed on by my employer and myself. He required
that I park my car in the correct car park and wear the correct colour
shirt one day a week. I required that I return to work on the same
duties as before and that my employer not abuse either myself or other
staff or customers.

These were agreed on and the commissioner made a point of emphasizing
my disability to my employer ( i am dyslexic and find writing quickly
and accurately under pressure impossible)

On my return to work I was presented with a document with 32 new
duties for me to perform 12 of these new duties involved reading and
writing something my employer had been specifically told I was not
capable of performing and that I had repeatedly told my employer I was
not capable of doing over my previous 3 years employment.

I stressed out and went off on sick leave, my doctor approved this and
I was accepted for work-cover payments. I checked with the AIRC saying
we had negotiated an agreement and my employer had not kept his side
of that agreement what happens next? Their reply was slightly
confronting they just said that they had negotiated a return to work
so the case was closed there was absolutely no responsibility on their
part that the employer keep to the agreement. Once the matter leaves
the AIRC then that is the end of it.

I was pretty disappointed with this with this to say the least.

I contacted my local member of parliament a Liberal while his office
was very concerned but was unable to do anything to assist me other
than tell me that they thought the system was unfair and did not
protect workers.

Sometime later I was still on work-cover payments I received a letter
from my superannuation company informing me that my employer had
ceased my super payments because my employment had been terminated. I
had been sacked while I was on sick leave this was unlawful dismissal
under workchoices legislation so I contacted the Workchoices office
they agreed that it was unlawful but told me there was nothing they or
any other government department could do to assist me. I mentioned
the workchoices advertisement offering protection to workers and was
told that that did not cover this situation.

I phoned the workplace ombudsman and was told "Get a Lawyer" when I
suggested that it may be a case they should investigate I was told
that I was being uncooperative and they hung up on me.

I again contacted my local member and they contacted Joe Hockey's
office I got an email from Joe Hockey's office saying that this was a
matter that the Workplace Ombudsman could and should investigate and
that a senior officer from the Brisbane office would contact me
shortly, a person called and I explained the situation he said that
there was nothing they could do. I suggested that I had been sacked
while on sick leave and that this was unlawful by their laws he
replied "If we help you then we would also have to help your
employer" I told him that Hockey's office had said that this was
something they could investigate, he replied and I quote "The minister
and his department have no idea about the legislation or what is going
on"

I again contacted my local member and Hockey's office and they agreed
that this was not a matter for the ombudsman and that there was no
assistance available to me.

Being an annoying and very determined person I again contacted Joe
Hockey's office after he stated publicly that "he would investigate
any wrongdoing by either union or employer". He was, of course,
defending using government funds to investigate alleged union wrong
doings.

I again was contacted by a senior person in the workplace ombudsman's
office who at least made what appeared to be an attempt to get some
assistance for me.

So far nothing has been forthcoming. To sum up a long story all the
advertising all the assurances all the "Protected by law" statements
are worthless propaganda, when it comes to the crunch, the new
workplace laws are written for and by employers. Employees have had
their basic working rights that have ben fought for by generations of
unions and workers stripped away.

I will continue to fight and annoy them as much as possible. I will
also tell my story to anyone who will listen.

If you have made it this far through my story thank you. I am not
alone in unfair or unlawful dismissal I have heard many similar
stories but unless a worker can come up with the $40,000 or so to take
the case to a federal court the employer escapes any justice.

Why will I not be voting for John Howard and his team of supporters? I
think you get the main idea.


Is there a Liberal in this NG who would come up with a solution?name
withheld.....

[Patrick]

Post by Raven
The story unfolds... never mind fairness this is an example of a poor
employer legally dismissing an employee.
May I ask your indulgence and tell you my own view on the 2007
election. I have until recently worked for 3 years as a part time
casual at a large local camera store in Maroochydore. Being a
Professional Photographer it was beneficial to myself and I thought my
knowledge was valuable to my employer.
Earlier this year I was asked to vacuum the floor with an old vacuum
cleaner having done half the floor I found the electrical cable had
worn through and the wires were exposed, as per my responsibilities
under workplace health and safety I reported this to my employer and
was told he would fix it. A short time later the cleaner was returned
to me with some sticky tape round the damaged cord area. I considered
this to be unsafe and refused to use the equipment. I based this
decision on the fact that I had been a member of the Occupational
Health and Safety committee at the university where I was previously
employed for 16 years, My wife is a trained Occupational health and
safety nurse and my son is an Occupational health and safety manager
at a mine so Occ health and safety is a fairly common discussion in
our home, so I am fairly aware of my responsibilities.
My employer gave me a simple choice "Use the equipment or leave".
Rather than risk my life (I refuse to have "Died while vacuuming the
floor" inscribed on my tombstone :) and endanger the lives of
customers and other staff, I left. As soon as I got home I called the
local Occupational Health and Safety office and reported the incident.
They attended the scene and found the item to be faulty and dangerous.
Now the interesting part. If I had used this equipment under
Queensland Occupational Health and Safety laws I would be liable for a
fine not exceeding $20,000 and or up to 12 months in prison. However
after extensive discussion with the federal workplace minister Joe
Hockey and his office I have been informed under the federal law it is
neither unlawful or unfair dismissal for my employer to sack me for
refusing to use dangerous equipment. Let me repeat that It is not
illegal to sack a worker for refusing to break the law and endanger
their life and the lives of others.
I took this matter to the AIRC as there was no assistance available
from the government for sacked workers I had to attend by myself. I
managed to bluff my way through the meeting and negotiated a return to
work with 4 points agreed on by my employer and myself. He required
that I park my car in the correct car park and wear the correct colour
shirt one day a week. I required that I return to work on the same
duties as before and that my employer not abuse either myself or other
staff or customers.
These were agreed on and the commissioner made a point of emphasizing
my disability to my employer ( i am dyslexic and find writing quickly
and accurately under pressure impossible)
On my return to work I was presented with a document with 32 new
duties for me to perform 12 of these new duties involved reading and
writing something my employer had been specifically told I was not
capable of performing and that I had repeatedly told my employer I was
not capable of doing over my previous 3 years employment.
I stressed out and went off on sick leave, my doctor approved this and
I was accepted for work-cover payments. I checked with the AIRC saying
we had negotiated an agreement and my employer had not kept his side
of that agreement what happens next? Their reply was slightly
confronting they just said that they had negotiated a return to work
so the case was closed there was absolutely no responsibility on their
part that the employer keep to the agreement. Once the matter leaves
the AIRC then that is the end of it.
I was pretty disappointed with this with this to say the least.
I contacted my local member of parliament a Liberal while his office
was very concerned but was unable to do anything to assist me other
than tell me that they thought the system was unfair and did not
protect workers.
Sometime later I was still on work-cover payments I received a letter
from my superannuation company informing me that my employer had
ceased my super payments because my employment had been terminated. I
had been sacked while I was on sick leave this was unlawful dismissal
under workchoices legislation so I contacted the Workchoices office
they agreed that it was unlawful but told me there was nothing they or
any other government department could do to assist me. I mentioned
the workchoices advertisement offering protection to workers and was
told that that did not cover this situation.
I phoned the workplace ombudsman and was told "Get a Lawyer" when I
suggested that it may be a case they should investigate I was told
that I was being uncooperative and they hung up on me.
I again contacted my local member and they contacted Joe Hockey's
office I got an email from Joe Hockey's office saying that this was a
matter that the Workplace Ombudsman could and should investigate and
that a senior officer from the Brisbane office would contact me
shortly, a person called and I explained the situation he said that
there was nothing they could do. I suggested that I had been sacked
while on sick leave and that this was unlawful by their laws he
replied "If we help you then we would also have to help your
employer" I told him that Hockey's office had said that this was
something they could investigate, he replied and I quote "The minister
and his department have no idea about the legislation or what is going
on"
I again contacted my local member and Hockey's office and they agreed
that this was not a matter for the ombudsman and that there was no
assistance available to me.
Being an annoying and very determined person I again contacted Joe
Hockey's office after he stated publicly that "he would investigate
any wrongdoing by either union or employer". He was, of course,
defending using government funds to investigate alleged union wrong
doings.
I again was contacted by a senior person in the workplace ombudsman's
office who at least made what appeared to be an attempt to get some
assistance for me.
So far nothing has been forthcoming. To sum up a long story all the
advertising all the assurances all the "Protected by law" statements
are worthless propaganda, when it comes to the crunch, the new
workplace laws are written for and by employers. Employees have had
their basic working rights that have ben fought for by generations of
unions and workers stripped away.
I will continue to fight and annoy them as much as possible. I will
also tell my story to anyone who will listen.
If you have made it this far through my story thank you. I am not
alone in unfair or unlawful dismissal I have heard many similar
stories but unless a worker can come up with the $40,000 or so to take
the case to a federal court the employer escapes any justice.
Why will I not be voting for John Howard and his team of supporters? I
think you get the main idea.
Is there a Liberal in this NG who would come up with a solution?name
withheld.....

E-mail the ACTU, they'll highlight your saga and force the people
involved to do whats right.

[Raven]

Post by Patrick

Post by Raven
The story unfolds... never mind fairness this is an example of a poor
employer legally dismissing an employee.
May I ask your indulgence and tell you my own view on the 2007
election. I have until recently worked for 3 years as a part time
casual at a large local camera store in Maroochydore. Being a
Professional Photographer it was beneficial to myself and I thought my
knowledge was valuable to my employer.
Earlier this year I was asked to vacuum the floor with an old vacuum
cleaner having done half the floor I found the electrical cable had
worn through and the wires were exposed, as per my responsibilities
under workplace health and safety I reported this to my employer and
was told he would fix it. A short time later the cleaner was returned
to me with some sticky tape round the damaged cord area. I considered
this to be unsafe and refused to use the equipment. I based this
decision on the fact that I had been a member of the Occupational
Health and Safety committee at the university where I was previously
employed for 16 years, My wife is a trained Occupational health and
safety nurse and my son is an Occupational health and safety manager
at a mine so Occ health and safety is a fairly common discussion in
our home, so I am fairly aware of my responsibilities.
My employer gave me a simple choice "Use the equipment or leave".
Rather than risk my life (I refuse to have "Died while vacuuming the
floor" inscribed on my tombstone :) and endanger the lives of
customers and other staff, I left. As soon as I got home I called the
local Occupational Health and Safety office and reported the incident.
They attended the scene and found the item to be faulty and dangerous.
Now the interesting part. If I had used this equipment under
Queensland Occupational Health and Safety laws I would be liable for a
fine not exceeding $20,000 and or up to 12 months in prison. However
after extensive discussion with the federal workplace minister Joe
Hockey and his office I have been informed under the federal law it is
neither unlawful or unfair dismissal for my employer to sack me for
refusing to use dangerous equipment. Let me repeat that It is not
illegal to sack a worker for refusing to break the law and endanger
their life and the lives of others.
I took this matter to the AIRC as there was no assistance available
from the government for sacked workers I had to attend by myself. I
managed to bluff my way through the meeting and negotiated a return to
work with 4 points agreed on by my employer and myself. He required
that I park my car in the correct car park and wear the correct colour
shirt one day a week. I required that I return to work on the same
duties as before and that my employer not abuse either myself or other
staff or customers.
These were agreed on and the commissioner made a point of emphasizing
my disability to my employer ( i am dyslexic and find writing quickly
and accurately under pressure impossible)
On my return to work I was presented with a document with 32 new
duties for me to perform 12 of these new duties involved reading and
writing something my employer had been specifically told I was not
capable of performing and that I had repeatedly told my employer I was
not capable of doing over my previous 3 years employment.
I stressed out and went off on sick leave, my doctor approved this and
I was accepted for work-cover payments. I checked with the AIRC saying
we had negotiated an agreement and my employer had not kept his side
of that agreement what happens next? Their reply was slightly
confronting they just said that they had negotiated a return to work
so the case was closed there was absolutely no responsibility on their
part that the employer keep to the agreement. Once the matter leaves
the AIRC then that is the end of it.
I was pretty disappointed with this with this to say the least.
I contacted my local member of parliament a Liberal while his office
was very concerned but was unable to do anything to assist me other
than tell me that they thought the system was unfair and did not
protect workers.
Sometime later I was still on work-cover payments I received a letter
from my superannuation company informing me that my employer had
ceased my super payments because my employment had been terminated. I
had been sacked while I was on sick leave this was unlawful dismissal
under workchoices legislation so I contacted the Workchoices office
they agreed that it was unlawful but told me there was nothing they or
any other government department could do to assist me. I mentioned
the workchoices advertisement offering protection to workers and was
told that that did not cover this situation.
I phoned the workplace ombudsman and was told "Get a Lawyer" when I
suggested that it may be a case they should investigate I was told
that I was being uncooperative and they hung up on me.
I again contacted my local member and they contacted Joe Hockey's
office I got an email from Joe Hockey's office saying that this was a
matter that the Workplace Ombudsman could and should investigate and
that a senior officer from the Brisbane office would contact me
shortly, a person called and I explained the situation he said that
there was nothing they could do. I suggested that I had been sacked
while on sick leave and that this was unlawful by their laws he
replied "If we help you then we would also have to help your
employer" I told him that Hockey's office had said that this was
something they could investigate, he replied and I quote "The minister
and his department have no idea about the legislation or what is going
on"
I again contacted my local member and Hockey's office and they agreed
that this was not a matter for the ombudsman and that there was no
assistance available to me.
Being an annoying and very determined person I again contacted Joe
Hockey's office after he stated publicly that "he would investigate
any wrongdoing by either union or employer". He was, of course,
defending using government funds to investigate alleged union wrong
doings.
I again was contacted by a senior person in the workplace ombudsman's
office who at least made what appeared to be an attempt to get some
assistance for me.
So far nothing has been forthcoming. To sum up a long story all the
advertising all the assurances all the "Protected by law" statements
are worthless propaganda, when it comes to the crunch, the new
workplace laws are written for and by employers. Employees have had
their basic working rights that have ben fought for by generations of
unions and workers stripped away.
I will continue to fight and annoy them as much as possible. I will
also tell my story to anyone who will listen.
If you have made it this far through my story thank you. I am not
alone in unfair or unlawful dismissal I have heard many similar
stories but unless a worker can come up with the $40,000 or so to take
the case to a federal court the employer escapes any justice.
Why will I not be voting for John Howard and his team of supporters? I
think you get the main idea.
Is there a Liberal in this NG who would come up with a solution?name
withheld.....

E-mail the ACTU, they'll highlight your saga and force the people
involved to do whats right.

Are you serious? The ACTU wont help anyone who is not a member....hey
cmon lets get to the point here... the whole 'workchoice' thing is
fucked, TV ads are no more than propaganda on both sides....this post
is just one example.

[Patrick]

Post by Raven

Post by Patrick

Post by Raven
The story unfolds... never mind fairness this is an example of a poor
employer legally dismissing an employee.
May I ask your indulgence and tell you my own view on the 2007
election. I have until recently worked for 3 years as a part time
casual at a large local camera store in Maroochydore. Being a
Professional Photographer it was beneficial to myself and I thought my
knowledge was valuable to my employer.
Earlier this year I was asked to vacuum the floor with an old vacuum
cleaner having done half the floor I found the electrical cable had
worn through and the wires were exposed, as per my responsibilities
under workplace health and safety I reported this to my employer and
was told he would fix it. A short time later the cleaner was returned
to me with some sticky tape round the damaged cord area. I considered
this to be unsafe and refused to use the equipment. I based this
decision on the fact that I had been a member of the Occupational
Health and Safety committee at the university where I was previously
employed for 16 years, My wife is a trained Occupational health and
safety nurse and my son is an Occupational health and safety manager
at a mine so Occ health and safety is a fairly common discussion in
our home, so I am fairly aware of my responsibilities.
My employer gave me a simple choice "Use the equipment or leave".
Rather than risk my life (I refuse to have "Died while vacuuming the
floor" inscribed on my tombstone :) and endanger the lives of
customers and other staff, I left. As soon as I got home I called the
local Occupational Health and Safety office and reported the incident.
They attended the scene and found the item to be faulty and dangerous.
Now the interesting part. If I had used this equipment under
Queensland Occupational Health and Safety laws I would be liable for a
fine not exceeding $20,000 and or up to 12 months in prison. However
after extensive discussion with the federal workplace minister Joe
Hockey and his office I have been informed under the federal law it is
neither unlawful or unfair dismissal for my employer to sack me for
refusing to use dangerous equipment. Let me repeat that It is not
illegal to sack a worker for refusing to break the law and endanger
their life and the lives of others.
I took this matter to the AIRC as there was no assistance available
from the government for sacked workers I had to attend by myself. I
managed to bluff my way through the meeting and negotiated a return to
work with 4 points agreed on by my employer and myself. He required
that I park my car in the correct car park and wear the correct colour
shirt one day a week. I required that I return to work on the same
duties as before and that my employer not abuse either myself or other
staff or customers.
These were agreed on and the commissioner made a point of emphasizing
my disability to my employer ( i am dyslexic and find writing quickly
and accurately under pressure impossible)
On my return to work I was presented with a document with 32 new
duties for me to perform 12 of these new duties involved reading and
writing something my employer had been specifically told I was not
capable of performing and that I had repeatedly told my employer I was
not capable of doing over my previous 3 years employment.
I stressed out and went off on sick leave, my doctor approved this and
I was accepted for work-cover payments. I checked with the AIRC saying
we had negotiated an agreement and my employer had not kept his side
of that agreement what happens next? Their reply was slightly
confronting they just said that they had negotiated a return to work
so the case was closed there was absolutely no responsibility on their
part that the employer keep to the agreement. Once the matter leaves
the AIRC then that is the end of it.
I was pretty disappointed with this with this to say the least.
I contacted my local member of parliament a Liberal while his office
was very concerned but was unable to do anything to assist me other
than tell me that they thought the system was unfair and did not
protect workers.
Sometime later I was still on work-cover payments I received a letter
from my superannuation company informing me that my employer had
ceased my super payments because my employment had been terminated. I
had been sacked while I was on sick leave this was unlawful dismissal
under workchoices legislation so I contacted the Workchoices office
they agreed that it was unlawful but told me there was nothing they or
any other government department could do to assist me. I mentioned
the workchoices advertisement offering protection to workers and was
told that that did not cover this situation.
I phoned the workplace ombudsman and was told "Get a Lawyer" when I
suggested that it may be a case they should investigate I was told
that I was being uncooperative and they hung up on me.
I again contacted my local member and they contacted Joe Hockey's
office I got an email from Joe Hockey's office saying that this was a
matter that the Workplace Ombudsman could and should investigate and
that a senior officer from the Brisbane office would contact me
shortly, a person called and I explained the situation he said that
there was nothing they could do. I suggested that I had been sacked
while on sick leave and that this was unlawful by their laws he
replied "If we help you then we would also have to help your
employer" I told him that Hockey's office had said that this was
something they could investigate, he replied and I quote "The minister
and his department have no idea about the legislation or what is going
on"
I again contacted my local member and Hockey's office and they agreed
that this was not a matter for the ombudsman and that there was no
assistance available to me.
Being an annoying and very determined person I again contacted Joe
Hockey's office after he stated publicly that "he would investigate
any wrongdoing by either union or employer". He was, of course,
defending using government funds to investigate alleged union wrong
doings.
I again was contacted by a senior person in the workplace ombudsman's
office who at least made what appeared to be an attempt to get some
assistance for me.
So far nothing has been forthcoming. To sum up a long story all the
advertising all the assurances all the "Protected by law" statements
are worthless propaganda, when it comes to the crunch, the new
workplace laws are written for and by employers. Employees have had
their basic working rights that have ben fought for by generations of
unions and workers stripped away.
I will continue to fight and annoy them as much as possible. I will
also tell my story to anyone who will listen.
If you have made it this far through my story thank you. I am not
alone in unfair or unlawful dismissal I have heard many similar
stories but unless a worker can come up with the $40,000 or so to take
the case to a federal court the employer escapes any justice.
Why will I not be voting for John Howard and his team of supporters? I
think you get the main idea.
Is there a Liberal in this NG who would come up with a solution?name
withheld.....

E-mail the ACTU, they'll highlight your saga and force the people
involved to do whats right.

Are you serious? The ACTU wont help anyone who is not a member....hey
cmon lets get to the point here... the whole 'workchoice' thing is
fucked, TV ads are no more than propaganda on both sides....this post
is just one example.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

Why dont you ask the ACTU..what have you got to lose

[Mango]

Post by Raven

Post by Patrick

Post by Raven
The story unfolds... never mind fairness this is an example of a poor
employer legally dismissing an employee.
May I ask your indulgence and tell you my own view on the 2007
election. I have until recently worked for 3 years as a part time
casual at a large local camera store in Maroochydore. Being a
Professional Photographer it was beneficial to myself and I thought my
knowledge was valuable to my employer.
Earlier this year I was asked to vacuum the floor with an old vacuum
cleaner having done half the floor I found the electrical cable had
worn through and the wires were exposed, as per my responsibilities
under workplace health and safety I reported this to my employer and
was told he would fix it. A short time later the cleaner was returned
to me with some sticky tape round the damaged cord area. I considered
this to be unsafe and refused to use the equipment. I based this
decision on the fact that I had been a member of the Occupational
Health and Safety committee at the university where I was previously
employed for 16 years, My wife is a trained Occupational health and
safety nurse and my son is an Occupational health and safety manager
at a mine so Occ health and safety is a fairly common discussion in
our home, so I am fairly aware of my responsibilities.
My employer gave me a simple choice "Use the equipment or leave".
Rather than risk my life (I refuse to have "Died while vacuuming the
floor" inscribed on my tombstone :) and endanger the lives of
customers and other staff, I left. As soon as I got home I called the
local Occupational Health and Safety office and reported the incident.
They attended the scene and found the item to be faulty and dangerous.
Now the interesting part. If I had used this equipment under
Queensland Occupational Health and Safety laws I would be liable for a
fine not exceeding $20,000 and or up to 12 months in prison. However
after extensive discussion with the federal workplace minister Joe
Hockey and his office I have been informed under the federal law it is
neither unlawful or unfair dismissal for my employer to sack me for
refusing to use dangerous equipment. Let me repeat that It is not
illegal to sack a worker for refusing to break the law and endanger
their life and the lives of others.
I took this matter to the AIRC as there was no assistance available
from the government for sacked workers I had to attend by myself. I
managed to bluff my way through the meeting and negotiated a return to
work with 4 points agreed on by my employer and myself. He required
that I park my car in the correct car park and wear the correct colour
shirt one day a week. I required that I return to work on the same
duties as before and that my employer not abuse either myself or other
staff or customers.
These were agreed on and the commissioner made a point of emphasizing
my disability to my employer ( i am dyslexic and find writing quickly
and accurately under pressure impossible)
On my return to work I was presented with a document with 32 new
duties for me to perform 12 of these new duties involved reading and
writing something my employer had been specifically told I was not
capable of performing and that I had repeatedly told my employer I was
not capable of doing over my previous 3 years employment.
I stressed out and went off on sick leave, my doctor approved this and
I was accepted for work-cover payments. I checked with the AIRC saying
we had negotiated an agreement and my employer had not kept his side
of that agreement what happens next? Their reply was slightly
confronting they just said that they had negotiated a return to work
so the case was closed there was absolutely no responsibility on their
part that the employer keep to the agreement. Once the matter leaves
the AIRC then that is the end of it.
I was pretty disappointed with this with this to say the least.
I contacted my local member of parliament a Liberal while his office
was very concerned but was unable to do anything to assist me other
than tell me that they thought the system was unfair and did not
protect workers.
Sometime later I was still on work-cover payments I received a letter
from my superannuation company informing me that my employer had
ceased my super payments because my employment had been terminated. I
had been sacked while I was on sick leave this was unlawful dismissal
under workchoices legislation so I contacted the Workchoices office
they agreed that it was unlawful but told me there was nothing they or
any other government department could do to assist me. I mentioned
the workchoices advertisement offering protection to workers and was
told that that did not cover this situation.
I phoned the workplace ombudsman and was told "Get a Lawyer" when I
suggested that it may be a case they should investigate I was told
that I was being uncooperative and they hung up on me.
I again contacted my local member and they contacted Joe Hockey's
office I got an email from Joe Hockey's office saying that this was a
matter that the Workplace Ombudsman could and should investigate and
that a senior officer from the Brisbane office would contact me
shortly, a person called and I explained the situation he said that
there was nothing they could do. I suggested that I had been sacked
while on sick leave and that this was unlawful by their laws he
replied "If we help you then we would also have to help your
employer" I told him that Hockey's office had said that this was
something they could investigate, he replied and I quote "The minister
and his department have no idea about the legislation or what is going
on"
I again contacted my local member and Hockey's office and they agreed
that this was not a matter for the ombudsman and that there was no
assistance available to me.
Being an annoying and very determined person I again contacted Joe
Hockey's office after he stated publicly that "he would investigate
any wrongdoing by either union or employer". He was, of course,
defending using government funds to investigate alleged union wrong
doings.
I again was contacted by a senior person in the workplace ombudsman's
office who at least made what appeared to be an attempt to get some
assistance for me.
So far nothing has been forthcoming. To sum up a long story all the
advertising all the assurances all the "Protected by law" statements
are worthless propaganda, when it comes to the crunch, the new
workplace laws are written for and by employers. Employees have had
their basic working rights that have ben fought for by generations of
unions and workers stripped away.
I will continue to fight and annoy them as much as possible. I will
also tell my story to anyone who will listen.
If you have made it this far through my story thank you. I am not
alone in unfair or unlawful dismissal I have heard many similar
stories but unless a worker can come up with the $40,000 or so to take
the case to a federal court the employer escapes any justice.
Why will I not be voting for John Howard and his team of supporters? I
think you get the main idea.
Is there a Liberal in this NG who would come up with a solution?name
withheld.....

E-mail the ACTU, they'll highlight your saga and force the people
involved to do whats right.

Are you serious? The ACTU wont help anyone who is not a member....hey
cmon lets get to the point here... the whole 'workchoice' thing is
fucked, TV ads are no more than propaganda on both sides....this post
is just one example.

You could always join if you wished. It's probably the cheapest form of
representation you will find. Of course, you get what you pay for.

[Twine]

Post by Raven
The story unfolds... never mind fairness this is an example of a poor
employer legally dismissing an employee.
May I ask your indulgence and tell you my own view on the 2007
election. I have until recently worked for 3 years as a part time
casual at a large local camera store in Maroochydore. Being a
Professional Photographer it was beneficial to myself and I thought my
knowledge was valuable to my employer.
Earlier this year I was asked to vacuum the floor with an old vacuum
cleaner having done half the floor I found the electrical cable had
worn through and the wires were exposed, as per my responsibilities
under workplace health and safety I reported this to my employer and
was told he would fix it. A short time later the cleaner was returned
to me with some sticky tape round the damaged cord area. I considered
this to be unsafe and refused to use the equipment. I based this
decision on the fact that I had been a member of the Occupational
Health and Safety committee at the university where I was previously
employed for 16 years, My wife is a trained Occupational health and
safety nurse and my son is an Occupational health and safety manager
at a mine so Occ health and safety is a fairly common discussion in
our home, so I am fairly aware of my responsibilities.
My employer gave me a simple choice "Use the equipment or leave".
Rather than risk my life (I refuse to have "Died while vacuuming the
floor" inscribed on my tombstone :) and endanger the lives of
customers and other staff, I left. As soon as I got home I called the
local Occupational Health and Safety office and reported the incident.
They attended the scene and found the item to be faulty and dangerous.
Now the interesting part. If I had used this equipment under
Queensland Occupational Health and Safety laws I would be liable for a
fine not exceeding $20,000 and or up to 12 months in prison. However
after extensive discussion with the federal workplace minister Joe
Hockey and his office I have been informed under the federal law it is
neither unlawful or unfair dismissal for my employer to sack me for
refusing to use dangerous equipment. Let me repeat that It is not
illegal to sack a worker for refusing to break the law and endanger
their life and the lives of others.
I took this matter to the AIRC as there was no assistance available
from the government for sacked workers I had to attend by myself. I
managed to bluff my way through the meeting and negotiated a return to
work with 4 points agreed on by my employer and myself. He required
that I park my car in the correct car park and wear the correct colour
shirt one day a week. I required that I return to work on the same
duties as before and that my employer not abuse either myself or other
staff or customers.
These were agreed on and the commissioner made a point of emphasizing
my disability to my employer ( i am dyslexic and find writing quickly
and accurately under pressure impossible)
On my return to work I was presented with a document with 32 new
duties for me to perform 12 of these new duties involved reading and
writing something my employer had been specifically told I was not
capable of performing and that I had repeatedly told my employer I was
not capable of doing over my previous 3 years employment.
I stressed out and went off on sick leave, my doctor approved this and
I was accepted for work-cover payments. I checked with the AIRC saying
we had negotiated an agreement and my employer had not kept his side
of that agreement what happens next? Their reply was slightly
confronting they just said that they had negotiated a return to work
so the case was closed there was absolutely no responsibility on their
part that the employer keep to the agreement. Once the matter leaves
the AIRC then that is the end of it.
I was pretty disappointed with this with this to say the least.
I contacted my local member of parliament a Liberal while his office
was very concerned but was unable to do anything to assist me other
than tell me that they thought the system was unfair and did not
protect workers.
Sometime later I was still on work-cover payments I received a letter
from my superannuation company informing me that my employer had
ceased my super payments because my employment had been terminated. I
had been sacked while I was on sick leave this was unlawful dismissal
under workchoices legislation so I contacted the Workchoices office
they agreed that it was unlawful but told me there was nothing they or
any other government department could do to assist me. I mentioned
the workchoices advertisement offering protection to workers and was
told that that did not cover this situation.
I phoned the workplace ombudsman and was told "Get a Lawyer" when I
suggested that it may be a case they should investigate I was told
that I was being uncooperative and they hung up on me.
I again contacted my local member and they contacted Joe Hockey's
office I got an email from Joe Hockey's office saying that this was a
matter that the Workplace Ombudsman could and should investigate and
that a senior officer from the Brisbane office would contact me
shortly, a person called and I explained the situation he said that
there was nothing they could do. I suggested that I had been sacked
while on sick leave and that this was unlawful by their laws he
replied "If we help you then we would also have to help your
employer" I told him that Hockey's office had said that this was
something they could investigate, he replied and I quote "The minister
and his department have no idea about the legislation or what is going
on"
I again contacted my local member and Hockey's office and they agreed
that this was not a matter for the ombudsman and that there was no
assistance available to me.
Being an annoying and very determined person I again contacted Joe
Hockey's office after he stated publicly that "he would investigate
any wrongdoing by either union or employer". He was, of course,
defending using government funds to investigate alleged union wrong
doings.
I again was contacted by a senior person in the workplace ombudsman's
office who at least made what appeared to be an attempt to get some
assistance for me.
So far nothing has been forthcoming. To sum up a long story all the
advertising all the assurances all the "Protected by law" statements
are worthless propaganda, when it comes to the crunch, the new
workplace laws are written for and by employers. Employees have had
their basic working rights that have ben fought for by generations of
unions and workers stripped away.
I will continue to fight and annoy them as much as possible. I will
also tell my story to anyone who will listen.
If you have made it this far through my story thank you. I am not
alone in unfair or unlawful dismissal I have heard many similar
stories but unless a worker can come up with the $40,000 or so to take
the case to a federal court the employer escapes any justice.
Why will I not be voting for John Howard and his team of supporters? I
think you get the main idea.
Is there a Liberal in this NG who would come up with a solution?name
withheld.....

Just a question......

How is a part-time casual employee able to "stress out and go off on sick
leave"?

[Swampfox]

Post by Twine

Post by Raven
The story unfolds... never mind fairness this is an
example of a poor
employer legally dismissing an employee.
May I ask your indulgence and tell you my own view
on the 2007
election. I have until recently worked for 3 years
as a part time
casual at a large local camera store in
Maroochydore. Being a
Professional Photographer it was beneficial to
myself and I thought my
knowledge was valuable to my employer.
Earlier this year I was asked to vacuum the floor
with an old vacuum
cleaner having done half the floor I found the
electrical cable had
worn through and the wires were exposed, as per my
responsibilities
under workplace health and safety I reported this
to my employer and
was told he would fix it. A short time later the
cleaner was returned
to me with some sticky tape round the damaged cord
area. I considered
this to be unsafe and refused to use the equipment.
I based this
decision on the fact that I had been a member of
the Occupational
Health and Safety committee at the university where
I was previously
employed for 16 years, My wife is a trained
Occupational health and
safety nurse and my son is an Occupational health
and safety manager
at a mine so Occ health and safety is a fairly
common discussion in
our home, so I am fairly aware of my
responsibilities.
My employer gave me a simple choice "Use the
equipment or leave".
Rather than risk my life (I refuse to have "Died
while vacuuming the
floor" inscribed on my tombstone :) and endanger
the lives of
customers and other staff, I left. As soon as I got
home I called the
local Occupational Health and Safety office and
reported the incident.
They attended the scene and found the item to be
faulty and dangerous.
Now the interesting part. If I had used this
equipment under
Queensland Occupational Health and Safety laws I
would be liable for a
fine not exceeding $20,000 and or up to 12 months
in prison. However
after extensive discussion with the federal
workplace minister Joe
Hockey and his office I have been informed under
the federal law it is
neither unlawful or unfair dismissal for my
employer to sack me for
refusing to use dangerous equipment. Let me repeat
that It is not
illegal to sack a worker for refusing to break the
law and endanger
their life and the lives of others.
I took this matter to the AIRC as there was no
assistance available
from the government for sacked workers I had to
attend by myself. I
managed to bluff my way through the meeting and
negotiated a return to
work with 4 points agreed on by my employer and
myself. He required
that I park my car in the correct car park and wear
the correct colour
shirt one day a week. I required that I return to
work on the same
duties as before and that my employer not abuse
either myself or other
staff or customers.
These were agreed on and the commissioner made a
point of emphasizing
my disability to my employer ( i am dyslexic and
find writing quickly
and accurately under pressure impossible)
On my return to work I was presented with a
document with 32 new
duties for me to perform 12 of these new duties
involved reading and
writing something my employer had been specifically
told I was not
capable of performing and that I had repeatedly
told my employer I was
not capable of doing over my previous 3 years
employment.
I stressed out and went off on sick leave, my
doctor approved this and
I was accepted for work-cover payments. I checked
with the AIRC saying
we had negotiated an agreement and my employer had
not kept his side
of that agreement what happens next? Their reply
was slightly
confronting they just said that they had negotiated
a return to work
so the case was closed there was absolutely no
responsibility on their
part that the employer keep to the agreement. Once
the matter leaves
the AIRC then that is the end of it.
I was pretty disappointed with this with this to
say the least.
I contacted my local member of parliament a Liberal
while his office
was very concerned but was unable to do anything to
assist me other
than tell me that they thought the system was
unfair and did not
protect workers.
Sometime later I was still on work-cover payments I
received a letter
from my superannuation company informing me that my
employer had
ceased my super payments because my employment had
been terminated. I
had been sacked while I was on sick leave this was
unlawful dismissal
under workchoices legislation so I contacted the
Workchoices office
they agreed that it was unlawful but told me there
was nothing they or
any other government department could do to assist
me. I mentioned
the workchoices advertisement offering protection
to workers and was
told that that did not cover this situation.
I phoned the workplace ombudsman and was told "Get
a Lawyer" when I
suggested that it may be a case they should
investigate I was told
that I was being uncooperative and they hung up on
me.
I again contacted my local member and they
contacted Joe Hockey's
office I got an email from Joe Hockey's office
saying that this was a
matter that the Workplace Ombudsman could and
should investigate and
that a senior officer from the Brisbane office
would contact me
shortly, a person called and I explained the
situation he said that
there was nothing they could do. I suggested that I
had been sacked
while on sick leave and that this was unlawful by
their laws he
replied "If we help you then we would also have to
help your
employer" I told him that Hockey's office had
said that this was
something they could investigate, he replied and I
quote "The minister
and his department have no idea about the
legislation or what is going
on"
I again contacted my local member and Hockey's
office and they agreed
that this was not a matter for the ombudsman and
that there was no
assistance available to me.
Being an annoying and very determined person I
again contacted Joe
Hockey's office after he stated publicly that "he
would investigate
any wrongdoing by either union or employer". He
was, of course,
defending using government funds to investigate
alleged union wrong
doings.
I again was contacted by a senior person in the
workplace ombudsman's
office who at least made what appeared to be an
attempt to get some
assistance for me.
So far nothing has been forthcoming. To sum up a
long story all the
advertising all the assurances all the "Protected
by law" statements
are worthless propaganda, when it comes to the
crunch, the new
workplace laws are written for and by employers.
Employees have had
their basic working rights that have ben fought for
by generations of
unions and workers stripped away.
I will continue to fight and annoy them as much as
possible. I will
also tell my story to anyone who will listen.
If you have made it this far through my story thank
you. I am not
alone in unfair or unlawful dismissal I have heard
many similar
stories but unless a worker can come up with the
$40,000 or so to take
the case to a federal court the employer escapes
any justice.
Why will I not be voting for John Howard and his
team of supporters? I
think you get the main idea.
Is there a Liberal in this NG who would come up
with a solution?name
withheld.....

Just a question......
How is a part-time casual employee able to "stress
out and go off on sick leave"?

I think you'll find it was Workcover.
And the silence from the Howard apologists in this
newsgroup is deafening.

[Twine]

Post by Swampfox

Post by Twine

Post by Raven
The story unfolds... never mind fairness this is an example of a poor
employer legally dismissing an employee.
May I ask your indulgence and tell you my own view on the 2007
election. I have until recently worked for 3 years as a part time
casual at a large local camera store in Maroochydore. Being a
Professional Photographer it was beneficial to myself and I thought my
knowledge was valuable to my employer.
Earlier this year I was asked to vacuum the floor with an old vacuum
cleaner having done half the floor I found the electrical cable had
worn through and the wires were exposed, as per my responsibilities
under workplace health and safety I reported this to my employer and
was told he would fix it. A short time later the cleaner was returned
to me with some sticky tape round the damaged cord area. I considered
this to be unsafe and refused to use the equipment. I based this
decision on the fact that I had been a member of the Occupational
Health and Safety committee at the university where I was previously
employed for 16 years, My wife is a trained Occupational health and
safety nurse and my son is an Occupational health and safety manager
at a mine so Occ health and safety is a fairly common discussion in
our home, so I am fairly aware of my responsibilities.
My employer gave me a simple choice "Use the equipment or leave".
Rather than risk my life (I refuse to have "Died while vacuuming the
floor" inscribed on my tombstone :) and endanger the lives of
customers and other staff, I left. As soon as I got home I called the
local Occupational Health and Safety office and reported the incident.
They attended the scene and found the item to be faulty and dangerous.
Now the interesting part. If I had used this equipment under
Queensland Occupational Health and Safety laws I would be liable for a
fine not exceeding $20,000 and or up to 12 months in prison. However
after extensive discussion with the federal workplace minister Joe
Hockey and his office I have been informed under the federal law it is
neither unlawful or unfair dismissal for my employer to sack me for
refusing to use dangerous equipment. Let me repeat that It is not
illegal to sack a worker for refusing to break the law and endanger
their life and the lives of others.
I took this matter to the AIRC as there was no assistance available
from the government for sacked workers I had to attend by myself. I
managed to bluff my way through the meeting and negotiated a return to
work with 4 points agreed on by my employer and myself. He required
that I park my car in the correct car park and wear the correct colour
shirt one day a week. I required that I return to work on the same
duties as before and that my employer not abuse either myself or other
staff or customers.
These were agreed on and the commissioner made a point of emphasizing
my disability to my employer ( i am dyslexic and find writing quickly
and accurately under pressure impossible)
On my return to work I was presented with a document with 32 new
duties for me to perform 12 of these new duties involved reading and
writing something my employer had been specifically told I was not
capable of performing and that I had repeatedly told my employer I was
not capable of doing over my previous 3 years employment.
I stressed out and went off on sick leave, my doctor approved this and
I was accepted for work-cover payments. I checked with the AIRC saying
we had negotiated an agreement and my employer had not kept his side
of that agreement what happens next? Their reply was slightly
confronting they just said that they had negotiated a return to work
so the case was closed there was absolutely no responsibility on their
part that the employer keep to the agreement. Once the matter leaves
the AIRC then that is the end of it.
I was pretty disappointed with this with this to say the least.
I contacted my local member of parliament a Liberal while his office
was very concerned but was unable to do anything to assist me other
than tell me that they thought the system was unfair and did not
protect workers.
Sometime later I was still on work-cover payments I received a letter
from my superannuation company informing me that my employer had
ceased my super payments because my employment had been terminated. I
had been sacked while I was on sick leave this was unlawful dismissal
under workchoices legislation so I contacted the Workchoices office
they agreed that it was unlawful but told me there was nothing they or
any other government department could do to assist me. I mentioned
the workchoices advertisement offering protection to workers and was
told that that did not cover this situation.
I phoned the workplace ombudsman and was told "Get a Lawyer" when I
suggested that it may be a case they should investigate I was told
that I was being uncooperative and they hung up on me.
I again contacted my local member and they contacted Joe Hockey's
office I got an email from Joe Hockey's office saying that this was a
matter that the Workplace Ombudsman could and should investigate and
that a senior officer from the Brisbane office would contact me
shortly, a person called and I explained the situation he said that
there was nothing they could do. I suggested that I had been sacked
while on sick leave and that this was unlawful by their laws he
replied "If we help you then we would also have to help your
employer" I told him that Hockey's office had said that this was
something they could investigate, he replied and I quote "The minister
and his department have no idea about the legislation or what is going
on"
I again contacted my local member and Hockey's office and they agreed
that this was not a matter for the ombudsman and that there was no
assistance available to me.
Being an annoying and very determined person I again contacted Joe
Hockey's office after he stated publicly that "he would investigate
any wrongdoing by either union or employer". He was, of course,
defending using government funds to investigate alleged union wrong
doings.
I again was contacted by a senior person in the workplace ombudsman's
office who at least made what appeared to be an attempt to get some
assistance for me.
So far nothing has been forthcoming. To sum up a long story all the
advertising all the assurances all the "Protected by law" statements
are worthless propaganda, when it comes to the crunch, the new
workplace laws are written for and by employers. Employees have had
their basic working rights that have ben fought for by generations of
unions and workers stripped away.
I will continue to fight and annoy them as much as possible. I will
also tell my story to anyone who will listen.
If you have made it this far through my story thank you. I am not
alone in unfair or unlawful dismissal I have heard many similar
stories but unless a worker can come up with the $40,000 or so to take
the case to a federal court the employer escapes any justice.
Why will I not be voting for John Howard and his team of supporters? I
think you get the main idea.
Is there a Liberal in this NG who would come up with a solution?name
withheld.....

Just a question......
How is a part-time casual employee able to "stress out and go off on sick
leave"?

I think you'll find it was Workcover.

So are you saying that "Workcover" (ie. compo) provides for people to leave
part time casual jobs and go on stress leave?

[Swampfox]

Post by Twine

Post by Swampfox

Post by Twine

Post by Raven
The story unfolds... never mind fairness this is
an example of a poor
employer legally dismissing an employee.
May I ask your indulgence and tell you my own
view on the 2007
election. I have until recently worked for 3
years as a part time
casual at a large local camera store in
Maroochydore. Being a
Professional Photographer it was beneficial to
myself and I thought my
knowledge was valuable to my employer.
Earlier this year I was asked to vacuum the floor
with an old vacuum
cleaner having done half the floor I found the
electrical cable had
worn through and the wires were exposed, as per
my responsibilities
under workplace health and safety I reported this
to my employer and
was told he would fix it. A short time later the
cleaner was returned
to me with some sticky tape round the damaged
cord area. I considered
this to be unsafe and refused to use the
equipment. I based this
decision on the fact that I had been a member of
the Occupational
Health and Safety committee at the university
where I was previously
employed for 16 years, My wife is a trained
Occupational health and
safety nurse and my son is an Occupational health
and safety manager
at a mine so Occ health and safety is a fairly
common discussion in
our home, so I am fairly aware of my
responsibilities.
My employer gave me a simple choice "Use the
equipment or leave".
Rather than risk my life (I refuse to have "Died
while vacuuming the
floor" inscribed on my tombstone :) and
endanger the lives of
customers and other staff, I left. As soon as I
got home I called the
local Occupational Health and Safety office and
reported the incident.
They attended the scene and found the item to be
faulty and dangerous.
Now the interesting part. If I had used this
equipment under
Queensland Occupational Health and Safety laws I
would be liable for a
fine not exceeding $20,000 and or up to 12 months
in prison. However
after extensive discussion with the federal
workplace minister Joe
Hockey and his office I have been informed under
the federal law it is
neither unlawful or unfair dismissal for my
employer to sack me for
refusing to use dangerous equipment. Let me
repeat that It is not
illegal to sack a worker for refusing to break
the law and endanger
their life and the lives of others.
I took this matter to the AIRC as there was no
assistance available
from the government for sacked workers I had to
attend by myself. I
managed to bluff my way through the meeting and
negotiated a return to
work with 4 points agreed on by my employer and
myself. He required
that I park my car in the correct car park and
wear the correct colour
shirt one day a week. I required that I return
to work on the same
duties as before and that my employer not abuse
either myself or other
staff or customers.
These were agreed on and the commissioner made a
point of emphasizing
my disability to my employer ( i am dyslexic and
find writing quickly
and accurately under pressure impossible)
On my return to work I was presented with a
document with 32 new
duties for me to perform 12 of these new duties
involved reading and
writing something my employer had been
specifically told I was not
capable of performing and that I had repeatedly
told my employer I was
not capable of doing over my previous 3 years
employment.
I stressed out and went off on sick leave, my
doctor approved this and
I was accepted for work-cover payments. I checked
with the AIRC saying
we had negotiated an agreement and my employer
had not kept his side
of that agreement what happens next? Their reply
was slightly
confronting they just said that they had
negotiated a return to work
so the case was closed there was absolutely no
responsibility on their
part that the employer keep to the agreement.
Once the matter leaves
the AIRC then that is the end of it.
I was pretty disappointed with this with this to
say the least.
I contacted my local member of parliament a
Liberal while his office
was very concerned but was unable to do anything
to assist me other
than tell me that they thought the system was
unfair and did not
protect workers.
Sometime later I was still on work-cover payments
I received a letter
from my superannuation company informing me that
my employer had
ceased my super payments because my employment
had been terminated. I
had been sacked while I was on sick leave this
was unlawful dismissal
under workchoices legislation so I contacted the
Workchoices office
they agreed that it was unlawful but told me
there was nothing they or
any other government department could do to
assist me. I mentioned
the workchoices advertisement offering protection
to workers and was
told that that did not cover this situation.
I phoned the workplace ombudsman and was told
"Get a Lawyer" when I
suggested that it may be a case they should
investigate I was told
that I was being uncooperative and they hung up
on me.
I again contacted my local member and they
contacted Joe Hockey's
office I got an email from Joe Hockey's office
saying that this was a
matter that the Workplace Ombudsman could and
should investigate and
that a senior officer from the Brisbane office
would contact me
shortly, a person called and I explained the
situation he said that
there was nothing they could do. I suggested that
I had been sacked
while on sick leave and that this was unlawful by
their laws he
replied "If we help you then we would also have
to help your
employer" I told him that Hockey's office had
said that this was
something they could investigate, he replied and
I quote "The minister
and his department have no idea about the
legislation or what is going
on"
I again contacted my local member and Hockey's
office and they agreed
that this was not a matter for the ombudsman and
that there was no
assistance available to me.
Being an annoying and very determined person I
again contacted Joe
Hockey's office after he stated publicly that "he
would investigate
any wrongdoing by either union or employer". He
was, of course,
defending using government funds to investigate
alleged union wrong
doings.
I again was contacted by a senior person in the
workplace ombudsman's
office who at least made what appeared to be an
attempt to get some
assistance for me.
So far nothing has been forthcoming. To sum up a
long story all the
advertising all the assurances all the "Protected
by law" statements
are worthless propaganda, when it comes to the
crunch, the new
workplace laws are written for and by employers.
Employees have had
their basic working rights that have ben fought
for by generations of
unions and workers stripped away.
I will continue to fight and annoy them as much
as possible. I will
also tell my story to anyone who will listen.
If you have made it this far through my story
thank you. I am not
alone in unfair or unlawful dismissal I have
heard many similar
stories but unless a worker can come up with the
$40,000 or so to take
the case to a federal court the employer escapes
any justice.
Why will I not be voting for John Howard and his
team of supporters? I
think you get the main idea.
Is there a Liberal in this NG who would come up
with a solution?name
withheld.....

Just a question......
How is a part-time casual employee able to "stress
out and go off on sick leave"?

I think you'll find it was Workcover.

So are you saying that "Workcover" (ie. compo)
provides for people to leave part time casual jobs
and go on stress leave?

If the stress is work related then as far as I'm aware
yes.

[Mango]

Post by Twine

Post by Swampfox

Post by Twine

Post by Raven
The story unfolds... never mind fairness this is an example of a poor
employer legally dismissing an employee.
May I ask your indulgence and tell you my own view on the 2007
election. I have until recently worked for 3 years as a part time
casual at a large local camera store in Maroochydore. Being a
Professional Photographer it was beneficial to myself and I thought my
knowledge was valuable to my employer.
Earlier this year I was asked to vacuum the floor with an old vacuum
cleaner having done half the floor I found the electrical cable had
worn through and the wires were exposed, as per my responsibilities
under workplace health and safety I reported this to my employer and
was told he would fix it. A short time later the cleaner was returned
to me with some sticky tape round the damaged cord area. I considered
this to be unsafe and refused to use the equipment. I based this
decision on the fact that I had been a member of the Occupational
Health and Safety committee at the university where I was previously
employed for 16 years, My wife is a trained Occupational health and
safety nurse and my son is an Occupational health and safety manager
at a mine so Occ health and safety is a fairly common discussion in
our home, so I am fairly aware of my responsibilities.
My employer gave me a simple choice "Use the equipment or leave".
Rather than risk my life (I refuse to have "Died while vacuuming the
floor" inscribed on my tombstone :) and endanger the lives of
customers and other staff, I left. As soon as I got home I called the
local Occupational Health and Safety office and reported the incident.
They attended the scene and found the item to be faulty and dangerous.
Now the interesting part. If I had used this equipment under
Queensland Occupational Health and Safety laws I would be liable for a
fine not exceeding $20,000 and or up to 12 months in prison. However
after extensive discussion with the federal workplace minister Joe
Hockey and his office I have been informed under the federal law it is
neither unlawful or unfair dismissal for my employer to sack me for
refusing to use dangerous equipment. Let me repeat that It is not
illegal to sack a worker for refusing to break the law and endanger
their life and the lives of others.
I took this matter to the AIRC as there was no assistance available
from the government for sacked workers I had to attend by myself. I
managed to bluff my way through the meeting and negotiated a return to
work with 4 points agreed on by my employer and myself. He required
that I park my car in the correct car park and wear the correct colour
shirt one day a week. I required that I return to work on the same
duties as before and that my employer not abuse either myself or other
staff or customers.
These were agreed on and the commissioner made a point of emphasizing
my disability to my employer ( i am dyslexic and find writing quickly
and accurately under pressure impossible)
On my return to work I was presented with a document with 32 new
duties for me to perform 12 of these new duties involved reading and
writing something my employer had been specifically told I was not
capable of performing and that I had repeatedly told my employer I was
not capable of doing over my previous 3 years employment.
I stressed out and went off on sick leave, my doctor approved this and
I was accepted for work-cover payments. I checked with the AIRC saying
we had negotiated an agreement and my employer had not kept his side
of that agreement what happens next? Their reply was slightly
confronting they just said that they had negotiated a return to work
so the case was closed there was absolutely no responsibility on their
part that the employer keep to the agreement. Once the matter leaves
the AIRC then that is the end of it.
I was pretty disappointed with this with this to say the least.
I contacted my local member of parliament a Liberal while his office
was very concerned but was unable to do anything to assist me other
than tell me that they thought the system was unfair and did not
protect workers.
Sometime later I was still on work-cover payments I received a letter
from my superannuation company informing me that my employer had
ceased my super payments because my employment had been terminated. I
had been sacked while I was on sick leave this was unlawful dismissal
under workchoices legislation so I contacted the Workchoices office
they agreed that it was unlawful but told me there was nothing they or
any other government department could do to assist me. I mentioned
the workchoices advertisement offering protection to workers and was
told that that did not cover this situation.
I phoned the workplace ombudsman and was told "Get a Lawyer" when I
suggested that it may be a case they should investigate I was told
that I was being uncooperative and they hung up on me.
I again contacted my local member and they contacted Joe Hockey's
office I got an email from Joe Hockey's office saying that this was a
matter that the Workplace Ombudsman could and should investigate and
that a senior officer from the Brisbane office would contact me
shortly, a person called and I explained the situation he said that
there was nothing they could do. I suggested that I had been sacked
while on sick leave and that this was unlawful by their laws he
replied "If we help you then we would also have to help your
employer" I told him that Hockey's office had said that this was
something they could investigate, he replied and I quote "The minister
and his department have no idea about the legislation or what is going
on"
I again contacted my local member and Hockey's office and they agreed
that this was not a matter for the ombudsman and that there was no
assistance available to me.
Being an annoying and very determined person I again contacted Joe
Hockey's office after he stated publicly that "he would investigate
any wrongdoing by either union or employer". He was, of course,
defending using government funds to investigate alleged union wrong
doings.
I again was contacted by a senior person in the workplace ombudsman's
office who at least made what appeared to be an attempt to get some
assistance for me.
So far nothing has been forthcoming. To sum up a long story all the
advertising all the assurances all the "Protected by law" statements
are worthless propaganda, when it comes to the crunch, the new
workplace laws are written for and by employers. Employees have had
their basic working rights that have ben fought for by generations of
unions and workers stripped away.
I will continue to fight and annoy them as much as possible. I will
also tell my story to anyone who will listen.
If you have made it this far through my story thank you. I am not
alone in unfair or unlawful dismissal I have heard many similar
stories but unless a worker can come up with the $40,000 or so to take
the case to a federal court the employer escapes any justice.
Why will I not be voting for John Howard and his team of supporters? I
think you get the main idea.
Is there a Liberal in this NG who would come up with a solution?name
withheld.....

Just a question......
How is a part-time casual employee able to "stress out and go off on
sick leave"?

I think you'll find it was Workcover.

So are you saying that "Workcover" (ie. compo) provides for people to
leave part time casual jobs and go on stress leave?

Worker's compensation covers part time and casual employees.

[Peter Webb]

Imagine what a pain the arse this guy would be.

He kicks up a fuss about a vacuum cleaner being unsafe, doesn't like the
repair job, and now wants to take it to the Federal Court, having complained
to everybody who will listen how badly he was treated.

He worked part time in a shop in Maroochydore, for christ sakes.

And now he is milking the system for workers compensation, claiming that
having to use a dodgy vacuum cleaner in the shop in Maroochydore has somehow
left in him mentally scarred, and unable to work.

Clearly he doesn't want to work there, and the shop owner doesn't want him
there. The solution seems pretty simple. Get another job.

[Twine]

Post by Peter Webb
Imagine what a pain the arse this guy would be.
He kicks up a fuss about a vacuum cleaner being unsafe, doesn't like the
repair job, and now wants to take it to the Federal Court, having
complained to everybody who will listen how badly he was treated.
He worked part time in a shop in Maroochydore, for christ sakes.
And now he is milking the system for workers compensation, claiming that
having to use a dodgy vacuum cleaner in the shop in Maroochydore has
somehow left in him mentally scarred, and unable to work.
Clearly he doesn't want to work there, and the shop owner doesn't want him
there. The solution seems pretty simple. Get another job.

Sounds reasonable to me.

[Raven]

Post by Twine

Post by Raven
The story unfolds... never mind fairness this is an example of a poor
employer legally dismissing an employee.
May I ask your indulgence and tell you my own view on the 2007
election. I have until recently worked for 3 years as a part time
casual at a large local camera store in Maroochydore. Being a
Professional Photographer it was beneficial to myself and I thought my
knowledge was valuable to my employer.
Earlier this year I was asked to vacuum the floor with an old vacuum
cleaner having done half the floor I found the electrical cable had
worn through and the wires were exposed, as per my responsibilities
under workplace health and safety I reported this to my employer and
was told he would fix it. A short time later the cleaner was returned
to me with some sticky tape round the damaged cord area. I considered
this to be unsafe and refused to use the equipment. I based this
decision on the fact that I had been a member of the Occupational
Health and Safety committee at the university where I was previously
employed for 16 years, My wife is a trained Occupational health and
safety nurse and my son is an Occupational health and safety manager
at a mine so Occ health and safety is a fairly common discussion in
our home, so I am fairly aware of my responsibilities.
My employer gave me a simple choice "Use the equipment or leave".
Rather than risk my life (I refuse to have "Died while vacuuming the
floor" inscribed on my tombstone :) and endanger the lives of
customers and other staff, I left. As soon as I got home I called the
local Occupational Health and Safety office and reported the incident.
They attended the scene and found the item to be faulty and dangerous.
Now the interesting part. If I had used this equipment under
Queensland Occupational Health and Safety laws I would be liable for a
fine not exceeding $20,000 and or up to 12 months in prison. However
after extensive discussion with the federal workplace minister Joe
Hockey and his office I have been informed under the federal law it is
neither unlawful or unfair dismissal for my employer to sack me for
refusing to use dangerous equipment. Let me repeat that It is not
illegal to sack a worker for refusing to break the law and endanger
their life and the lives of others.
I took this matter to the AIRC as there was no assistance available
from the government for sacked workers I had to attend by myself. I
managed to bluff my way through the meeting and negotiated a return to
work with 4 points agreed on by my employer and myself. He required
that I park my car in the correct car park and wear the correct colour
shirt one day a week. I required that I return to work on the same
duties as before and that my employer not abuse either myself or other
staff or customers.
These were agreed on and the commissioner made a point of emphasizing
my disability to my employer ( i am dyslexic and find writing quickly
and accurately under pressure impossible)
On my return to work I was presented with a document with 32 new
duties for me to perform 12 of these new duties involved reading and
writing something my employer had been specifically told I was not
capable of performing and that I had repeatedly told my employer I was
not capable of doing over my previous 3 years employment.
I stressed out and went off on sick leave, my doctor approved this and
I was accepted for work-cover payments. I checked with the AIRC saying
we had negotiated an agreement and my employer had not kept his side
of that agreement what happens next? Their reply was slightly
confronting they just said that they had negotiated a return to work
so the case was closed there was absolutely no responsibility on their
part that the employer keep to the agreement. Once the matter leaves
the AIRC then that is the end of it.
I was pretty disappointed with this with this to say the least.
I contacted my local member of parliament a Liberal while his office
was very concerned but was unable to do anything to assist me other
than tell me that they thought the system was unfair and did not
protect workers.
Sometime later I was still on work-cover payments I received a letter
from my superannuation company informing me that my employer had
ceased my super payments because my employment had been terminated. I
had been sacked while I was on sick leave this was unlawful dismissal
under workchoices legislation so I contacted the Workchoices office
they agreed that it was unlawful but told me there was nothing they or
any other government department could do to assist me. I mentioned
the workchoices advertisement offering protection to workers and was
told that that did not cover this situation.
I phoned the workplace ombudsman and was told "Get a Lawyer" when I
suggested that it may be a case they should investigate I was told
that I was being uncooperative and they hung up on me.
I again contacted my local member and they contacted Joe Hockey's
office I got an email from Joe Hockey's office saying that this was a
matter that the Workplace Ombudsman could and should investigate and
that a senior officer from the Brisbane office would contact me
shortly, a person called and I explained the situation he said that
there was nothing they could do. I suggested that I had been sacked
while on sick leave and that this was unlawful by their laws he
replied "If we help you then we would also have to help your
employer" I told him that Hockey's office had said that this was
something they could investigate, he replied and I quote "The minister
and his department have no idea about the legislation or what is going
on"
I again contacted my local member and Hockey's office and they agreed
that this was not a matter for the ombudsman and that there was no
assistance available to me.
Being an annoying and very determined person I again contacted Joe
Hockey's office after he stated publicly that "he would investigate
any wrongdoing by either union or employer". He was, of course,
defending using government funds to investigate alleged union wrong
doings.
I again was contacted by a senior person in the workplace ombudsman's
office who at least made what appeared to be an attempt to get some
assistance for me.
So far nothing has been forthcoming. To sum up a long story all the
advertising all the assurances all the "Protected by law" statements
are worthless propaganda, when it comes to the crunch, the new
workplace laws are written for and by employers. Employees have had
their basic working rights that have ben fought for by generations of
unions and workers stripped away.
I will continue to fight and annoy them as much as possible. I will
also tell my story to anyone who will listen.
If you have made it this far through my story thank you. I am not
alone in unfair or unlawful dismissal I have heard many similar
stories but unless a worker can come up with the $40,000 or so to take
the case to a federal court the employer escapes any justice.
Why will I not be voting for John Howard and his team of supporters? I
think you get the main idea.
Is there a Liberal in this NG who would come up with a solution?name
withheld.....

Just a question......
How is a part-time casual employee able to "stress out and go off on sick
leave"?

I cant answer that q as I never asked it in the first place. Do I
understand you ask this question to perhaps seek a flaw in this chaps
plight.

[Twine]

Post by Raven

Post by Twine

Post by Raven
The story unfolds... never mind fairness this is an example of a poor
employer legally dismissing an employee.
May I ask your indulgence and tell you my own view on the 2007
election. I have until recently worked for 3 years as a part time
casual at a large local camera store in Maroochydore. Being a
Professional Photographer it was beneficial to myself and I thought my
knowledge was valuable to my employer.
Earlier this year I was asked to vacuum the floor with an old vacuum
cleaner having done half the floor I found the electrical cable had
worn through and the wires were exposed, as per my responsibilities
under workplace health and safety I reported this to my employer and
was told he would fix it. A short time later the cleaner was returned
to me with some sticky tape round the damaged cord area. I considered
this to be unsafe and refused to use the equipment. I based this
decision on the fact that I had been a member of the Occupational
Health and Safety committee at the university where I was previously
employed for 16 years, My wife is a trained Occupational health and
safety nurse and my son is an Occupational health and safety manager
at a mine so Occ health and safety is a fairly common discussion in
our home, so I am fairly aware of my responsibilities.
My employer gave me a simple choice "Use the equipment or leave".
Rather than risk my life (I refuse to have "Died while vacuuming the
floor" inscribed on my tombstone :) and endanger the lives of
customers and other staff, I left. As soon as I got home I called the
local Occupational Health and Safety office and reported the incident.
They attended the scene and found the item to be faulty and dangerous.
Now the interesting part. If I had used this equipment under
Queensland Occupational Health and Safety laws I would be liable for a
fine not exceeding $20,000 and or up to 12 months in prison. However
after extensive discussion with the federal workplace minister Joe
Hockey and his office I have been informed under the federal law it is
neither unlawful or unfair dismissal for my employer to sack me for
refusing to use dangerous equipment. Let me repeat that It is not
illegal to sack a worker for refusing to break the law and endanger
their life and the lives of others.
I took this matter to the AIRC as there was no assistance available
from the government for sacked workers I had to attend by myself. I
managed to bluff my way through the meeting and negotiated a return to
work with 4 points agreed on by my employer and myself. He required
that I park my car in the correct car park and wear the correct colour
shirt one day a week. I required that I return to work on the same
duties as before and that my employer not abuse either myself or other
staff or customers.
These were agreed on and the commissioner made a point of emphasizing
my disability to my employer ( i am dyslexic and find writing quickly
and accurately under pressure impossible)
On my return to work I was presented with a document with 32 new
duties for me to perform 12 of these new duties involved reading and
writing something my employer had been specifically told I was not
capable of performing and that I had repeatedly told my employer I was
not capable of doing over my previous 3 years employment.
I stressed out and went off on sick leave, my doctor approved this and
I was accepted for work-cover payments. I checked with the AIRC saying
we had negotiated an agreement and my employer had not kept his side
of that agreement what happens next? Their reply was slightly
confronting they just said that they had negotiated a return to work
so the case was closed there was absolutely no responsibility on their
part that the employer keep to the agreement. Once the matter leaves
the AIRC then that is the end of it.
I was pretty disappointed with this with this to say the least.
I contacted my local member of parliament a Liberal while his office
was very concerned but was unable to do anything to assist me other
than tell me that they thought the system was unfair and did not
protect workers.
Sometime later I was still on work-cover payments I received a letter
from my superannuation company informing me that my employer had
ceased my super payments because my employment had been terminated. I
had been sacked while I was on sick leave this was unlawful dismissal
under workchoices legislation so I contacted the Workchoices office
they agreed that it was unlawful but told me there was nothing they or
any other government department could do to assist me. I mentioned
the workchoices advertisement offering protection to workers and was
told that that did not cover this situation.
I phoned the workplace ombudsman and was told "Get a Lawyer" when I
suggested that it may be a case they should investigate I was told
that I was being uncooperative and they hung up on me.
I again contacted my local member and they contacted Joe Hockey's
office I got an email from Joe Hockey's office saying that this was a
matter that the Workplace Ombudsman could and should investigate and
that a senior officer from the Brisbane office would contact me
shortly, a person called and I explained the situation he said that
there was nothing they could do. I suggested that I had been sacked
while on sick leave and that this was unlawful by their laws he
replied "If we help you then we would also have to help your
employer" I told him that Hockey's office had said that this was
something they could investigate, he replied and I quote "The minister
and his department have no idea about the legislation or what is going
on"
I again contacted my local member and Hockey's office and they agreed
that this was not a matter for the ombudsman and that there was no
assistance available to me.
Being an annoying and very determined person I again contacted Joe
Hockey's office after he stated publicly that "he would investigate
any wrongdoing by either union or employer". He was, of course,
defending using government funds to investigate alleged union wrong
doings.
I again was contacted by a senior person in the workplace ombudsman's
office who at least made what appeared to be an attempt to get some
assistance for me.
So far nothing has been forthcoming. To sum up a long story all the
advertising all the assurances all the "Protected by law" statements
are worthless propaganda, when it comes to the crunch, the new
workplace laws are written for and by employers. Employees have had
their basic working rights that have ben fought for by generations of
unions and workers stripped away.
I will continue to fight and annoy them as much as possible. I will
also tell my story to anyone who will listen.
If you have made it this far through my story thank you. I am not
alone in unfair or unlawful dismissal I have heard many similar
stories but unless a worker can come up with the $40,000 or so to take
the case to a federal court the employer escapes any justice.
Why will I not be voting for John Howard and his team of supporters? I
think you get the main idea.
Is there a Liberal in this NG who would come up with a solution?name
withheld.....

Just a question......
How is a part-time casual employee able to "stress out and go off on sick
leave"?

I cant answer that q as I never asked it in the first place. Do I
understand you ask this question to perhaps seek a flaw in this chaps
plight.

No, I ask it to try to establish whether this is another
manufactured/fictitious case dreamed up by Labor/Unions and thrown out there
in an election campaign as being real. They've done it before....and somehow
this one, as pulling on the heart strings as it might be, somehow doesn't
ring true.

[Swampfox]

Post by Twine

Post by Raven

Post by Twine

Post by Raven
The story unfolds... never mind fairness this is
an example of a poor
employer legally dismissing an employee.
May I ask your indulgence and tell you my own
view on the 2007
election. I have until recently worked for 3
years as a part time
casual at a large local camera store in
Maroochydore. Being a
Professional Photographer it was beneficial to
myself and I thought my
knowledge was valuable to my employer.
Earlier this year I was asked to vacuum the
floor with an old vacuum
cleaner having done half the floor I found the
electrical cable had
worn through and the wires were exposed, as per
my responsibilities
under workplace health and safety I reported
this to my employer and
was told he would fix it. A short time later the
cleaner was returned
to me with some sticky tape round the damaged
cord area. I considered
this to be unsafe and refused to use the
equipment. I based this
decision on the fact that I had been a member of
the Occupational
Health and Safety committee at the university
where I was previously
employed for 16 years, My wife is a trained
Occupational health and
safety nurse and my son is an Occupational
health and safety manager
at a mine so Occ health and safety is a fairly
common discussion in
our home, so I am fairly aware of my
responsibilities.
My employer gave me a simple choice "Use the
equipment or leave".
Rather than risk my life (I refuse to have "Died
while vacuuming the
floor" inscribed on my tombstone :) and
endanger the lives of
customers and other staff, I left. As soon as I
got home I called the
local Occupational Health and Safety office and
reported the incident.
They attended the scene and found the item to be
faulty and dangerous.
Now the interesting part. If I had used this
equipment under
Queensland Occupational Health and Safety laws I
would be liable for a
fine not exceeding $20,000 and or up to 12
months in prison. However
after extensive discussion with the federal
workplace minister Joe
Hockey and his office I have been informed under
the federal law it is
neither unlawful or unfair dismissal for my
employer to sack me for
refusing to use dangerous equipment. Let me
repeat that It is not
illegal to sack a worker for refusing to break
the law and endanger
their life and the lives of others.
I took this matter to the AIRC as there was no
assistance available
from the government for sacked workers I had to
attend by myself. I
managed to bluff my way through the meeting and
negotiated a return to
work with 4 points agreed on by my employer and
myself. He required
that I park my car in the correct car park and
wear the correct colour
shirt one day a week. I required that I return
to work on the same
duties as before and that my employer not abuse
either myself or other
staff or customers.
These were agreed on and the commissioner made a
point of emphasizing
my disability to my employer ( i am dyslexic and
find writing quickly
and accurately under pressure impossible)
On my return to work I was presented with a
document with 32 new
duties for me to perform 12 of these new duties
involved reading and
writing something my employer had been
specifically told I was not
capable of performing and that I had repeatedly
told my employer I was
not capable of doing over my previous 3 years
employment.
I stressed out and went off on sick leave, my
doctor approved this and
I was accepted for work-cover payments. I
checked with the AIRC saying
we had negotiated an agreement and my employer
had not kept his side
of that agreement what happens next? Their
reply was slightly
confronting they just said that they had
negotiated a return to work
so the case was closed there was absolutely no
responsibility on their
part that the employer keep to the agreement.
Once the matter leaves
the AIRC then that is the end of it.
I was pretty disappointed with this with this to
say the least.
I contacted my local member of parliament a
Liberal while his office
was very concerned but was unable to do anything
to assist me other
than tell me that they thought the system was
unfair and did not
protect workers.
Sometime later I was still on work-cover
payments I received a letter
from my superannuation company informing me that
my employer had
ceased my super payments because my employment
had been terminated. I
had been sacked while I was on sick leave this
was unlawful dismissal
under workchoices legislation so I contacted the
Workchoices office
they agreed that it was unlawful but told me
there was nothing they or
any other government department could do to
assist me. I mentioned
the workchoices advertisement offering
protection to workers and was
told that that did not cover this situation.
I phoned the workplace ombudsman and was told
"Get a Lawyer" when I
suggested that it may be a case they should
investigate I was told
that I was being uncooperative and they hung up
on me.
I again contacted my local member and they
contacted Joe Hockey's
office I got an email from Joe Hockey's office
saying that this was a
matter that the Workplace Ombudsman could and
should investigate and
that a senior officer from the Brisbane office
would contact me
shortly, a person called and I explained the
situation he said that
there was nothing they could do. I suggested
that I had been sacked
while on sick leave and that this was unlawful
by their laws he
replied "If we help you then we would also have
to help your
employer" I told him that Hockey's office had
said that this was
something they could investigate, he replied and
I quote "The minister
and his department have no idea about the
legislation or what is going
on"
I again contacted my local member and Hockey's
office and they agreed
that this was not a matter for the ombudsman and
that there was no
assistance available to me.
Being an annoying and very determined person I
again contacted Joe
Hockey's office after he stated publicly that
"he would investigate
any wrongdoing by either union or employer". He
was, of course,
defending using government funds to investigate
alleged union wrong
doings.
I again was contacted by a senior person in the
workplace ombudsman's
office who at least made what appeared to be an
attempt to get some
assistance for me.
So far nothing has been forthcoming. To sum up
a long story all the
advertising all the assurances all the
"Protected by law" statements
are worthless propaganda, when it comes to the
crunch, the new
workplace laws are written for and by employers.
Employees have had
their basic working rights that have ben fought
for by generations of
unions and workers stripped away.
I will continue to fight and annoy them as much
as possible. I will
also tell my story to anyone who will listen.
If you have made it this far through my story
thank you. I am not
alone in unfair or unlawful dismissal I have
heard many similar
stories but unless a worker can come up with the
$40,000 or so to take
the case to a federal court the employer escapes
any justice.
Why will I not be voting for John Howard and his
team of supporters? I
think you get the main idea.
Is there a Liberal in this NG who would come up
with a solution?name
withheld.....

Just a question......
How is a part-time casual employee able to "stress
out and go off on sick
leave"?

I cant answer that q as I never asked it in the
first place. Do I
understand you ask this question to perhaps seek a
flaw in this chaps
plight.

No, I ask it to try to establish whether this is
another manufactured/fictitious case dreamed up by
Labor/Unions and thrown out there in an election
campaign as being real. They've done it
before....and somehow this one, as pulling on the
heart strings as it might be, somehow doesn't ring
true.

It's a story on a newsgroup, that's all, not thrown
out there by anyone but the person who posted it.
If you want a story that's definately true then watch
the ACTU ad that shows how someone can be sacked for
operational reasons then have his job readvertised for
$20000 less under this great new IR regime.
If it was manufactured/fictitious Howard and Hockey
would have screemed the house down by now.

[Raven]

Post by Twine

Post by Raven

Post by Twine

Post by Raven
The story unfolds... never mind fairness this is an example of a poor
employer legally dismissing an employee.
May I ask your indulgence and tell you my own view on the 2007
election. I have until recently worked for 3 years as a part time
casual at a large local camera store in Maroochydore. Being a
Professional Photographer it was beneficial to myself and I thought my
knowledge was valuable to my employer.
Earlier this year I was asked to vacuum the floor with an old vacuum
cleaner having done half the floor I found the electrical cable had
worn through and the wires were exposed, as per my responsibilities
under workplace health and safety I reported this to my employer and
was told he would fix it. A short time later the cleaner was returned
to me with some sticky tape round the damaged cord area. I considered
this to be unsafe and refused to use the equipment. I based this
decision on the fact that I had been a member of the Occupational
Health and Safety committee at the university where I was previously
employed for 16 years, My wife is a trained Occupational health and
safety nurse and my son is an Occupational health and safety manager
at a mine so Occ health and safety is a fairly common discussion in
our home, so I am fairly aware of my responsibilities.
My employer gave me a simple choice "Use the equipment or leave".
Rather than risk my life (I refuse to have "Died while vacuuming the
floor" inscribed on my tombstone :) and endanger the lives of
customers and other staff, I left. As soon as I got home I called the
local Occupational Health and Safety office and reported the incident.
They attended the scene and found the item to be faulty and dangerous.
Now the interesting part. If I had used this equipment under
Queensland Occupational Health and Safety laws I would be liable for a
fine not exceeding $20,000 and or up to 12 months in prison. However
after extensive discussion with the federal workplace minister Joe
Hockey and his office I have been informed under the federal law it is
neither unlawful or unfair dismissal for my employer to sack me for
refusing to use dangerous equipment. Let me repeat that It is not
illegal to sack a worker for refusing to break the law and endanger
their life and the lives of others.
I took this matter to the AIRC as there was no assistance available
from the government for sacked workers I had to attend by myself. I
managed to bluff my way through the meeting and negotiated a return to
work with 4 points agreed on by my employer and myself. He required
that I park my car in the correct car park and wear the correct colour
shirt one day a week. I required that I return to work on the same
duties as before and that my employer not abuse either myself or other
staff or customers.
These were agreed on and the commissioner made a point of emphasizing
my disability to my employer ( i am dyslexic and find writing quickly
and accurately under pressure impossible)
On my return to work I was presented with a document with 32 new
duties for me to perform 12 of these new duties involved reading and
writing something my employer had been specifically told I was not
capable of performing and that I had repeatedly told my employer I was
not capable of doing over my previous 3 years employment.
I stressed out and went off on sick leave, my doctor approved this and
I was accepted for work-cover payments. I checked with the AIRC saying
we had negotiated an agreement and my employer had not kept his side
of that agreement what happens next? Their reply was slightly
confronting they just said that they had negotiated a return to work
so the case was closed there was absolutely no responsibility on their
part that the employer keep to the agreement. Once the matter leaves
the AIRC then that is the end of it.
I was pretty disappointed with this with this to say the least.
I contacted my local member of parliament a Liberal while his office
was very concerned but was unable to do anything to assist me other
than tell me that they thought the system was unfair and did not
protect workers.
Sometime later I was still on work-cover payments I received a letter
from my superannuation company informing me that my employer had
ceased my super payments because my employment had been terminated. I
had been sacked while I was on sick leave this was unlawful dismissal
under workchoices legislation so I contacted the Workchoices office
they agreed that it was unlawful but told me there was nothing they or
any other government department could do to assist me. I mentioned
the workchoices advertisement offering protection to workers and was
told that that did not cover this situation.
I phoned the workplace ombudsman and was told "Get a Lawyer" when I
suggested that it may be a case they should investigate I was told
that I was being uncooperative and they hung up on me.
I again contacted my local member and they contacted Joe Hockey's
office I got an email from Joe Hockey's office saying that this was a
matter that the Workplace Ombudsman could and should investigate and
that a senior officer from the Brisbane office would contact me
shortly, a person called and I explained the situation he said that
there was nothing they could do. I suggested that I had been sacked
while on sick leave and that this was unlawful by their laws he
replied "If we help you then we would also have to help your
employer" I told him that Hockey's office had said that this was
something they could investigate, he replied and I quote "The minister
and his department have no idea about the legislation or what is going
on"
I again contacted my local member and Hockey's office and they agreed
that this was not a matter for the ombudsman and that there was no
assistance available to me.
Being an annoying and very determined person I again contacted Joe
Hockey's office after he stated publicly that "he would investigate
any wrongdoing by either union or employer". He was, of course,
defending using government funds to investigate alleged union wrong
doings.
I again was contacted by a senior person in the workplace ombudsman's
office who at least made what appeared to be an attempt to get some
assistance for me.
So far nothing has been forthcoming. To sum up a long story all the
advertising all the assurances all the "Protected by law" statements
are worthless propaganda, when it comes to the crunch, the new
workplace laws are written for and by employers. Employees have had
their basic working rights that have ben fought for by generations of
unions and workers stripped away.
I will continue to fight and annoy them as much as possible. I will
also tell my story to anyone who will listen.
If you have made it this far through my story thank you. I am not
alone in unfair or unlawful dismissal I have heard many similar
stories but unless a worker can come up with the $40,000 or so to take
the case to a federal court the employer escapes any justice.
Why will I not be voting for John Howard and his team of supporters? I
think you get the main idea.
Is there a Liberal in this NG who would come up with a solution?name
withheld.....

Just a question......
How is a part-time casual employee able to "stress out and go off on sick
leave"?

I cant answer that q as I never asked it in the first place. Do I
understand you ask this question to perhaps seek a flaw in this chaps
plight.

No, I ask it to try to establish whether this is another
manufactured/fictitious case dreamed up by Labor/Unions and thrown out there
in an election campaign as being real. They've done it before....and somehow
this one, as pulling on the heart strings as it might be, somehow doesn't
ring true.

I am a journalist without any political persuassion... it really
happened and there are plenty of them out there. No party be it Labor
or Liberal has my stamp on this story. If anything I am a swinger....
wanna come over tnite?

[Twine]

Post by Raven

Post by Twine

Post by Raven

Post by Twine

Post by Raven
The story unfolds... never mind fairness this is an example of a poor
employer legally dismissing an employee.
May I ask your indulgence and tell you my own view on the 2007
election. I have until recently worked for 3 years as a part time
casual at a large local camera store in Maroochydore. Being a
Professional Photographer it was beneficial to myself and I thought my
knowledge was valuable to my employer.
Earlier this year I was asked to vacuum the floor with an old vacuum
cleaner having done half the floor I found the electrical cable had
worn through and the wires were exposed, as per my responsibilities
under workplace health and safety I reported this to my employer and
was told he would fix it. A short time later the cleaner was returned
to me with some sticky tape round the damaged cord area. I considered
this to be unsafe and refused to use the equipment. I based this
decision on the fact that I had been a member of the Occupational
Health and Safety committee at the university where I was previously
employed for 16 years, My wife is a trained Occupational health and
safety nurse and my son is an Occupational health and safety manager
at a mine so Occ health and safety is a fairly common discussion in
our home, so I am fairly aware of my responsibilities.
My employer gave me a simple choice "Use the equipment or leave".
Rather than risk my life (I refuse to have "Died while vacuuming the
floor" inscribed on my tombstone :) and endanger the lives of
customers and other staff, I left. As soon as I got home I called the
local Occupational Health and Safety office and reported the incident.
They attended the scene and found the item to be faulty and dangerous.
Now the interesting part. If I had used this equipment under
Queensland Occupational Health and Safety laws I would be liable for a
fine not exceeding $20,000 and or up to 12 months in prison. However
after extensive discussion with the federal workplace minister Joe
Hockey and his office I have been informed under the federal law it is
neither unlawful or unfair dismissal for my employer to sack me for
refusing to use dangerous equipment. Let me repeat that It is not
illegal to sack a worker for refusing to break the law and endanger
their life and the lives of others.
I took this matter to the AIRC as there was no assistance available
from the government for sacked workers I had to attend by myself. I
managed to bluff my way through the meeting and negotiated a return to
work with 4 points agreed on by my employer and myself. He required
that I park my car in the correct car park and wear the correct colour
shirt one day a week. I required that I return to work on the same
duties as before and that my employer not abuse either myself or other
staff or customers.
These were agreed on and the commissioner made a point of emphasizing
my disability to my employer ( i am dyslexic and find writing quickly
and accurately under pressure impossible)
On my return to work I was presented with a document with 32 new
duties for me to perform 12 of these new duties involved reading and
writing something my employer had been specifically told I was not
capable of performing and that I had repeatedly told my employer I was
not capable of doing over my previous 3 years employment.
I stressed out and went off on sick leave, my doctor approved this and
I was accepted for work-cover payments. I checked with the AIRC saying
we had negotiated an agreement and my employer had not kept his side
of that agreement what happens next? Their reply was slightly
confronting they just said that they had negotiated a return to work
so the case was closed there was absolutely no responsibility on their
part that the employer keep to the agreement. Once the matter leaves
the AIRC then that is the end of it.
I was pretty disappointed with this with this to say the least.
I contacted my local member of parliament a Liberal while his office
was very concerned but was unable to do anything to assist me other
than tell me that they thought the system was unfair and did not
protect workers.
Sometime later I was still on work-cover payments I received a letter
from my superannuation company informing me that my employer had
ceased my super payments because my employment had been terminated.
I
had been sacked while I was on sick leave this was unlawful dismissal
under workchoices legislation so I contacted the Workchoices office
they agreed that it was unlawful but told me there was nothing they or
any other government department could do to assist me. I mentioned
the workchoices advertisement offering protection to workers and was
told that that did not cover this situation.
I phoned the workplace ombudsman and was told "Get a Lawyer" when I
suggested that it may be a case they should investigate I was told
that I was being uncooperative and they hung up on me.
I again contacted my local member and they contacted Joe Hockey's
office I got an email from Joe Hockey's office saying that this was a
matter that the Workplace Ombudsman could and should investigate and
that a senior officer from the Brisbane office would contact me
shortly, a person called and I explained the situation he said that
there was nothing they could do. I suggested that I had been sacked
while on sick leave and that this was unlawful by their laws he
replied "If we help you then we would also have to help your
employer" I told him that Hockey's office had said that this was
something they could investigate, he replied and I quote "The minister
and his department have no idea about the legislation or what is going
on"
I again contacted my local member and Hockey's office and they agreed
that this was not a matter for the ombudsman and that there was no
assistance available to me.
Being an annoying and very determined person I again contacted Joe
Hockey's office after he stated publicly that "he would investigate
any wrongdoing by either union or employer". He was, of course,
defending using government funds to investigate alleged union wrong
doings.
I again was contacted by a senior person in the workplace ombudsman's
office who at least made what appeared to be an attempt to get some
assistance for me.
So far nothing has been forthcoming. To sum up a long story all the
advertising all the assurances all the "Protected by law" statements
are worthless propaganda, when it comes to the crunch, the new
workplace laws are written for and by employers. Employees have had
their basic working rights that have ben fought for by generations of
unions and workers stripped away.
I will continue to fight and annoy them as much as possible. I will
also tell my story to anyone who will listen.
If you have made it this far through my story thank you. I am not
alone in unfair or unlawful dismissal I have heard many similar
stories but unless a worker can come up with the $40,000 or so to take
the case to a federal court the employer escapes any justice.
Why will I not be voting for John Howard and his team of supporters? I
think you get the main idea.
Is there a Liberal in this NG who would come up with a solution?name
withheld.....

Just a question......
How is a part-time casual employee able to "stress out and go off on sick
leave"?

I cant answer that q as I never asked it in the first place. Do I
understand you ask this question to perhaps seek a flaw in this chaps
plight.

No, I ask it to try to establish whether this is another
manufactured/fictitious case dreamed up by Labor/Unions and thrown out there
in an election campaign as being real. They've done it before....and somehow
this one, as pulling on the heart strings as it might be, somehow doesn't
ring true.

I am a journalist without any political persuassion...

Yeah, sure. That's an oxymoron in itself.

Judging by your posts on here you are a dead set Labor stooge.
No problems there - but don't prostitute your "profession" by trying to
bullshit that you are objective.

From what I've seen so far you aren't a journalists arsehole.

[Ördög]

Post by Twine
Judging by your posts on here you are a dead set Labor stooge.

Judging by your recent activities in this NG you are a lie-beral
drone.

Post by Twine
No problems there - but don't prostitute your "profession" by trying to
bullshit that you are objective.

Can you prove he isn't? If you can't than fuck off back to sweeping
the floor of your party room and kissing your boss' arse before and
after he makes his next big public lie!

Post by Twine
From what I've seen so far you aren't a journalists arsehole.

And you aren't a genuine poster, fuckwit, just a lie-beral plant
pushing gnome's propaganda bullshit uphill on Usenet.

�rd�g (The friendly Hungarian Devil in service of aus.politics and
Usenet)
## I usually treat pests with pesticide.
That goes for the lying rodent too! ##

[Mango]

Post by Raven

Post by Twine

Post by Raven
The story unfolds... never mind fairness this is an example of a poor
employer legally dismissing an employee.
May I ask your indulgence and tell you my own view on the 2007
election. I have until recently worked for 3 years as a part time
casual at a large local camera store in Maroochydore. Being a
Professional Photographer it was beneficial to myself and I thought my
knowledge was valuable to my employer.
Earlier this year I was asked to vacuum the floor with an old vacuum
cleaner having done half the floor I found the electrical cable had
worn through and the wires were exposed, as per my responsibilities
under workplace health and safety I reported this to my employer and
was told he would fix it. A short time later the cleaner was returned
to me with some sticky tape round the damaged cord area. I considered
this to be unsafe and refused to use the equipment. I based this
decision on the fact that I had been a member of the Occupational
Health and Safety committee at the university where I was previously
employed for 16 years, My wife is a trained Occupational health and
safety nurse and my son is an Occupational health and safety manager
at a mine so Occ health and safety is a fairly common discussion in
our home, so I am fairly aware of my responsibilities.
My employer gave me a simple choice "Use the equipment or leave".
Rather than risk my life (I refuse to have "Died while vacuuming the
floor" inscribed on my tombstone :) and endanger the lives of
customers and other staff, I left. As soon as I got home I called the
local Occupational Health and Safety office and reported the incident.
They attended the scene and found the item to be faulty and dangerous.
Now the interesting part. If I had used this equipment under
Queensland Occupational Health and Safety laws I would be liable for a
fine not exceeding $20,000 and or up to 12 months in prison. However
after extensive discussion with the federal workplace minister Joe
Hockey and his office I have been informed under the federal law it is
neither unlawful or unfair dismissal for my employer to sack me for
refusing to use dangerous equipment. Let me repeat that It is not
illegal to sack a worker for refusing to break the law and endanger
their life and the lives of others.
I took this matter to the AIRC as there was no assistance available
from the government for sacked workers I had to attend by myself. I
managed to bluff my way through the meeting and negotiated a return to
work with 4 points agreed on by my employer and myself. He required
that I park my car in the correct car park and wear the correct colour
shirt one day a week. I required that I return to work on the same
duties as before and that my employer not abuse either myself or other
staff or customers.
These were agreed on and the commissioner made a point of emphasizing
my disability to my employer ( i am dyslexic and find writing quickly
and accurately under pressure impossible)
On my return to work I was presented with a document with 32 new
duties for me to perform 12 of these new duties involved reading and
writing something my employer had been specifically told I was not
capable of performing and that I had repeatedly told my employer I was
not capable of doing over my previous 3 years employment.
I stressed out and went off on sick leave, my doctor approved this and
I was accepted for work-cover payments. I checked with the AIRC saying
we had negotiated an agreement and my employer had not kept his side
of that agreement what happens next? Their reply was slightly
confronting they just said that they had negotiated a return to work
so the case was closed there was absolutely no responsibility on their
part that the employer keep to the agreement. Once the matter leaves
the AIRC then that is the end of it.
I was pretty disappointed with this with this to say the least.
I contacted my local member of parliament a Liberal while his office
was very concerned but was unable to do anything to assist me other
than tell me that they thought the system was unfair and did not
protect workers.
Sometime later I was still on work-cover payments I received a letter
from my superannuation company informing me that my employer had
ceased my super payments because my employment had been terminated. I
had been sacked while I was on sick leave this was unlawful dismissal
under workchoices legislation so I contacted the Workchoices office
they agreed that it was unlawful but told me there was nothing they or
any other government department could do to assist me. I mentioned
the workchoices advertisement offering protection to workers and was
told that that did not cover this situation.
I phoned the workplace ombudsman and was told "Get a Lawyer" when I
suggested that it may be a case they should investigate I was told
that I was being uncooperative and they hung up on me.
I again contacted my local member and they contacted Joe Hockey's
office I got an email from Joe Hockey's office saying that this was a
matter that the Workplace Ombudsman could and should investigate and
that a senior officer from the Brisbane office would contact me
shortly, a person called and I explained the situation he said that
there was nothing they could do. I suggested that I had been sacked
while on sick leave and that this was unlawful by their laws he
replied "If we help you then we would also have to help your
employer" I told him that Hockey's office had said that this was
something they could investigate, he replied and I quote "The minister
and his department have no idea about the legislation or what is going
on"
I again contacted my local member and Hockey's office and they agreed
that this was not a matter for the ombudsman and that there was no
assistance available to me.
Being an annoying and very determined person I again contacted Joe
Hockey's office after he stated publicly that "he would investigate
any wrongdoing by either union or employer". He was, of course,
defending using government funds to investigate alleged union wrong
doings.
I again was contacted by a senior person in the workplace ombudsman's
office who at least made what appeared to be an attempt to get some
assistance for me.
So far nothing has been forthcoming. To sum up a long story all the
advertising all the assurances all the "Protected by law" statements
are worthless propaganda, when it comes to the crunch, the new
workplace laws are written for and by employers. Employees have had
their basic working rights that have ben fought for by generations of
unions and workers stripped away.
I will continue to fight and annoy them as much as possible. I will
also tell my story to anyone who will listen.
If you have made it this far through my story thank you. I am not
alone in unfair or unlawful dismissal I have heard many similar
stories but unless a worker can come up with the $40,000 or so to take
the case to a federal court the employer escapes any justice.
Why will I not be voting for John Howard and his team of supporters? I
think you get the main idea.
Is there a Liberal in this NG who would come up with a solution?name
withheld.....

Just a question......
How is a part-time casual employee able to "stress out and go off on sick
leave"?

I cant answer that q as I never asked it in the first place. Do I
understand you ask this question to perhaps seek a flaw in this chaps
plight.

Are you saying the chap in question is not you?

[ralph]

Post by Mango

Post by Raven
I cant answer that q as I never asked it in the first place. Do I
understand you ask this question to perhaps seek a flaw in this chaps
plight.

Are you saying the chap in question is not you?

LOL ... are you saying this thread is not some bullshit troll by some
Labor shill?

[Mango]

Post by ralph

Post by Mango

Post by Raven
I cant answer that q as I never asked it in the first place. Do I
understand you ask this question to perhaps seek a flaw in this chaps
plight.

Are you saying the chap in question is not you?

LOL ... are you saying this thread is not some bullshit troll by some
Labor shill?

There are some aspects that strike me as plausable, and several others that
don't. Slightly more believable than a Bob Hawke or Little Johnny Howard
post, but not by much.

[Jim]

but didn`t they just spend $121,000,000 telling us how fair the new laws
are.Surely they didn`t spend all that money telling us BULLSHIT

Post by Raven
The story unfolds... never mind fairness this is an example of a poor
employer legally dismissing an employee.
May I ask your indulgence and tell you my own view on the 2007
election. I have until recently worked for 3 years as a part time
casual at a large local camera store in Maroochydore. Being a
Professional Photographer it was beneficial to myself and I thought my
knowledge was valuable to my employer.
Earlier this year I was asked to vacuum the floor with an old vacuum
cleaner having done half the floor I found the electrical cable had
worn through and the wires were exposed, as per my responsibilities
under workplace health and safety I reported this to my employer and
was told he would fix it. A short time later the cleaner was returned
to me with some sticky tape round the damaged cord area. I considered
this to be unsafe and refused to use the equipment. I based this
decision on the fact that I had been a member of the Occupational
Health and Safety committee at the university where I was previously
employed for 16 years, My wife is a trained Occupational health and
safety nurse and my son is an Occupational health and safety manager
at a mine so Occ health and safety is a fairly common discussion in
our home, so I am fairly aware of my responsibilities.
My employer gave me a simple choice "Use the equipment or leave".
Rather than risk my life (I refuse to have "Died while vacuuming the
floor" inscribed on my tombstone :) and endanger the lives of
customers and other staff, I left. As soon as I got home I called the
local Occupational Health and Safety office and reported the incident.
They attended the scene and found the item to be faulty and dangerous.
Now the interesting part. If I had used this equipment under
Queensland Occupational Health and Safety laws I would be liable for a
fine not exceeding $20,000 and or up to 12 months in prison. However
after extensive discussion with the federal workplace minister Joe
Hockey and his office I have been informed under the federal law it is
neither unlawful or unfair dismissal for my employer to sack me for
refusing to use dangerous equipment. Let me repeat that It is not
illegal to sack a worker for refusing to break the law and endanger
their life and the lives of others.
I took this matter to the AIRC as there was no assistance available
from the government for sacked workers I had to attend by myself. I
managed to bluff my way through the meeting and negotiated a return to
work with 4 points agreed on by my employer and myself. He required
that I park my car in the correct car park and wear the correct colour
shirt one day a week. I required that I return to work on the same
duties as before and that my employer not abuse either myself or other
staff or customers.
These were agreed on and the commissioner made a point of emphasizing
my disability to my employer ( i am dyslexic and find writing quickly
and accurately under pressure impossible)
On my return to work I was presented with a document with 32 new
duties for me to perform 12 of these new duties involved reading and
writing something my employer had been specifically told I was not
capable of performing and that I had repeatedly told my employer I was
not capable of doing over my previous 3 years employment.
I stressed out and went off on sick leave, my doctor approved this and
I was accepted for work-cover payments. I checked with the AIRC saying
we had negotiated an agreement and my employer had not kept his side
of that agreement what happens next? Their reply was slightly
confronting they just said that they had negotiated a return to work
so the case was closed there was absolutely no responsibility on their
part that the employer keep to the agreement. Once the matter leaves
the AIRC then that is the end of it.
I was pretty disappointed with this with this to say the least.
I contacted my local member of parliament a Liberal while his office
was very concerned but was unable to do anything to assist me other
than tell me that they thought the system was unfair and did not
protect workers.
Sometime later I was still on work-cover payments I received a letter
from my superannuation company informing me that my employer had
ceased my super payments because my employment had been terminated. I
had been sacked while I was on sick leave this was unlawful dismissal
under workchoices legislation so I contacted the Workchoices office
they agreed that it was unlawful but told me there was nothing they or
any other government department could do to assist me. I mentioned
the workchoices advertisement offering protection to workers and was
told that that did not cover this situation.
I phoned the workplace ombudsman and was told "Get a Lawyer" when I
suggested that it may be a case they should investigate I was told
that I was being uncooperative and they hung up on me.
I again contacted my local member and they contacted Joe Hockey's
office I got an email from Joe Hockey's office saying that this was a
matter that the Workplace Ombudsman could and should investigate and
that a senior officer from the Brisbane office would contact me
shortly, a person called and I explained the situation he said that
there was nothing they could do. I suggested that I had been sacked
while on sick leave and that this was unlawful by their laws he
replied "If we help you then we would also have to help your
employer" I told him that Hockey's office had said that this was
something they could investigate, he replied and I quote "The minister
and his department have no idea about the legislation or what is going
on"
I again contacted my local member and Hockey's office and they agreed
that this was not a matter for the ombudsman and that there was no
assistance available to me.
Being an annoying and very determined person I again contacted Joe
Hockey's office after he stated publicly that "he would investigate
any wrongdoing by either union or employer". He was, of course,
defending using government funds to investigate alleged union wrong
doings.
I again was contacted by a senior person in the workplace ombudsman's
office who at least made what appeared to be an attempt to get some
assistance for me.
So far nothing has been forthcoming. To sum up a long story all the
advertising all the assurances all the "Protected by law" statements
are worthless propaganda, when it comes to the crunch, the new
workplace laws are written for and by employers. Employees have had
their basic working rights that have ben fought for by generations of
unions and workers stripped away.
I will continue to fight and annoy them as much as possible. I will
also tell my story to anyone who will listen.
If you have made it this far through my story thank you. I am not
alone in unfair or unlawful dismissal I have heard many similar
stories but unless a worker can come up with the $40,000 or so to take
the case to a federal court the employer escapes any justice.
Why will I not be voting for John Howard and his team of supporters? I
think you get the main idea.
Is there a Liberal in this NG who would come up with a solution?name
withheld.....

[ralph]

Post by Jim
but didn`t they just spend $121,000,000 telling us how fair the new laws
are.Surely they didn`t spend all that money telling us BULLSHIT

The only bullshit here is troll "Ravens" story.

[David Moss]

Post by Raven
On my return to work I was presented with a document with 32 new
duties for me to perform 12 of these new duties involved reading and
writing something my employer had been specifically told I was not
capable of performing and that I had repeatedly told my employer I was
not capable of doing over my previous 3 years employment.

How are you able to participate in a text based newsgroup?