As if I needed another reason to not buy C.U.B. products.

[Bridges]

I'd be pretty sure not too many of our members are buying their products anyway but this sort of behavior is abhorrent and what we have to look forward to with Turnball and Cash running their special brand of work choices industrial relations.

For Balance here's a few sources.

http://www.smh.com.au/business/workplace-relations/staff-picket-cub-factory-as-sackings-stall-production-20160712-gq3zsx.html

http://www.actu.org.au/actu-media/media-releases/2016/cub-workers-being-forced-to-reapply-for-jobs-at-lower-pay-a-sign-of-things-to-come

https://www.etuvic.com.au/content/cub-workers

I don't care how you paint this, it's a **** act by a company that can and should look after it's workforce.

 

[SBOB]

not supporting them, and mostly devils advocate, but technically, THEY didn't fire those workers.Based on those links,
- Those workers were hired by a maintenance company with a (and i quote from one of those articles) "long-standing maintenance contract"

So, just like any contact work, contacts end. They arent guaranteed full time employment, and they dont come with the same kind of employment guarantees (and as such, often have much higher pay rates )

If the new maintenance contractor who CUB is outsourcing its maintenance to know chooses to (or has to *shrug*) have lower pay rates, thats not really CUB's problem/fault


(its the same as when I hear complaints about contractors or contractor employees who work in mining, getting paid massively above what 'regular' people earn for the same wage, and they contracts are cancelled or come to an end.. its one of those risk/rewards about contract work or working for a contractor)

 

[yankinoz]

I'm with you, Bridges, but wonder if there's anyone on this forum who actually buys CUB products and can therefore boycott them.

 

[Camo6]

According to reports I've read, the staff were stood down and offered new contracts at non EBA award rates at close to a third of what they earned. This from a company that reportedly made $4.4 billion last year, $62 million of that going to the CEO. Just another example of big companies trying to drive down labour wages in order to maintain ever increasing profits. They say our current level of wages aren't sustainable but how the **** can you expect record profits to be? FFS now I sound like a shop steward.

 

[SBOB]

According to reports I've read, the staff were stood down and offered new contracts at non EBA award rates at close to a third of what they earned.

yes, but CUB isn't offering those contracts. The maintenance/electrical company they have engaged to do their maintenance work is...

I'll repeat what i said earlier, im mostly playing devils advocate, but if CUB enlisted contract company A for its maintenance for 10 years, that comes to an end and instead of re-contracting with company A decides to shop around and now enlists company B (who is "Catalyst Recruitment, which is in the Programmed/Skilled Group"), its not CUB's problem/responsibility as to what company A or company B pay their contract employees..

 

[Camo6]

...its not CUB's problem/responsibility as to what company A or company B pay their contract employees...

Yeah, convenient that. You don't think they had any sway over the new conditions? Now, I'm no union thug by any means, but this kind of action is a worrying trend in so many industries nowadays.

 

[SBOB]

Yeah, convenient that. You don't think they had any sway over the new conditions? Now, I'm no union thug by any means, but this kind of action is a worrying trend in so many industries nowadays.

im sure, based on their size, they have sway.. and like i said, mostly devils advocate
but when the headlines say 'workers fired and told to re-apply for 65% less pay' its not exactly accurate

sub-contractors earning $80+/hr on long term contracts should be treating their sub-contracting employment as just that, a contract employment. If CUB can find a new contract company able to find equally skilled workers for 65% of the price, it would probably indicate the current sub-contractors are being paid above average..

Hypothetically, if you are chasing a bunch of tradies during a shortage and have to pay more than normal to hire them, if in the future, there is an over supply of tradies, should you continue to pay the same higher rate, or is paying the market rate fair?

 

[Killer Brew]

Yeah, convenient that. You don't think they had any sway over the new conditions? Now, I'm no union thug by any means, but this kind of action is a worrying trend in so many industries nowadays.

Why would CUB have sway on the conditions? Programmed are a massive company with plenty of contracts. CUB puts a contract out for tender and a different company wins it, almost certainly on price yes, but are CUB bound to pay more to preserve the wages of another company's workforce? At least that is the way i read it in the Age this morning.

 

[TheWiggman]

I'm hearing you SBOB, but the mentality of companies hiring bulk contract labour like that annoys me. Personally, I like those around me - staff and wages - to wear the same badge as me and have pride in their company. Contact it out and all you'll do is upset people eventually. I'm married, have a mortgage, have beautiful kids and fear what might happen if I lose my job. Contractors aren't 'scabs', but instead of being a workforce should supplement it. Being a contractor carries risk but if dads like me were out of work and offered a job, I'd take it.
Fairer in the first place to just employ your own people. Granted I don't know the whole story but that's what I reckon anyway.

 

[yum beer]

These are the joys of our industrial capitalised society. Profits must increase no matter how.
Workers are a commodity for using as the pigs see fit.
Thank you every ****** who voted liberal.

 

[Camo6]

Why would CUB have sway on the conditions? Programmed are a massive company with plenty of contracts. CUB puts a contract out for tender and a different company wins it, almost certainly on price yes, but are CUB bound to pay more to preserve the wages of another company's workforce? At least that is the way i read it in the Age this morning.

The staff were sacked then offered their new jobs at non union rates and CUB had nothing to do with it? They didn't think the new contract wouldn't have an affect on their workers wages? Oh well, you pay peanuts, you get monkeys. Funnily enough, tradesman are probably their biggest target market and it would be nice to see a sustained effort to boycott the big breweries. Love to see all them union thugs putting away Pirate Life.

 

[SBOB]

I'm hearing you SBOB, but the mentality of companies hiring bulk contract labour like that annoys me. Personally, I like those around me - staff and wages - to wear the same badge as me and have pride in their company. Contact it out and all you'll do is upset people eventually.

no argument there
I've worked on plenty of control system engineering jobs where I'm working along side sole/sub-contract workers who are being paid 2-3x my wage due to being contractors as opposed to employees.

But its the pro/con contract work comes with (generally), higher earnings with lower job security.
I also, choose the slightly higher job security options for the same reason you do, but when a contractor's contract is ended, I dont want to hear them complaining about having to go looking for their next job, when they have been perfectly happy taking home more $ while contracted.

 

[SBOB]

The staff were sacked then offered their new jobs at non union rates and CUB had nothing to do with it? T

I think its more like 'you're current contracts are finished. The new maintenance contract has been awarded to company xyz, so feel free to apply to company xyz'

The quotes/lines in most of those articles are somewhat 'union/one-sided' in their wording

(again, mostly devils advocate here )

 

[Bridges]

Why can't a massive company employ staff? On a fair wage? Why must they contract **** like this out? Yeah I know it's all about the bottom line for the bloke taking home $62 million a year. But FFS $62 mill a year! Yet he's happily knifing people probably earning 0.1% of what he takes home each year. How do people like that sleep. It's just flat out cuntery.

 

[Bridges]

I'm with you, Bridges, but wonder if there's anyone on this forum who actually buys CUB products and can therefore boycott them.

Well maybe we can try a bit harder to change the minds of some friends or family members who mistakenly think the **** they turn out is drinkable...

 

[arctic78]

+1 Bridges
But you know without that extra 5 million he may get this year as a bonus for cost cutting the poor guy would be really struggling to get by.

 

[SBOB]

Why can't a massive company employ staff? On a fair wage?

considering the wages arent mentioned, how do you know the new contracts aren't 'fair'?
if a maintenance electrician or fitter was previously being paid $80/hr (~$150k a year) and is now being offered ~$95k a year, does that make the $95k/year unfair?

 

[Camo6]

The quotes/lines in most of those articles are somewhat 'union/one-sided' in their wording

(again, mostly devils advocate here )

Swap 'union/one-sided' with 'empathetic' and you'll be closer to the mark. If we'd all sat back and accepted our lot we wouldn't have the freedoms we enjoy now.

 

[lost at sea]

Organised labour unions......yeah but what did the romans ever do for us.

 

[Judanero]

It's just flat out cuntery.

Just so you know; I am stealing this phrase. Sterling wordsmithery Bridges.