Work Choices Violence

(Domestic violence is a henous act and should never be taken lightly.)

Domestic violence often results from a process of progressive increased dependence and helplessness on one side and, an increased sense of strength, justification and indifference on the other side. It results in all physical, emotions and economic strength and freedom residing on the one side and, a helpless abused and dispossessed person on the other and, cut off from advice and support while sometimes living in false hope.

When all power resides within any one group in society it becomes psychologically inevitable that the power will be used to its own maximum benefit, especially when there is competition within the power group (as there is in business). The 'lower' groups learn to become physically, financially and even emotionally dependent on the wielders of power (jobs, money).

These are some of the dynamics of domestic violence.

Work Choices is a system that shifts all economic power to one group in society, big business. Business has almost king like powers when it comes to dealing out jobs to it's 'Subjects', the public. And so far as the average Australian is concerned big business powers are identical to that of a king.

When a person in need of work goes to 'negotiate' an AWA with a big business negotiator they are already at near total disadvantage. Most Australians would lack the skill, language, knowledge, experience, understanding and confidence to obtain anything except what they are 'told' to take.

The similarities of Work Choices to domestic violence mechanisms is disturbing.

• It begins with acceptance of an initial 'unacceptable' condition.
• One side is emboldened by their ability to escape the first 'offence' without consequences, proceeds to be progressively restrictive and demanding.
• The partner progressively accepts each increment because of an increasing sense of helplessness and emergence of a denial/false hope.
• The partner becomes emotionally entrenched in their environment of dispossession because of the sense of loss of control and having become emotionally dependent and helpless.
• Also there is a gradual cutting off from support networks, friends, advice and access to alternatives.
• It endures until the excess goes beyond the limits of endurance or some concerned party steps in.

Work Choices entrap then destroys, a process that has already begun as the nature of the first 6 months statistics on Work Choice AWAs tell their disturbing story.

The erstwhile Australian at their AWA negotiation lose most conditions and rights which is sometimes accompanied with a few extra dollars in wages above the minimum to falsley enhance the government statistics being collected [i.e. to enable the statement 'wages are being increased']

Employers emboldened on how simple it was to enforce AWAs stripped of most basic conditions, then pushed for  even fewer basic conditions and, imposed restrictive one's of their own. e.g. No wage increase for 5 years, required to work at odd hours or on demand without warning and with no compensation [no penalty rates].

The employee accepts each step in the abusiveness of each AWA because of a position of helplessness; lacking representation and authoritative support. When the environment becomes one of restrictive AWAs the poor employee is left little option as he is in a sea of unfairness. They thus become firmly trapped in wholly restrictive and stripped standard of AWAs. They feel dis-empowered and without support to resist or have voice.

From the start of the AWA process the employee is cut off from any network of support and advice which they would normally receive from their union.

Unions are removed from the process deliberately so as to remove any skills and negotiation ability from the table,

The result is an employee and work force that accepts a position of helplessness, lack of confidence, power, rights or sense of worth as their lot.

The whole process is allowed to occur because of the vast difference of power between the individual and the big business. When business can offer an AWA on the basis of 'take or leave it' (as it can, does and will continue to do) the employee is put in the position of abused partner, the choices are; be abused but have a place with money and security or, be rejected to the outside and needy.

It should be suspected that this is a situation big business has planned with the Howard government in order to produce a docile, helpless and voiceless labour market for their use.

An individual is a very easy target indeed for business, possessing no right and power to achieve basic conditions for themselves and no professional support group. Business on the other hand has the unconditional support of government and enslaving Work Choices laws.

It is because Business has Work Choices law and can pick and choose and reject on an individual basis that the already terrible poor statistics on AWAs will get much worse.

This type of situation is the reason we had the rise of unions in Australia, to stop business picking off individuals as if in a shooting gallery. The unions were professional negotiators that could speak for each individual and obtain some minimum standard, basic conditions for everyone so business abuses could stop.

We must not forget that business has the prime objective of making maximum profit [nothing wrong with that usually]. And if businesses are competing with one another they will do anything to reduce costs. They will all as a group across the country, offer in AWAs the very minimum benefits and wages allowable and put in restrictive conditions and, implement beneficial conditions for themselves.

Why will all business eventually move to offering only severely restrictive AWAs with minimum benefit and include restrictive conditions that favour them? Because it helps the profit margin and, because they can!

John Howard is moving Australian business and employment environment back to 1820's England and will succeed in doing this with a Work Choices 2008 'fine tuning'.

Work Choices: the unbalanced ledger:-