Workplace Laws and Rights

[4Vman]

Originally Posted by 4.9 EF Futura

And this is a question for all participants. What is a better outcome: (note that scenario [a] represents an 8% increase from scenario [b])

Assume, for the sake of the excercise, that the employer's budget needs wages to come in at a max $400/hr.

a) 18.5 FTE on $21.60
b) 20 FTE on $20.00

Both have an (almost) identical cost to the employer. Personally I beleive that scenario (b) is "better" and is an outcome that is more likely to be devliered under workchoices than it would be under a collective system.

Cheers lads.

Scenario B) has significant benefits in terms of business growth and sustainability, it offers more people employment on one hand, and allows the business access to an extra 1.5 people to increase output, or work on "growth" projects, i guess it also assumes that the other 18.5 people are at their limit in terms of productivity and there's meaningful work for the extra 1.5 people.
I personally like the concept of profit share and annual CPI wage rises to be honest, CPI allows the employee to maintain their ecconomic position if they haven't been rewarded with a job promotion, and profit share (if the business is profitable) gives them a reward for hard work. What it doesnt do is artificially ratchet up their wages above CPI should the following year be less profitable or there be a down turn in the market place, which is good for both parties in the long run..


Here's an interesting scenario i hope people think about carefully before answering (or flaming!), by the way im not making a judgement for or against, its just an interesting concept if you think it through:


I wonder how many people would be unemployed if they removed unemployment benefits and removed the minimum wage? I wonder what effect this would have on our economy and global competitveness?