$2,400 for Hurt and Suffering

[Patrick]

He used the card deliberately, (oops, I mean in WINJAS world, he mistook his name printed on the card as "Joes Plastering Company")

He deliberately used swastikas on a jewish family home... (ooops... I forgot, in WINJAS world, his name was Sho Mah Big WOK and it is all fung shui).

The boss didn't tell him what was blatantly obvious, "you can't do that shit..." Naughty boss, that will cost you $2400...

Also it was in the Harold... it all has to be completely true and unbiased...

[Ixion]

Just for clarity, I think the proposed 3 month trial period only permits the employer at the end to say "Thanks, but no thanks".

The employer is still bound by all other employment laws such as health and safety, no harrassment, no discrimination, equal pay rates etc. So its actually a pretty narrow change.

At the most basic level, the boss wants someone to turn up reliably, do the job, not annoy customers or other employees. 3 months is a fair trial period for everybody. No boss is going to go through the hassle of getting a new employee if they don't need to.

Uh-huh. Wanna bet how many new training rorts we'll see start up? "Super duper training scheme WE GUARANTEE YOU A JOB AT THE COMPLETION OF TRAINING. Only $5000. Job guaranteed (for three months)".

And how many kids desparate for that first job, or older workers "made redundant", who have been sucked in by the "retraining" bullshit, will pay their money and four months later find themselves less money and still no job.

Sorry mate, you're too decent a guy for this world. There are some utter CUNTS of employers out there, and all a three month trial period does is give them a perpetualy rolling supply of cheap labour to exploit and discard after three months.

[idb]

Uh-huh. Wanna bet how many new training rorts we'll see start up? "Super duper training scheme WE GUARANTEE YOU A JOB AT THE COMPLETION OF TRAINING. Only $5000. Job guaranteed (for three months)".

And how many kids desparate for that first job, or older workers "made redundant", who have been sucked in by the "retraining" bullshit, will pay their money and four months later find themselves less money and still no job.

Yep, that's exactly what has happened in the bullshit 'pre-apprenticeship training' courses dreamed up by the polytechs. But that's got nothing to do with employers.

Sorry mate, you're too decent a guy for this world. There are some utter CUNTS of employers out there, and all a three month trial period does is give them a perpetualy rolling supply of cheap labour to exploit and discard after three months.

It costs a lot of money to employ people what with interviewing, training, unproductive time while they're getting up to speed, kitting up, administrative costs and so on. Where's the incentive to keep changing every three months?

It's true that there are bad employers, there're are also bad employees.
It doesn't have to be just one or the other.
There are good cops and bad cops, good coffee makers and bad coffee makers, soft banana bites and hard banana bites, green eggs and ham.........

[Motu]

Those pre apprenticeship courses are useless,a rip off and give false hope to those on the course.I get a couple a week walking in or phoning up,99% can't speak English,I haven't seen the other 1%.My zombi metho Bro in Law even went on one - he's got no fucking fingers! Cut them all off at the first joint,gauranteed lifetime disability.

As an employer I'm very leery of taking someone on - once you got em,you got em for life.Three written warnings my arse!....''Oh,I've been getting into work earlier,but the dog ate my alarm yesterday and....'' And so you start at warning number one again.The Chinese guy I have here now is absolutly fucking hopeless,but I'm stuck with him....he's at a certain level and stuck there - he's not getting a fucking cent more until he earns his keep.

[JimO]

WINJA get your mum to turn the caps lock off on your computer

[WINJA]

WINJA get your mum to turn the caps lock off on your computer

I WILL , BUT FIRST YOU HAVE TO STOP YOUR MUM SNIFFING ROUND HERE FOR A ROOT

[WINJA]

There are some utter CUNTS of employers out there, and all a three month trial period does is give them a perpetualy rolling supply of cheap labour to exploit and discard after three months.

AND WHY CANT THE DUMB CUNTS ON THIS SITE SEE THIS , MOST THINGS ARE STILL STACKED IN THE EMPLOYERS FAVOUR THEY GOT THE LAWERS THE HR CUNTS (IF YOUR IN HR ILL SAY THAT TO YOUR FACE IF YOU LIKE)AND ALL THE HELP THEY NEED TO FUCK YOU OVER , MOST EMPLOYEES ARE ON THEIR OWN EVEN WHEN IN A UNION , ONE REASON THE IMBALANCE IS IF YOU ARE ONE OF 10 EMPLOYEES AND YOU GET FIRED ONLY 10%OF THE LABOUR IS GONE AND THOSE REAMINING USUALLY HAVE TO PICK UP THE SLACK YET FOR THE EMPLOYEE HES LOST 100% OF HIS INCOME

[chanceyy]

And how many kids desparate for that first job, or older workers "made redundant", who have been sucked in by the "retraining" bullshit, will pay their money and four months later find themselves less money and still no job.

Sorry mate, you're too decent a guy for this world. There are some utter CUNTS of employers out there, and all a three month trial period does is give them a perpetualy rolling supply of cheap labour to exploit and discard after three months.

This is law in another country and its not working, the new employees are not covered by the rules & regulations as those employed longer than 3 months.
The concerning part is the new workers have no rights at all. None, Nadda, Zip - there may be shit employees however there are far to many employers who will take full advantage of this to abuse workers

[JimO]

WINGER the only thing sniffing around you would be your poodle

[idb]

and why cant the dumb cunts on this site see this , most things are still stacked in the employers favour they got the lawers the hr cunts (if your in hr ill say that to your face if you like)and all the help they need to fuck you over , most employees are on their own even when in a union , one reason the imbalance is if you are one of 10 employees and you get fired only 10%of the labour is gone and those reamining usually have to pick up the slack yet for the employee hes lost 100% of his income

come on flanger.
lawers and hr c*nts?
how many small businesses can afford an hr c*nt do you think?
how many could afford to go to a lawer every three months?
why do you and all the other flangers think that all employers are rolling in dosh and furthermore are prepared to blow large wads of it on shafting workers for no reason other than their entertainment?
a good employee is actually worth money to a business owner.

[Ixion]

Some folk have postulated that it is unduely difficult for am employer to sack an unsatisfactory worker. WADR, I do not think this is so.

I have, as union delegate, been involved in a number of dismissal cases, several of which went to the employment tribunal. In each case a result beneficial to the worker was achieved. Of course, that is partly because I would not support cases where I thought the sacking justifed.

I have also, as a manager, sacked quite a few people. In two cases, these dismissals were referred to the tribunal. In both cases the dismissal was upheld as justified.

So I have some experience of sacking, from both sides of the fence.

If a worker is genuinely unsatisfactory, in performance or attitude, it is not unduely difficult to dismiss him or her.

Certainly, there is a procedure, which must be diligently followed. That should present no problems. It is just like fixing an engine that will not run properly. You do not go about it by ripping parts off at random, throwing them about the workshop, them fitting bits back any old how on the basis that near enough is good enough for cam timing.

If you want the result to be successful, you obtain the workshop manual. You read it carefully.You follow the required procedures attentively, being careful that each step is correct.

So, with fixing an employment situation that is not working. The manual may be obtained from the Employer's Federation, whose subscription is reasonable, and very good value for the free advice that may be had.

Obtain the manual. Follow it carefully. Ask for advice.

Nor are the procedures unduely onerous.

They are no more than the traditional Kiwi expression of a "fair go".

The workers performance, or attitude, or behaviour must be such as warrants dismissal. That surely is not unfair? If it is competance that is the issue, you will likely find your decision to dismiss supported by the other workers. Noone likes having to work harder to "prop up" an incompetant or lazy fellow.

If it be attitude or general behaviour that is complained of, that must only be such as a reasonable person would think unsupportable. A worker should not be sacked for minor high spiritedness,nor is the worker obliged to agree with all the bosses opinions. Workers after all are people too, entitled to their own opinion on matters, and to voice it. Should a man be sacked beause he does not support the same football team as his boss (one was, in one case I was involved in).

And the boss must be consistent. It is hardly fair if Tom is sacked for doing that which is overlooked in the case of Joe. Or which the boss was willing to tolerate last week, and has given no warning that he has changed his mind. Fair's fair after all.

The actual procedural requirements are not an arcane ritual. All the law says, is "Be fair". Ensure that you have the full story. Ask the worker what his version is, and be prepared to listen to it with an open mind. You do not have to accept lies, but maybe what you thought at first is not the whole story.

Tell the guy that he's in trouble. That he can talk to a lawyer (after all, you have, through the Employer's federation, if you are wise. Why should not he?)

Do not prejudge the matter. If the offence is not of such gravity as to warrant instant dismissal (which is still entirely possible), tell him in clear terms what you expect him to do to make you happy in future.I have seen so many cases where the boss expects the worker to be a mind reader.

CAVEAT: IANAL. And there are other matters to take into account. But, it is like fixing that engine again. If you do not know one end of a spanner from another, you are best to ask an expert for help. Do not blame the bike for breaking down if you put the cams in backward and leave out the oil pump gasket.

[Patrick]

BUT YOUVE ONLY GOT HALF THE STORY , YOUR OPINION MAY BE VERY DIFFERENT IF YOU HEARD BOTH SIDES OF THE STORY , DO YOU GUYS REALLY THINK THESE EMPLOYMENT COURT PEOPLE ARE REALLY THAT STUPID , I BET IF YOU SAT IN THE COURT THRU THE WHOLE PROCEEDING AND LISTEND TO BOTH SIDES AND THE JUDGES COMMENTS YOU MAY CHANGE YOUR MIND A BIT, HE COULD HAVE BEEN CHINESE AND THE SWASTIKA BACKWARDS MEANS PEACE AND GOOD LUCK (OR SIMILAR POSITIVE SHIT)IN THEIR CULTURE , HE MAY HAVE ACCIDENTLY USED THE COMPANY FUEL CARD CAUSE I KNOW IVE ACCIDENTLY USED MY CREDIT CARD TO FILL THE COMPANY CAR ITS EASILY DONE, FUCK IM GLAD YOUR NOT A COP OR SIMILAR PATRICK

It is accepted that swastikas were used in the house. It was accepted that he used the company card deliberately, not by mistake or error...diahorreoa is supposed to come out your arse WINJA...

As I said before...shame the homeowner can't sue the tosser for hurt feelings and dignity... or is that in dispute? They can't have hurt feelings or dignity? Tell us what youreally mean WINJA...

[Winston001]

Do not prejudge the matter. If the offence is not of such gravity as to warrant instant dismissal (which is still entirely possible), tell him in clear terms what you expect him to do to make you happy in future.I have seen so many cases where the boss expects the worker to be a mind reader.

Very fair and I agree. However IMHO the law is weighted in favour of the employee. That is as it should be - a worker shouldn't lose his job too easily.

But the fair procedures regime means that even in egregious cases - such as this wanker we're talking about - the employer gets slammed for acting the way 99% of the community would also act.

FFS, using the fuel card is theft. The swastikas are a clear breach of the human rights act and racially discriminatory. What reasonable employee could possibly expect to keep his job if caught?

[Lou Girardin]

Do all the employer supporters here realise that the, now defunct, ERA was designed to drive wages down and reduce negotiating ability for the majority of workers?
It achieved all that very well.
That's why we are lagging so far behind Aust in Average pay.

[idb]

Do all the employer supporters here realise that the, now defunct, ERA was designed to drive wages down and reduce negotiating ability for the majority of workers?
It achieved all that very well.
That's why we are lagging so far behind Aust in Average pay.

That's the problem with this discussion Lou.
Why do we have to be on one side or the other?
What I'm saying is that there are good and bad employers and good and bad employees.
I object to people assuming that all employers are rich sadists and that all employees are downtrodden and powerless