State Election 2010

[cruel_world00]

So stumpjumper, you don't think retail workers deserve penalty rates?

Surely whether they deserve penalty rates depends on the base rate they're getting paid?

Anyway, deregulation of employment standards isn't the issue - as it was one of the main issues that lost the Howard government the election, it's safe to conclude the public has rejected the idea. But deregulation of shopping hours is different - it's entirely a state issue, and the existing laws are silly - they inconvenience potential customers yet don't give any significant benefit to staff.

I never said anything about being against extending trading hours. I just don't understand why penalty rates should be abolished or why stumpjumper seems against them for retail workers.

[Aidan]

Anyway, deregulation of employment standards isn't the issue - as it was one of the main issues that lost the Howard government the election, it's safe to conclude the public has rejected the idea. But deregulation of shopping hours is different - it's entirely a state issue, and the existing laws are silly - they inconvenience potential customers yet don't give any significant benefit to staff.

Can you give specific examples that "inconvenience potential customers yet don't give any significant benefit to staff".

The classic example is the Coles in Grote Street having to shut between 9pm and midnight even though the City is still busy at these times. I'm sure I've mentioned it here before.

When aren't the stores open when they could be?

2100 to 0000, plus public holidays.

Most stores you will find, have experimented with extended hours and then more recently cut back of their own volition.

That's no excuse for forcing others to cut back.

Other than one day in Easter and boxing day, when do retail staff get a public holiday off?

The answer should be when they're rostered off. But unfortunately for most of them the answer is every time. And that's a bad thing. Time on public holidays isn't any more valuable than normal time - you can't do as much on them as you can on weekends.

[peas_and_corn]

what's the deal (financially speaking) interstate for weekend retail workers? maybe the penalty rates aren't as high as ours in SA?

I can only speak for Coles- since that's where I work- but the EBA is exactly the same nation wide for all Coles employees. Wages, penalties etc are identical across the board.

[AtD]

Don't forget Saturday and Sunday, the most regulated of days. Stores over a certain size (sqm) must be closed by 5pm on Weekends and not open before 11am Sunday. This has an effect of creating closing time rushes, where the store would go from being almost empty one moment to mammoth queues the next.

Back when I worked at Woolies, we'd always get people bitching and banging on the doors right up to 6pm on Weekends and before 11am on Sundays. Every weekend without fail there'd be dozens of them. The consumer demand undoubtedly exists - apparently the overpriced mini-IGA up the road from our store did most of its trade on Saturday evenings.

On Saturdays, the busiest hour would be 4.00pm to 5.00pm. The busiest half hour would be 4.30 to 5.00. Sundays, we did more trade in the first hour (11.00 - Noon) and last hour (4.00 to 5.00) than the rest of the day combined. The check outs would go from being empty one minute to queues a mile long the next.

This also played hell with rosters. Under the award, you'd get a paid 15 minute break every 4 hours, a half hour unpaid break between 5 and 7.5 hours and an hour unpaid break for more than 7.5 hours. Naturally Woolies minimised their breaks, so the shifts would always be either 3 hours, 5 hours or greater than 7.5.

Weekends were a nightmare because the flow of people was always so irregular. The minimum shift must be three hours - getting to work for a three hour shift is too much effort for too little pay so they were never popular. The irregular flow meant we had lots of staff doing 3 hour close shifts on weekends who would spend two hours standing around then one hour flat chat. It was bad for both Woolies and the customers.

Normally on a weekday the after school rush blends into the evening rush so you'll get a 5 hour shift out of it. The longer day also allows for overlapping of longer shifts. Three hour shifts were rare on weekdays except around public holidays.

I am convinced that staying open past 5pm would ease the weekend closing rush by spreading it over the following hours, better for the company, staff and customers.

[Norman]

Mike Rann's election campaign is going to start very soon methinks, his website's under redevelopment.

[Shuz]

Thinker in Residence on Lib chopping block
KIM WHEATLEY
October 16, 2009 05:15pm
THE state's high-profile Thinker in Residence program would be ditched by a new Liberal Government, the Opposition says.

The program, which has brought to Adelaide world-renowned thinkers such as Baroness Susan Greenfield, was introduced by the Rann Government as a forum for innovative ideas to take the state forward.

The Liberals have listed $150 million in savings that would also involve the end of three ministerial portfolios and the sacking of associated staff.

Savings measures include:

CUTTINGnon-essential Government advertising ($92 million),

ABOLISHING the Public Sector Performance commision ($12 million),

REDUCING Ministers by three ($12 million) and reduce ministerial staff ($24 million)

CUTTING the Thinkers In Residency program ($4 million), and cancelling the Australian Centre for Social Innovation ($6 million over three years)

REDUCING Cabinet's "second guessing policy" unit $8 million over four years).

Opposition Leader Isobel Redmond also plans to cancel the tram extension to Semaphore, Port Adelaide and West Lakes - saving $336 million - if elected.

"These cuts to Government waste are the first to be identified," she said.

"The Liberal party will announce further savings as we continue to expose a Rann Government that has become complacent with taxpayers money."

But Treasurer Kevin Foley dismissed the plan as merely "rats and mice" savings while criticising the idea of cutting the world's greatest thinkers as "small-town thinking".

"It's all fairy floss at the end of the day ... this Government is serious about cutting - we've cut 1200 public service positions this year and another 400 to go and perhaps more," he said.

"This demonstrates the Liberal Party is not fit for Government."

Mr Foley singled out the Common Ground project for homeless people as one of the major achievements directly resulting from the Thinkers in Residence program.

"That's a concept straight out of New York and putting roofs over the heads of homeless people in this state," Mr Foley said.

"We're talking about good initiatives that have come out of a low cost program.

"What is wrong with bringing experts from around the world into Adelaide to give us great ideas and policy going forward?"

Interesting to note that the Liberals so far have only announced what they're not going to do, as opposed to to Labor annoucing what they will do. Pretty obvious who will win.

[Nathan]

I'm definitely no fan or Rann, but this might just convince me to at least leave the Libs off my sheet. Do they plan on cutting everything back to the barest of essentials, so that the state effectively just treads water and nothing more?

Having said that, I would like some Labor to provide some examples of the effect the Thinker In Residence program has had. To me, I think it's a great idea, that is ultimate wasted because no action seems to be taken on the feedback these thinkers have provided.

[Howie]

Thinkers in Residences is a waste of time and taxpayers resources, business leaders have been saying that for ages now. How about a Do'ers in Residence program, starting with appointing a chief architect for our city.

[Wayno]

Thinkers in Residences is a waste of time and taxpayers resources, business leaders have been saying that for ages now. How about a Do'ers in Residence program, starting with appointing a chief architect for our city.

+1

[Shuz]

Very fair comment there Howie. Chief Architect would do so much more for the city, and probably at half the cost. Win-win.

[Queen Anne]

Thinkers in Residences is a waste of time and taxpayers resources, business leaders have been saying that for ages now. How about a Do'ers in Residence program, starting with appointing a chief architect for our city.

I disagree there Howie. I'm proud that SA is willing to invest in "ideas". I think it's one of those quirky things that we should do more of actually. And this is small-fry money in the scheme of things.

And having a thinker in residence program and a chief architect are very different things - no need to sacrifice one for the other, I would venture - unless I'm missing something.

[Prince George]

Thinkers in Residences is a waste of time and taxpayers resources, business leaders have been saying that for ages now. How about a Do'ers in Residence program, starting with appointing a chief architect for our city.

Business leaders, on the other hand, have never been shy about taking public moneys for dubious return.

In any case, considering that we just had the Royal Institute opening a centre courtesy of Baroness Susan Greenfield's engagement, and that the Common Ground program is already running and has broken ground on Light Square as a result of Rosanne Haggerty, I don't think that characterising the program as thinkers vs do-ers is at all fair. Certainly the participant's backgrounds all show that they have track records of producing results. We invite them to Adelaide for the explicit purpose of tapping their considerable experience and broad perspectives on questions of interest to us; if we aren't seeing results, perhaps it's because we aren't pursuing their advice as keenly as we should.

Also, when I look at the definitions of "state architects", it reads rather like a permanent thinker-in-residence for one particular field. Looking back to when the Victorian state architect role was reinstated in 2005, in the press release we see:

Mr Hulls said the Victorian State Architect would:

• Encourage high standards and innovative design for public buildings and spaces;
• Assist government departments to deliver better designed buildings;
• Promote the creation of well connected, inclusive and accessible new buildings and
  places;
• Advise the public and private sectors on ways to achieve quality design and sustainable
  built environment outcomes and;
• Promote energy efficient buildings and sustainable development;
• Foster and promote Victoria’s design expertise.

Encourage, assist, promote, advise, foster - they aren't the most affirmative of verbs for the "do-er" role.

(I should say that I don't necessarily mean this as rejecting the idea of a state architect, just not the idea that we should choose between that and the thinkers-in-residence)

[SRW]

[
I disagree there Howie. I'm proud that SA is willing to invest in "ideas". I think it's one of those quirky things that we should do more of actually. And this is small-fry money in the scheme of things.

And having a thinker in residence program and a chief architect are very different things - no need to sacrifice one for the other, I would venture - unless I'm missing something.

I agree.

It's a bit false to draw a line between thinking and doing, especially when there are actually tangible results from this programme (as well as less quantfiable ones such as intellectual development). It's important to realise that we can't think of everything ourselves; that there's a whole world of expertise out there from which to draw on for policy development and/or initiatives. Bringing such experts here to live and study directly is eminently more sensible and productive than parliamentarians or bureaucrats going on international study trips (which can indeed be useful but are just as likely to be junkets). I think it sends a positive image of Adelaide as forward-thinking kind of place.

[monotonehell]

Thinkers in Residences is a waste of time and taxpayers resources, business leaders have been saying that for ages now. How about a Do'ers in Residence program, starting with appointing a chief architect for our city.

Business leaders aren't always the fonts of wisdom they are put up to be. Sure many may be successful in their particular field, but business is often not about innovation. It's quite a conservative activity, with people doing things the way things have always been done, while all the time trying to get a competitive advantage by getting one over on whatever competitor or authority is "in their way". Business often takes a long time to adopt new ideas, as not many investors look favourably on those who stick their necks out. This leads to a culture of subversion instead of innovation.

This is one of the reasons people have been disappointed with the lack of architectural merit in recent developments; businesses going down the safe non-innovative path.

The Thinkers in Residence programme is a soft target for those looking to "cut government expenditure". But in the grand scheme of things, it costs very little, promotes discussion in the fields it intersects, and eventually leads to progress, whereas the alternative is monolithic entropy.

[Howie]

If the government are looking for good ideas to file away somewhere, then why not start locally. Even forums such as Sensational-Adelaide, and other respected communities in South Australia are great places for to start looking for ideas. It's not like we have a shortage of excellent architects, urban planners, academics who can give direction for a future south australia. Why do we need a Thinkers in Residence program when Adelaidians are already abuzz with wildly exciting ideas. That's my