Foster's sacks volunteer firefighters.

Two Country Fire Authority (CFA) volunteers have lost their jobs at brewing giant Foster's while fighting the fires which have savaged Victoria.

Link

I've changed my brand. When Singha dropped down from 6% to 5%, I changed from Tiger.

However, to be fair, CUB/Fosters was in the process of business-related retrenchments. It is clear that the determinations in respect of these two or three people (three were listed in a different newspaper article) were made prior to the bushfires. It also seems that those notifying them were unaware that these people were engaged in fighting bushfires. Granted, the actual form of notification of employees appears to fall short.

In sum, the press is, once again, trying to jerk the public's knees. What about all those who were retrenched (by whatever form of notice) but who were not fighting the bushfires? Should they be reinstated? What's the difference?

The timing was unfortunate but outside the control of the employer. That is the issue. This is a beat up.

(Do you want to get even with a reporter? Mention 'ethical reporting' - he/she will immediately go into convulsions.)

E:Clarification

I'd imagine that the buck passing at CUB at the moment wouldn't be a pretty sight.

I agree with what you say about it being a press beat up, I just couldn't resist at dig at the current trend by companies to subcontract maintenance to the lowest bidder and sack the people who actually know what all the the little knobs and buttons are for.

Then when someone's killed on the production line management just blames the contractor and gets a new one.

From what I have read, I understand that all that the contractor is doing is (in essence) charging a lower price than the current per-employee overheads. In one case, a sum of $10,000 lower for one particular replacement job was mentioned. So the contractor rehires those of the previous staff who are prepared to do the same job for $10,000 less. Effectively, a convoluted pay cut, with a middleman taking a percentage and the employees (aside from pay cuts) probably losing several union-won conditions and being employed on a contract basis (minimising union interference).

I've had quite a few occasions where I have spent a considerable period of time, money and effort to hire people on a permanent basis to head projects that require high-level competencies, only for them to announce, without warning and part way through a project, that they have been tempted elsewhere (without even providing an opportunity for counter offer). On most occasions, it has been more productive to start those projects from scratch rather than try to have someone else pick up the threads - at a significant cost both in time and $. If I hire someone to complete a job on a contract basis, I can lock them in. Why is it always the employer that has to be screwed? So in the larger scheme of things, companies are tired of being screwed by unions and their blackmail antics. Little wonder that more and more companies are moving towards contract and third party contractor employment.

And think how much better it would be if you could send your factory to Indonesia where people only get paid $5 a day. That "it's all the fault of the unions" rubbish won't fly any more, the unions have been a broken force for decades.

People take pay cuts now or lose their jobs, while the corporate media continues to howl about over paid workers holding companies to ransom.

I agree that it is unfortunate that companies decide to move offshore, but by the same token, you can't blame them for doing their best to remain competitive. If their major rival goes/is offshore and undercuts them, what else can they do? The only way it can be resolved is market protection (import tariffs), but that just doesn't wash anymore in today's global economy. If we try to protect our markets and local production, it is anti-competitive for overseas manufacturers, and other countries will therefore reciprocate (costing local manufacturers their export markets). What do you see as a solution?

E: Clarification

Protectionism.

Is there any self respecting Australian except Rolf Harris, oh sorry he's an honourary Brit, who actually admits to drinking Fosters?

The other great saving companies make by subcontracting out services is they get to offload all the emloyee welfare costs.

Subcontracting is just a form of outsourcing where the workforce is only ever temporary dependant on them submitting cheaper quotes than their competition. In this ever more global world society we live in the competition will source their employees from a low cost labour market.

A solution? Equalise pay rates worldwide. But I'm bu66ered if I'm working for a dollar an hour.

Seriously there is very little that can be done except, in one form or another, protectionism. The consumer will always demand the lowest price for goods and services and, in general, will not care how it is attained. How many people in the world really care what Bangladeshi sweat shop their Nike trainers came from? As long as they don't see it they can carry on in their little dream world where it doesn't exist. How many people really care when workers in Coventry lose their livelyhoods to a production facility in Viet Nam? How many people care when they get their leaking boiler repaired by a Polish plumber that they are putting a British worker out of a job? How many people care that the healthcare staff in their local hospital or old folks home are all Filippinos?

In reality unless they are personally affected by these practices they will not give a dam_n. Oh they will stand around tutt tutting at the demise of, say, British business but they will still buy the cheap goods or services. Sure, also, they will moan like hel_l about that bluddy call center in Mumbai but will they pay a little more to ensure jobs at home?

Of course it all eventually comes home to roost like in Britain a few years back when they came to upgrade one of the main rail lines. The rail companies had "let go" all their signals and telecommunications maintenance staff. So when they needed to upgrade the system they found the old boys were too happy in their retirements and there were no young replacements. End result? They had to import guys from India who were the only people that understood Victorian signalling systems. So by the time people realise the damage these practices are doing it is too late

Interesting post Phil.

I agree with what you say about it being a press beat up, I just couldn't resist at dig at the current trend by companies to subcontract maintenance to the lowest bidder and sack the people who actually know what all the the little knobs and buttons are for.

Then when someone's killed on the production line management just blames the contractor and gets a new one.

Usually, when jobs like that go to a sub-contractor, they take on the guys/gals who used to do the work anyways. For instance, when we outsourced the cleaning of our offices etc Mitie took on all the cleaners, same when we outsourced Security and then Maintenance and then the Transport Dep't and recently the same with our IT support.