Qld Budget 2009 Asset Sales - articles and discussion

[Jonno]

Only time will tell.

[ozbob]

From the Courier Mail click here!

QR National asks 3500 workers to take voluntary redundancy packages

QR National asks 3500 workers to take voluntary redundancy packages

   * From: The Courier-Mail
   * February 09, 2011 12:00AM

MORE than 3000 workers who were promised their jobs would be safe under a privatised Queensland Rail are now being asked to consider redundancy packages.

QR National, which was sold off in a $6.7 billion public share float in November, has asked 3500 employees - more than a third of its 9400-strong workforce between Townsville and Brisbane - to consider voluntary redundancies.

A QR National spokesman said a reduction in the size of the workforce was needed for the company to remain competitive.

"We have proposed a VR (voluntary redundancy) scheme at this time for operational reasons and to help ensure the size of sections of our workforce are relative to our competitors and industry benchmarking," the spokesman said.

Redundancies would be decided next month with the first changes to be made in April in what the Opposition has dubbed "an outrageous Labor betrayal".

Before the sell-off of the freight haulage arm of Queensland Rail, workers were assured their jobs would be safe for at least three years.

In a statement issued by managing director Lance Hockridge in August 2010, QR National said new workplace agreements offered "employees and investors certainty".

Under those agreements negotiated by the Rail Tram and Bus Union, workers were granted a one-off payment of $4000, a 4 per cent pay rise and an extension of the employment guarantee from two years to more than three.

The package was compensation for the workers losing the guarantee of a job for life.

The State Government, which remains the major shareholder in QR National, also gave each worker $1000 worth of shares in the company.

A spokesman for Treasurer Andrew Fraser yesterday said the redundancy offers were "entirely a matter for QRN".

RTBU secretary Owen Doogan said the offer of voluntary redundancies less than three months after the company was publicly listed had come as a surprise.

"We didn't expect it to occur so soon but what's going to happen now is that there will be further consultation before we formulate our position," he said.

The packages offer workers three weeks pay for every year of service.

[Golliwog]

I've read a bunch of the comments on the article. IMO a big uproar over nothing. These are voluntary redundancies. In the email sent to staff the point is made quite clear that no one is going to be forced to take one.

And some of the people commenting (including the Opposition) should get their facts straight. Yes the QLD Government is the largest stake-holder, however they are NOT the majority stake-holder and so can't force anything through. And I recall seeing some comments about "what competition?" Pacific National in particular are setting up in the coal mines, and the competition watchdog is keeping an eye to make sure that QRN is fair with its allocation of train paths, and access prices. There were a whole bunch of other comments blaming Bligh and the treasurer, but IMO thats all a bunch of junk that comes up everytime something about the privitisation is mentioned.

[Fares_Fair]

Other arguments aside, I find the fact that they are offering a whopping one-third (33%) of all staff redundancies is absolutely massive in it's scale.
It may be controversial, but who managed all of these people in QR and what does that tell you about QR's style of management ?

Regards,
Fares_Fair.

[Gazza]

Lol, when are QueenslandRail going to follow suit and offer voluntary redundancies/driver retraining for their guards?

[Golliwog]

Other arguments aside, I find the fact that they are offering a whopping one-third (33%) of all staff redundancies is absolutely massive in it's scale.
It may be controversial, but who managed all of these people in QR and what does that tell you about QR's style of management ?

Regards,
Fares_Fair.

But they also say that theres no way they would be actually giving out that many redundancies. The email to staff says something to the effect that they will look at each case and look at your safety record, etc with the company to assess who they give them to in the end. The fact that you may apply for the VR in no way guarantees that you get one.

[ozbob]

From the Queensland Times click here!

Anger as jobs go from workshops

Anger as jobs go from workshops

Zane Jackson | 10th February 2011

QR NATIONAL will make cuts to its work force through voluntary redundancies, offering packages to about one-third of its workforce.

The company – which has a 700- plus workforce at its Redbank workshops – announced the plan yesterday, three months after becoming privatised with promises that jobs will be safe.

Ipswich MP, Transport Minister Rachel Nolan said the measure did not mean rail jobs would be lost from Ipswich.

The Rail Tram and Bus Union said it would closely monitor negotiations with staff, while the Opposition has blasted the development, claiming the State Government had abandoned Ipswich rail workers.

QR National said in a statement that under the proposed scheme, no staff member will be asked to consider the package unless they asked for one.

"We have proposed a VR scheme at this time for operational reasons and to help ensure the size of sections of our workforce are relative to our competitors and industry benchmarking," they said.

Ms Nolan said Ipswich will, in total, have more rail workers than it did before privatisation because of a Government decision to move the still state-owned Queensland Rail headquarters to the city.

"Right now, QR National workers have a three-year rock-solid job guarantee," she said.

"This is a strong Queensland company with room for growth."

RTBU state secretary Owen Doogan said the union was surprised the move had been made so soon after privatisation and that a fair work load be left for those who do not take up the offer.

Shadow Transport Minister Fiona Simpson slammed the move, and said QR workers had been betrayed by Rachel Nolan.

"Not only has Minister Nolan let down her former staff. As Member for Ipswich, where rail is a major employer, she has also betrayed her own constituents," Ms Simpson said.

QR National said it would consult with staff until late February and begin the voluntary redundancies in March.

In October, QR National chairman John Prescott described speculation of job cuts as "misplaced".

"Our efficiency drive is not coming out of head cuts – it is coming out of making the business better, carrying more tonnes on trains," he said.

The company said it was "nonsense" to suggest all 3500 applicable workers would take up the package or that QR National would accept that many redundancies.

[ozbob]

From the Courier Mail --> Rail job cuts will harm regions, warns unions

[ozbob]

Brisbanetimes --> QR National to slash jobs - voluntarily

[curator49]

What gets me is the media, politicians and public are getting QR National (a privatised corporation listed on the stock market) and Queensland Rail (a fully owned Government corporation) totally confused. There are members of the public saying through newspaper comments that no wonder the railways (QR National) lost money with so much "fat" in the number of employees yet QR National (through coal haulage) was a huge profit earner for the State and the state's rail system and has been for many years.

Others are saying that QR National are paying to repair flood damaged track across the state. Is that so? I don't think so.

[Golliwog]

They're paying for the repairs to their tracks in the coal systems. Not sure about the tracks that they control along the NCL that are owned by the State though.

What gets me is the media blowing this out of proportion (I'm mainly look at CM here) and saying that job are being "slashed" when it is a totally voluntary scheme. There was a 2nd email sent to staff today reiterating that fact they (the higher ups) are not going to be forcing anyone out. They even point out that they have their own limit to how many staff they will offer the redundancies to once they get feed back on who is interested in taking them. Also they go on about the RACS workers in Ipswich being "betrayed" by the government, when (I don't know the figures) of all the RACS depots, the Redbank one is one of the busiest, constructing new coal wagons and servicing trains (not just QRN ones, but EMU, SMU and IMU units). There is absolutely no way it would be shut down.

[#Metro]

Oh well, It's Courier Mail.
A more appropriate section of the newsagency might be under 'Fiction' section... 

[ozbob]

Courier Mail --> QR staff told don't take redundancy

[ozbob]

Courier Mail --> Man fails in court bid to stop QR sale

[Stillwater]

Sadly, it is in the interests of some politicians to create the confusion that there are 'mass sackings' about to occur in Queensland Rail (passenger), just to create a mess for the state government to rectify.

Maybe it is time for RailBOT to start working up a list of questions to be put to all candidates standing at the next state election, seeking their views about public transport issues.  That way, all candidates' views will be 'on record' and the consolidated findings of the survey could be released publicly.

Expect the Labor and LNP party machines to swing into action, such that their endorsed candidates would return identical survey forms.  At least they will be put 'on the spot', so to speak.

[#Metro]

Sunshine Coast Line!
That's likely to become a big POD (point of difference). Along with CRR.

[mufreight]

Sadly, it is in the interests of some politicians to create the confusion that there are 'mass sackings' about to occur in Queensland Rail (passenger), just to create a mess for the state government to rectify.

Maybe it is time for RailBOT to start working up a list of questions to be put to all candidates standing at the next state election, seeking their views about public transport issues.  That way, all candidates' views will be 'on record' and the consolidated findings of the survey could be released publicly.

Expect the Labor and LNP party machines to swing into action, such that their endorsed candidates would return identical survey forms.  At least they will be put 'on the spot', so to speak.

So now we have the hysteria started and the polies who see their seats as being in danger when they lose the rail workers votes are now trying to position themselves as being suportive of the workers whose employment they knowingly sold down the drain when the backed they asset sales.
So much for the government gaurantee of three years of continued employment, it is obvious that it is the government and QRN managements intention to pare down the workforce as soon as possible so as to make the sale of these workshop facilities as attractive as possible to the private sector at which time they will either be sold off and the work presently carried out then outsourced or to the intention is to reduce the number of employees so as to reduce the liability to those employees still on the books when these workshop facilities are closed down and the work is outsourced, and this under a supposedly LABOR government.    

[Golliwog]

So now we have the hysteria started and the polies who see their seats as being in danger when they lose the rail workers votes are now trying to position themselves as being suportive of the workers whose employment they knowingly sold down the drain when the backed they asset sales.
So much for the government gaurantee of three years of continued employment, it is obvious that it is the government and QRN managements intention to pare down the workforce as soon as possible so as to make the sale of these workshop facilities as attractive as possible to the private sector at which time they will either be sold off and the work presently carried out then outsourced or to the intention is to reduce the number of employees so as to reduce the liability to those employees still on the books when these workshop facilities are closed down and the work is outsourced, and this under a supposedly LABOR government.    

Seriously, what part of VOLUNTARY is so hard for everyone to understand? They cannot and are not forcing people to take these redundancies. As for reducing the size of their workforce, that would be why they announced sometime ago that they were expanding the graduate program from 75 graduates per year to 300?

As for closing or selling of the workshops, I find that amusing. Where would they outsource to if they close it? And what evidence do you have to suggest that this is their plan?

[Jonno]

Here here Golliwog.   

[mufreight]

So now we have the hysteria started and the polies who see their seats as being in danger when they lose the rail workers votes are now trying to position themselves as being suportive of the workers whose employment they knowingly sold down the drain when the backed they asset sales.
So much for the government gaurantee of three years of continued employment, it is obvious that it is the government and QRN managements intention to pare down the workforce as soon as possible so as to make the sale of these workshop facilities as attractive as possible to the private sector at which time they will either be sold off and the work presently carried out then outsourced or to the intention is to reduce the number of employees so as to reduce the liability to those employees still on the books when these workshop facilities are closed down and the work is outsourced, and this under a supposedly LABOR government.    

Seriously, what part of VOLUNTARY is so hard for everyone to understand? They cannot and are not forcing people to take these redundancies. As for reducing the size of their workforce, that would be why they announced sometime ago that they were expanding the graduate program from 75 graduates per year to 300?

As for closing or selling of the workshops, I find that amusing. Where would they outsource to if they close it? And what evidence do you have to suggest that this is their plan?

What has happened with the workshops and maintenence facilities in New South Wales, they have all been sold and the work previously carried out has been outsourced in some cases to the companies that purchased the facilities employing considerably less employees at lower rates of pay.
In other cases the facilities were closed down and rollingstock that would have been built in that facility is now being built overseas by the company that closed the local facilities.

As for the Voluntary bit of voluntary redundencies it is in reality less than voluntary the reality is that staff levels will be reduced over a period of time be it to reduce liability for an intended closure or for the purposes of sale.
Those who do not take the voluntary redunduncies will be given the choice of transfers to woop woop in a lower grade position at a lower rate of pay that is unacceptable so they then will resign, a tactic that has ben used a number of times and which I have personally experienced not once but twice.

[Golliwog]

So now we have the hysteria started and the polies who see their seats as being in danger when they lose the rail workers votes are now trying to position themselves as being suportive of the workers whose employment they knowingly sold down the drain when the backed they asset sales.
So much for the government gaurantee of three years of continued employment, it is obvious that it is the government and QRN managements intention to pare down the workforce as soon as possible so as to make the sale of these workshop facilities as attractive as possible to the private sector at which time they will either be sold off and the work presently carried out then outsourced or to the intention is to reduce the number of employees so as to reduce the liability to those employees still on the books when these workshop facilities are closed down and the work is outsourced, and this under a supposedly LABOR government.    

Seriously, what part of VOLUNTARY is so hard for everyone to understand? They cannot and are not forcing people to take these redundancies. As for reducing the size of their workforce, that would be why they announced sometime ago that they were expanding the graduate program from 75 graduates per year to 300?

As for closing or selling of the workshops, I find that amusing. Where would they outsource to if they close it? And what evidence do you have to suggest that this is their plan?

What has happened with the workshops and maintenence facilities in New South Wales, they have all been sold and the work previously carried out has been outsourced in some cases to the companies that purchased the facilities employing considerably less employees at lower rates of pay.
In other cases the facilities were closed down and rollingstock that would have been built in that facility is now being built overseas by the company that closed the local facilities.

As for the Voluntary bit of voluntary redundencies it is in reality less than voluntary the reality is that staff levels will be reduced over a period of time be it to reduce liability for an intended closure or for the purposes of sale.
Those who do not take the voluntary redunduncies will be given the choice of transfers to woop woop in a lower grade position at a lower rate of pay that is unacceptable so they then will resign, a tactic that has ben used a number of times and which I have personally experienced not once but twice.

So because NSW did it, QR National will do it? I'm not saying I know its not going to happen, but I see no evidence that it will other than hearsay.

[justanotheruser]

Courier Mail --> QR staff told don't take redundancy

I agree they shouldn't take the redundancy package.  I used to work for a company and they never ever offered voluntary redundancy as it meant the staff who were confident they could get another job elsewhere would take the money leaving the not as good workers left. I see that happening. At that company when our department was outsourced the only employees who applied for a job with the company taking over our jobs were the worst ones while the rest of us laughed all the way to the bank! I took a one week holiday then had a new job within two days.  Now if you were able to get a new job and there possibly is plenty of work available for some of the staff if they can help during flood recovery then the money would be a good boost for them. If nobody takes the VR then it should be expected that there may be some forced redundancies in three years time.

[justanotheruser]

So now we have the hysteria started and the polies who see their seats as being in danger when they lose the rail workers votes are now trying to position themselves as being suportive of the workers whose employment they knowingly sold down the drain when the backed they asset sales.
So much for the government gaurantee of three years of continued employment, it is obvious that it is the government and QRN managements intention to pare down the workforce as soon as possible so as to make the sale of these workshop facilities as attractive as possible to the private sector at which time they will either be sold off and the work presently carried out then outsourced or to the intention is to reduce the number of employees so as to reduce the liability to those employees still on the books when these workshop facilities are closed down and the work is outsourced, and this under a supposedly LABOR government.    

Have you done your research?  the people who seem to be speaking against it now are the same ones who PUBLICALLY spoke against the sale. Of course if governments did not over-employ as they often do so they look good with a lower unemployment rate then there would be no need.  As a friend of mine who worked for Telecom said "Sadly the only way some people will actually do some work is if we were privatised".  I for one am sick of some people using government employment as a I don't have to do anything job. Or as another friend of mine said in his government department the procedure was that "you had to make one good decision to justify them keeping you then you spent the rest of your career never making a decision."

[mufreight]

So now we have the hysteria started and the polies who see their seats as being in danger when they lose the rail workers votes are now trying to position themselves as being suportive of the workers whose employment they knowingly sold down the drain when the backed they asset sales.
So much for the government gaurantee of three years of continued employment, it is obvious that it is the government and QRN managements intention to pare down the workforce as soon as possible so as to make the sale of these workshop facilities as attractive as possible to the private sector at which time they will either be sold off and the work presently carried out then outsourced or to the intention is to reduce the number of employees so as to reduce the liability to those employees still on the books when these workshop facilities are closed down and the work is outsourced, and this under a supposedly LABOR government.  

Seriously, what part of VOLUNTARY is so hard for everyone to understand? They cannot and are not forcing people to take these redundancies. As for reducing the size of their workforce, that would be why they announced sometime ago that they were expanding the graduate program from 75 graduates per year to 300?

As for closing or selling of the workshops, I find that amusing. Where would they outsource to if they close it? And what evidence do you have to suggest that this is their plan?

What has happened with the workshops and maintenence facilities in New South Wales, they have all been sold and the work previously carried out has been outsourced in some cases to the companies that purchased the facilities employing considerably less employees at lower rates of pay.
In other cases the facilities were closed down and rollingstock that would have been built in that facility is now being built overseas by the company that closed the local facilities.

As for the Voluntary bit of voluntary redundencies it is in reality less than voluntary the reality is that staff levels will be reduced over a period of time be it to reduce liability for an intended closure or for the purposes of sale.
Those who do not take the voluntary redunduncies will be given the choice of transfers to woop woop in a lower grade position at a lower rate of pay that is unacceptable so they then will resign, a tactic that has ben used a number of times and which I have personally experienced not once but twice.

So because NSW did it, QR National will do it? I'm not saying I know its not going to happen, but I see no evidence that it will other than hearsay.

THE BIG DIFFERENCE IS THAT IN NSW THEY SAID THAT THERE WOULD BE DOWNSIZING AND OUTSOURCINGHERE THE GOVERNMENT STATED THAT ALL EMPLOYMENT WOULD BE GURANTEED FOR THREE YEARS YET LESS THAN SIX MONTHS LATER QRN IS REDUCING WORKERS WHILE INCREASING THEIR BUREAUCRACYBut then the Premier went to an election saying nothing about selling off the assets then promptly turned around and sold them off, some as in the case of forestry well below their value as an asset alone not their actual commercial value, with the track record of incompetence, duplicity and deceit of this government do you have any reason to be of the belief that they will not shut down facilities and outsource the work where possible

[Golliwog]

But then the Premier went to an election saying nothing about selling off the assets then promptly turned around and sold them off, some as in the case of forestry well below their value as an asset alone not their actual commercial value, with the track record of incompetence, duplicity and deceit of this government do you have any reason to be of the belief that they will not shut down facilities and outsource the work where possible

BECAUSE QRN IS NOT GOVERNMENT! It has nothing to do with the government any more, other than the government having a roughly 30% stake in shares, which doesn't allow them to control anything.

HERE THE GOVERNMENT STATED THAT ALL EMPLOYMENT WOULD BE GURANTEED FOR THREE YEARS YET LESS THAN SIX MONTHS LATER QRN IS REDUCING WORKERS WHILE INCREASING THEIR BUREAUCRACY

Their employment IS STILL GUARANTEED, but they can choose to take the VR IF THEY WANT TO. It is entirely possible that no one will apply for a VR and there will be no reduction in workers. What do you offer as proof that they are increasing their bureaucracy?

[mufreight]

But then the Premier went to an election saying nothing about selling off the assets then promptly turned around and sold them off, some as in the case of forestry well below their value as an asset alone not their actual commercial value, with the track record of incompetence, duplicity and deceit of this government do you have any reason to be of the belief that they will not shut down facilities and outsource the work where possible

BECAUSE QRN IS NOT GOVERNMENT! It has nothing to do with the government any more, other than the government having a roughly 30% stake in shares, which doesn't allow them to control anything.

HERE THE GOVERNMENT STATED THAT ALL EMPLOYMENT WOULD BE GURANTEED FOR THREE YEARS YET LESS THAN SIX MONTHS LATER QRN IS REDUCING WORKERS WHILE INCREASING THEIR BUREAUCRACY

Their employment IS STILL GUARANTEED, but they can choose to take the VR IF THEY WANT TO. It is entirely possible that no one will apply for a VR and there will be no reduction in workers. What do you offer as proof that they are increasing their bureaucracy?

The increasing numbers of paper shufflers employed who produce no income employed by QRN a railway requires workers to operate and in this day there is reality less need for paper shufflers and seat polishers, as for the Government position the Government still holds considerably more than 30% ownership and remains the largest single shareholder so your claim that the Government has nothing to do with QRN is a sadly flawed statement, on the subject of voluntary in voluntary redundncies there are two problems, those with ability and experience will move on while those who lack motivation and ability will hold on for grim death, if the numbers are not what the vultures feel they should be the transfer to woop woop tactic will be applied or facilities and operations will be shut down (with the work outsourced) and those there will be offered unaceptable transfers which if refused will then become redundencies because their position no longer exists, do not believe me , I have both seen and experienced  these tactics personally, this lot does not care about anything other than the bottom line on the balance sheet and how much they can escalate their own renumeration package, regardless of the assurances given by the Premier that there would be no forced renduncies there is effectively no gurantee of employment in any field now under this present government even were these assurances to be engraved in boiler plate.

[somebody]

Not too concerned about some dead wood being removed from QRN.

I suppose it remains to be seen over the next 2.5 years whether QRN move into compulsory redundancies.  Not sure what obligation they have not to.

[Stillwater]

The shareholders like it.  QR National's share price has risen to $3.02.  As the largest shareholder, Qld Govt is in front.

[mufreight]

Not too concerned about some dead wood being removed from QRN.

I suppose it remains to be seen over the next 2.5 years whether QRN move into compulsory redundancies.  Not sure what obligation they have not to.

The problem there being that the dead wood stays while those with ability and motivation move on because they are employable in other fields, the downward spiral then commences as the standards of employees drops so then does the levels of service and as the levels of service drops then the usage of the services also diminishes correspondingly, in the freight sector this adds to transport costs which we all then pay on everything.
As for compulsory redundancies they are in effect already happening with the closure of some rail freight facilities on the Mt Isa line and the freight services now being contracted (outsourced) to road freight haulers with the consequen loss of employment to railway workers.
So much for QRN industrial relations in the interest of their workers.

No doubt the near future will see more of this tactic used to reduce the workforce while increasing the numbers of unproductive seat polishers .

[colinw]

The problem there being that the dead wood stays while those with ability and motivation move on because they are employable in other fields, the downward spiral then commences as the standards of employees drops so then does the levels of service and as the levels of service drops then the usage of the services also diminishes correspondingly, in the freight sector this adds to transport costs which we all then pay on everything.

That is the main problem.

I have seen both voluntary and compulsory redundancies in businesses I have worked for.  The voluntary redundancies took out the best performing, most employable engineers, and also those with the longest service who were owed the biggest payout.  The end result was a double whammy - the best & brightest younger employees headed off to greener pastures, while the collective experience & wisdom of the company was reduced by the loss of those old hands.  Afterward mediocrity reigned supreme, based on what I heard from those who stayed.

On the other hand, I have seen compulsory redundancies / layoffs as well.  Painful for all involved, but in both cases where we went through it the managers used it to cull the deadwood, and anyone who was truly good at their job was safe.  A much better outcome compared to the voluntary cuts.

I am highly sceptical about the whole QRN privatisation, and am of the opinion that it is the beginning of the end of our once great railway system. I think nothing good will come out of it long term, and anyone living west of Emerald or Roma, or in the South West of the state is going to find their railway reduced to a pair of rusty streaks through the long grass within 10 years.  QRN are only interested in coal & minerals. Mark my word!

[somebody]

QRN are only interested in coal & minerals. Mark my word!

Was it any different in govt hands, at least in recent times?

[mufreight]

QRN are only interested in coal & minerals. Mark my word!

Was it any different in govt hands, at least in recent times?

very much so and would have been even more so without government interference.

[Golliwog]

I can see the point about VR's allowing the dead wood to remain and those with high prospects takign the money and leaving, but I would like to point out the QRN has said it would be reviewing each applicant to the VR scheme for (I forget the exact wording) things like their safety and performance records so perhaps this is their way to try and combat that.

Mufreight, IIRC they just recently finished re-laying all the track out to Mt Isa so I dissagree about them trying to cut Mt Isa out, if anything the road transport was done so as they could use the rail less while they worked on it.

[justanotheruser]

But then the Premier went to an election saying nothing about selling off the assets then promptly turned around and sold them off, some as in the case of forestry well below their value as an asset alone not their actual commercial value, with the track record of incompetence, duplicity and deceit of this government do you have any reason to be of the belief that they will not shut down facilities and outsource the work where possible

BECAUSE QRN IS NOT GOVERNMENT! It has nothing to do with the government any more, other than the government having a roughly 30% stake in shares, which doesn't allow them to control anything.

HERE THE GOVERNMENT STATED THAT ALL EMPLOYMENT WOULD BE GURANTEED FOR THREE YEARS YET LESS THAN SIX MONTHS LATER QRN IS REDUCING WORKERS WHILE INCREASING THEIR BUREAUCRACY

Their employment IS STILL GUARANTEED, but they can choose to take the VR IF THEY WANT TO. It is entirely possible that no one will apply for a VR and there will be no reduction in workers. What do you offer as proof that they are increasing their bureaucracy?

The increasing numbers of paper shufflers employed who produce no income employed by QRN a railway requires workers to operate and in this day there is reality less need for paper shufflers and seat polishers, as for the Government position the Government still holds considerably more than 30% ownership and remains the largest single shareholder so your claim that the Government has nothing to do with QRN is a sadly flawed statement, on the subject of voluntary in voluntary redundncies there are two problems, those with ability and experience will move on while those who lack motivation and ability will hold on for grim death, if the numbers are not what the vultures feel they should be the transfer to woop woop tactic will be applied or facilities and operations will be shut down (with the work outsourced) and those there will be offered unaceptable transfers which if refused will then become redundencies because their position no longer exists, do not believe me , I have both seen and experienced  these tactics personally, this lot does not care about anything other than the bottom line on the balance sheet and how much they can escalate their own renumeration package, regardless of the assurances given by the Premier that there would be no forced renduncies there is effectively no gurantee of employment in any field now under this present government even were these assurances to be engraved in boiler plate.

To have a controlling stake in a company you must own more than 50% of the shares. Not even 50% is considered a controlling stake. So yes the government has shares butthey do not run the company.  They can have some influence as a large shareholder. It is through that which I assume they were hoping to enforce the no forced redundancies if they were not clever enough to make it a condition of sale.  Your claim of what they will do if VR's are not taken up is yet another unverified claim by you.  Yes this kind of thing may have happened in the past but once again that is no guarantee it will happen again now.

Out of curiosity what were the unacceptable transfer conditions? Were the legality of these looked into at the time. There are actually laws which govern that sort of thing. I know many people who have jumped at transfer opportunities. One person actually took three transfers in two years. Imagine all that rent free living period with a pool cleaned at the companies expense. With the offer that the employee could take over the lease if they wanted to stay there. If not then the company once again paid for their moving expenses to their new place. This wasn't a you pack it and we'll move it but top dollar we'll pay to have it packed and moved and then unpacked at the other end.  So not all transfers are unacceptable so what proof do you have that they will be?

No doubt the near future will see more of this tactic used to reduce the workforce while increasing the numbers of unproductive seat polishers .

and once again you make claims without backing them up. Several people have asked for your evidence that more paper pushers and seat polishers have been employed.  it is about time you put up or shut up.  Where is your evidence?

Any chance we could get proof for just one of these claims?

[mufreight]

I can see the point about VR's allowing the dead wood to remain and those with high prospects takign the money and leaving, but I would like to point out the QRN has said it would be reviewing each applicant to the VR scheme for (I forget the exact wording) things like their safety and performance records so perhaps this is their way to try and combat that.

Mufreight, IIRC they just recently finished re-laying all the track out to Mt Isa so I dissagree about them trying to cut Mt Isa out, if anything the road transport was done so as they could use the rail less while they worked on it.

General freight is currently being moved for QRN under contract by road, the QRN employees at the intermediate locations such as Julia Creek have been offered transfers, for some who have brought their own houses in such a location uprooting and moving on to another location is not a realistic option as to purchase a house at the location that they have been offered is considerably more expensive if obtainable and the amenity of the lifestyle there may be considerably less.
It would seem that it is the intention to only operate block trains of bulk freight on the Mt Isa line, greater returns for less operating cost, this despite the fact that the line was built by government to meet the government obligation to provide services for those living in these areas.

[mufreight]

To have a controlling stake in a company you must own more than 50% of the shares. Not even 50% is considered a controlling stake. So yes the government has shares butthey do not run the company.  They can have some influence as a large shareholder. It is through that which I assume they were hoping to enforce the no forced redundancies if they were not clever enough to make it a condition of sale.  Your claim of what they will do if VR's are not taken up is yet another unverified claim by you.  Yes this kind of thing may have happened in the past but once again that is no guarantee it will happen again now.

If you desire proof that these tactics have not been used by the current management of QRN since the privatision to reduce staff then perhaps you might like to discuss this with the workers from Julia Creek who after the general freight was contracted out by QRN to road contractors were then offered a choice of transfers which meant selling up their houses for nothing then moving to another location where if accomodation was avaliable it was unafordable to purchase and and the lifestyle for them and their families considerably less with no compensation for the enforced move, not a realistic or practical option.  Effectively a forced redundency without the benefits where they were not offered VR's.

Now Justanotheruser since you wish to defend the indefensible can you provide proof that these tactics will not continue to be employed to rail workers in rural areas.

As to the ratio of clerical and administrative staff these have increased in proportion to the numbers of hands on workers , this has been no doubt in part due to the privitatision split as both QRN and Queensland Rail now effectively duplicate in many areas of administration while reducing staff in areas of operation.

and once again you make claims without backing them up. Several people have asked for your evidence that more paper pushers and seat polishers have been employed.  it is about time you put up or shut up.  Where is your evidence?

Any chance we could get proof for just one of these claims?

The facts speak for themselves.
As for the level of government involvement the government gave assurances to not only the workers but also the people of this state in relation to the asset sales and more relevant to the rail assets, only one of two possible conclusions can be drawn from these staff reductions, either the government had no intention of meeting its commitment and assurances in relation to security of employment for rail workers or again as a further example of its incompetence did not in its haste to sell off the assets ensure that the security of employment was ensured on the basis that once sold, we the government are no longer responsible for any comitments made, sorry (more Bligh and Nolan crocodile tears) but as another politician in another place said "sh#t happens"..
Take your pick, either more woefull incompetence by the government or deliberate duplicity..

Out of curiousity Justanotheruser two things, you said about transfers and terrific accomodation, was that for railway WORKERS and second I am now retired after a lifetime in the transport industry both rail and road and as both an employee and in management, what is your field of employment and on what experience in these matters other than as an observer do you base your experience

[Golliwog]

I can see the point about VR's allowing the dead wood to remain and those with high prospects takign the money and leaving, but I would like to point out the QRN has said it would be reviewing each applicant to the VR scheme for (I forget the exact wording) things like their safety and performance records so perhaps this is their way to try and combat that.

Mufreight, IIRC they just recently finished re-laying all the track out to Mt Isa so I dissagree about them trying to cut Mt Isa out, if anything the road transport was done so as they could use the rail less while they worked on it.

General freight is currently being moved for QRN under contract by road, the QRN employees at the intermediate locations such as Julia Creek have been offered transfers, for some who have brought their own houses in such a location uprooting and moving on to another location is not a realistic option as to purchase a house at the location that they have been offered is considerably more expensive if obtainable and the amenity of the lifestyle there may be considerably less.
It would seem that it is the intention to only operate block trains of bulk freight on the Mt Isa line, greater returns for less operating cost, this despite the fact that the line was built by government to meet the government obligation to provide services for those living in these areas.

To my knowledge though, QR National doesn't own the line to Mt Isa, they are just like any other service provider running on the line which is owned by the Government. And as you yourself point out, its a government obligation, not a QR National one. If the state was to do some sort of deal with QR National to have them meet this obligation for them, I have no doubt QR National would be more than happy to do so, but they themselves, being no longer government owned have no obligation to do so.

[justanotheruser]

To have a controlling stake in a company you must own more than 50% of the shares. Not even 50% is considered a controlling stake. So yes the government has shares butthey do not run the company.  They can have some influence as a large shareholder. It is through that which I assume they were hoping to enforce the no forced redundancies if they were not clever enough to make it a condition of sale.  Your claim of what they will do if VR's are not taken up is yet another unverified claim by you.  Yes this kind of thing may have happened in the past but once again that is no guarantee it will happen again now.

If you desire proof that these tactics have not been used by the current management of QRN since the privatision to reduce staff then perhaps you might like to discuss this with the workers from Julia Creek who after the general freight was contracted out by QRN to road contractors were then offered a choice of transfers which meant selling up their houses for nothing then moving to another location where if accomodation was avaliable it was unafordable to purchase and and the lifestyle for them and their families considerably less with no compensation for the enforced move, not a realistic or practical option.  Effectively a forced redundency without the benefits where they were not offered VR's.

Now Justanotheruser since you wish to defend the indefensible can you provide proof that these tactics will not continue to be employed to rail workers in rural areas.

Who said I was defending anything? I simply asked for you to provide proof of claims you made.

So are you offering to breach this websites rules and also break privacy laws by giving me names and phone numbers of people? To suggest I might like to talk to these people is unrealistic. however I am sure there would be a newspaper article about this or some other solid evidence you could legally provide.

As to the ratio of clerical and administrative staff these have increased in proportion to the numbers of hands on workers , this has been no doubt in part due to the privitatision split as both QRN and Queensland Rail now effectively duplicate in many areas of administration while reducing staff in areas of operation.

and once again you make claims without backing them up. Several people have asked for your evidence that more paper pushers and seat polishers have been employed.  it is about time you put up or shut up.  Where is your evidence?

Any chance we could get proof for just one of these claims?

The facts speak for themselves.
As for the level of government involvement the government gave assurances to not only the workers but also the people of this state in relation to the asset sales and more relevant to the rail assets, only one of two possible conclusions can be drawn from these staff reductions, either the government had no intention of meeting its commitment and assurances in relation to security of employment for rail workers or again as a further example of its incompetence did not in its haste to sell off the assets ensure that the security of employment was ensured on the basis that once sold, we the government are no longer responsible for any comitments made, sorry (more Bligh and Nolan crocodile tears) but as another politician in another place said "sh#t happens"..
Take your pick, either more woefull incompetence by the government or deliberate duplicity..

but you still have not provided proof that there has been an increase. If there are jobs that are duplicated in QR National and QR remember they are different companies. One is privately owned the other is government owned. Are you saying the government should provide bank managers simply because westpac has bank managers?? I'm sure your not but do you see the point? You can't expect government to do jobs for private companies so it makes sense to have your own admin. Did all admin automatically go to QR or QRN? I'm sure it was split. That alone does not provide evidence of a reduction in operational staff or that previous ratio of admin to operational staff is different. So you still have not backed up that claim.

Out of curiousity Justanotheruser two things, you said about transfers and terrific accomodation, was that for railway WORKERS and second I am now retired after a lifetime in the transport industry both rail and road and as both an employee and in management, what is your field of employment and on what experience in these matters other than as an observer do you base your experience

you know how this comes across? It comes across as I used to work in the industry therefore nobody else knows anything and you should all bow down to me.  I know your history well as you have now told me four times now including in this thread.  Just because you worked in the industry means nothing to me. I had a former defence force person telling me that I was wrong about a particular ship being sent to east timor. However a very close friend of mine was on the ship and sent me an update on things to pass on. So I took the word of the person who was on the ship over the other person who used to be in the defence forces even though they still had connections.

Part of my experience in this is processing the bills when they were sent to the company I worked for.  These provisions were not in the enterprise agreement between the union and company they were state law. I will happily admit it was another state (not qld) however that is why I did say did anyone check out the legality of it. Different states often have very similar laws in these areas and sometimes it is a federal law so applies to all states.

[mufreight]

Who said I was defending anything? I simply asked for you to provide proof of claims you made.

So are you offering to breach this websites rules and also break privacy laws by giving me names and phone numbers of people? To suggest I might like to talk to these people is unrealistic. however I am sure there would be a newspaper article about this or some other solid evidence you could legally provide.

Justanotheruser, no there was no intention to as you chose to construe it to breach either the rules of this or any other website or privacy laws, You required proof and you were provided with an avenue by which you could ascertain the facts for yourself without my further involvement, you have obviously chosen not to do so, one would question why.

and once again you make claims without backing them up. Several people have asked for your evidence that more paper pushers and seat polishers have been employed.  it is about time you put up or shut up.  Where is your evidence?

Any chance we could get proof for just one of these claims?

Again the facts speak for themselves, perhaps it is your turn to as you put it "put up or shut up", and provide proof contary to what I understand to be fact, you have been provided with avenues to verify for yourself the facts of the situation and have chosen not to, a yes Minister approach of I do not want to know so I will not verify the fact so that when they are proven to be the case I can claim that "Oh well I was not told", a seemingly common tactic with the current administration.

[quote author=justanotheruser link=topic=2320.msg47955#msg47955 date=1297859149 I had a former defence force person telling me that I was wrong about a particular ship being sent to east timor. However a very close friend of mine was on the ship and sent me an update on things to pass on. So I took the word of the person who was on the ship over the other person who used to be in the defence forces even though they still had connections. [/quote]

You stated that you yourself gave greater credibility to information that you obtained from people actualy on the job, in my case because on my close and extended contacts in the rail industry I also rely on information from people actualy involved and I have the oportunity to verify and frequently challenge the information given and its veracity.

As to the staffing levels there has been a steady and ongoing increase in the numbers in clerical and administrative positions and an equaly ongoing decline in the ratio of actual workers, again if you feel so inclined there are avenues by which you or any other person can verify the actual figures should one so desire.
I notice that you did not respond in respect of the levels of accomodation provided for railway workers who are in the situation of an enforced transfer.  Perhaps since the pedantic doting of I's and crossing of T's is of such great importance you might like to take the opportunity to respond.

[justanotheruser]

Who said I was defending anything? I simply asked for you to provide proof of claims you made.

So are you offering to breach this websites rules and also break privacy laws by giving me names and phone numbers of people? To suggest I might like to talk to these people is unrealistic. however I am sure there would be a newspaper article about this or some other solid evidence you could legally provide.

Justanotheruser, no there was no intention to as you chose to construe it to breach either the rules of this or any other website or privacy laws, You required proof and you were provided with an avenue by which you could ascertain the facts for yourself without my further involvement, you have obviously chosen not to do so, one would question why.

this is a blatent lie. I can not talk to these people unless I am given their contact deatils which would be a breach of privacy laws.

and once again you make claims without backing them up. Several people have asked for your evidence that more paper pushers and seat polishers have been employed.  it is about time you put up or shut up.  Where is your evidence?

Any chance we could get proof for just one of these claims?

Again the facts speak for themselves, perhaps it is your turn to as you put it "put up or shut up", and provide proof contary to what I understand to be fact, you have been provided with avenues to verify for yourself the facts of the situation and have chosen not to, a yes Minister approach of I do not want to know so I will not verify the fact so that when they are proven to be the case I can claim that "Oh well I was not told", a seemingly common tactic with the current administration.

I had a former defence force person telling me that I was wrong about a particular ship being sent to east timor. However a very close friend of mine was on the ship and sent me an update on things to pass on. So I took the word of the person who was on the ship over the other person who used to be in the defence forces even though they still had connections.

You stated that you yourself gave greater credibility to information that you obtained from people actualy on the job, in my case because on my close and extended contacts in the rail industry I also rely on information from people actualy involved and I have the oportunity to verify and frequently challenge the information given and its veracity.

You misunderstand. I gave greater credibility to the person on the job because I personally knew them not simply because they were on the job.  if I knew any of these people personally I could easily contact them and ask if what you say is true.  At the moment though in my example you are like the former defence force person not the person on the job.

As to the staffing levels there has been a steady and ongoing increase in the numbers in clerical and administrative positions and an equaly ongoing decline in the ratio of actual workers, again if you feel so inclined there are avenues by which you or any other person can verify the actual figures should one so desire.
I notice that you did not respond in respect of the levels of accomodation provided for railway workers who are in the situation of an enforced transfer.  Perhaps since the pedantic doting of I's and crossing of T's is of such great importance you might like to take the opportunity to respond.

Once again absolute rubbish that I have been provided with avenues to check. You have not provide one single link to a source that I can look at. You made the claim now show me where to check or provide the figures yourself with a link to the source.

I responded by stating how the situation was in one state and that it was state laws that enforced that not a agreement between the company and union. I also said that my original statement was actually a question asking if anyone checked the legality of it. Lets look at the situation of my brother who received a transfer to London from Sydney. I can assure you prices in London are higher than that here. Yet that was done. It happens tough luck sorry. Is it fair that I lost my job because the business owners had a falling out and as assistant manager my job no longer existed because the new owners were actually going to work in the shop. Sorry if you think life is always fair but that ain't the truth and people need to accept that. Is it fair that a boy dies in floodwater because he insists that his younger brother be saved first. Nope so lets put things in perspective.