MedVision ad

Tired of Unions (1 Viewer)

whatashotbyseve

It all counts
Joined
Nov 13, 2008
Messages
1,855
Location
Randwick or Rosehill racecourse.
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
BONDS owner Pacific Brands has paid up to $500,000 to sponsor the Melbourne Fashion Festival despite axing 1850 jobs.

The event's organisers are in crisis talks with the disgraced company on how to minimise the damage to one of Australia's biggest fashion events.

Mass protests are expected in response to Pacific Brands' decision to axe jobs and shift its manufacturing to China.

"The fashion festival is still talking to Pacific Brands about the most appropriate and responsible course of action regarding their involvement," said a spokesman for the organisers.

A spokesman from Pacific Brands told AAP this morning the figure was closer to $100,000, which, he said was "a longstanding trend with the fashion festival which has been going on for many years".

"This (is) an essential part of our support for the industry and for our business which still employs 7000 people," he said.

Tony Sheldon, of the Transport Workers Union (TWU), said he was arranging for people to dress as rats to protest against Pacific Brand's CEO Sue Morphet.

"We will have dozens of life-size rats at the event - we're busy sourcing costumes right now," Mr Sheldon said.

"We will have lots of employees present who are facing the sack and we want her (Ms Morphet) to look these people in the eye, these people she is throwing on the scrap heap."

Mr Sheldon is also liaising with workers who wear Bonds gear as uniforms. They have vowed to stop wearing Pacific Brands goods once they are no longer made in Australia.

Michele O'Neil, of the Textile, Clothing and Footwear Union, said she was shocked at the decision to sponsor the event.

"We've already seen there's been a substantial increase in their expenditure on marketing and advertising in the past 12-month period - the same time as they have been increasing (their) salaries and bonuses," she said.

Pacific Brands also shows no sign of easing up on its huge advertising expenditure to promote brands that are to be made overseas.

As well as paying for the endorsement of tennis player Pat Rafter and cricketer Michael Clarke, subsidiary Bonds has launched a colourful new series of ads for its Art Attack range of women's underwear.

Meanwhile, Innovation Minister Kim Carr is trying to broker a deal to save as many jobs as possible. While Pacific Brands has made it clear it will proceed with sacking the 1850 workers, Mr Carr is believed to be trying to arrange the sale of the company's factories so another manufacturer could use them and employ at least some of the Bonds workers.

"A number of proposals have been put to the Government by Pacific Brands and other players. Discussions with all parties including the Pacific Brands CEO and board chair are ongoing," a spokesman for Mr Carr said.

Yesterday, fashion show organisers were busy trying to distance themselves from Pacific Brands. Organisers removed the most prominent references to Bonds and Pacific Brands from the show's website.

The company has appointed expensive public relations company Cato Counsel to handle the fallout.

However, when The Sunday Telegraph gave Cato Counsel's Matt Horan the opportunity to respond, he refused to comment.
Is anyone else sick of hearing the Unions response to this non-event? Ok, so Bonds 'axed' 1850 workers. This is their prerogative. If labour is cheaper overseas, with no discernible reduction in quality of product, then a publicly listed company has an obligation to reduce expenditure and thus increase profit for their shareholders. Unfortunate for the workers and their families, but this is the real world. Shit happens.

Now, I am a marketing student, and as such this may be biased a little, but Bonds is absolutely correct in spending $500k on this event. They need to keep their brand image intact, and $500k is a drop in the ocean. Their marketing team will know damn well that for all the talk of boycotting Bonds, it simply will not happen, as most people are ambivalent. Do people boycott Nike because their products are made in Thailand or Vietnam or China? Didn't think so, aside from a small minority. Dressing up as rats to scare the CEO? Unions really have gone downhill.

The whole 'CEO gave herself a million dollar payrise' union claims shits me as well. She got that over 12 months ago for her promotion to CEO. If she is getting a promotion, she deserves a payrise. If one of her KPI's was to reduce the workforce by x amount, and she achieved it, then she deserves her bonus. She is just doing her job. Businesses make tough decisions to survive in this economic climate.

This whole union movement is another storm in a teacup and further evidence of why unions in Australia have slid further and further in irrelevance.
 

Nebuchanezzar

Banned
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Messages
7,536
Location
Camden
Gender
Male
HSC
2005
one might say that firing 1500 people and plunging them into the welfare system is a greater evil than a slightly reduced profit for shareholders.
 

whatashotbyseve

It all counts
Joined
Nov 13, 2008
Messages
1,855
Location
Randwick or Rosehill racecourse.
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
I'm sure they will be offered redundancies etc.

Why do they necessarily have to move to the welfare system? They are not skilled workers per se, I am sure that there are some jobs available, even in this current climate.
 

withoutaface

Premium Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2004
Messages
15,098
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
Is anyone else sick of hearing the Unions response to this non-event? Ok, so Bonds 'axed' 1850 workers. This is their prerogative. If labour is cheaper overseas, with no discernible reduction in quality of product, then a publicly listed company has an obligation to reduce expenditure and thus increase profit for their shareholders. Unfortunate for the workers and their families, but this is the real world. Shit happens.

Now, I am a marketing student, and as such this may be biased a little, but Bonds is absolutely correct in spending $500k on this event. They need to keep their brand image intact, and $500k is a drop in the ocean. Their marketing team will know damn well that for all the talk of boycotting Bonds, it simply will not happen, as most people are ambivalent. Do people boycott Nike because their products are made in Thailand or Vietnam or China? Didn't think so, aside from a small minority. Dressing up as rats to scare the CEO? Unions really have gone downhill.

The whole 'CEO gave herself a million dollar payrise' union claims shits me as well. She got that over 12 months ago for her promotion to CEO. If she is getting a promotion, she deserves a payrise. If one of her KPI's was to reduce the workforce by x amount, and she achieved it, then she deserves her bonus. She is just doing her job. Businesses make tough decisions to survive in this economic climate.

This whole union movement is another storm in a teacup and further evidence of why unions in Australia have slid further and further in irrelevance.
I'd be interested to see if these sackings would be ocurring if the Fair Work Bill weren't just around the corner.
 

banco55

Active Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2005
Messages
1,577
Gender
Male
HSC
2006
Sure it's their prerogative to fire their workers. It's also the union's prerogative to go after them as hard as they want (within the law). If they can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen.
 

whatashotbyseve

It all counts
Joined
Nov 13, 2008
Messages
1,855
Location
Randwick or Rosehill racecourse.
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
Sure it's their prerogative to fire their workers. It's also the union's prerogative to go after them as hard as they want (within the law). If they can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen.
By dressing up as rats??

Whats wrong with contacting the relevant figures within a company and maturely scheduling a meeting to discuss the plight of employees?
 

banco55

Active Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2005
Messages
1,577
Gender
Male
HSC
2006
By dressing up as rats??

Whats wrong with contacting the relevant figures within a company and maturely scheduling a meeting to discuss the plight of employees?
Yeah I'm sure the company would be really responsive to a sit down

If they make life a living hell for the CEO (I hear she now needs bodyguards) and make life difficult for the company (by attacking sponsorships etc) it will be a deterrent for other companies thinking of doing something similar. The pacific brands jobs aren't coming back but if they can crucify the company and its executives the unions will have got something out of it so it makes total sense for them to do what they are doing.
 

JonathanM

Antagonist
Joined
Feb 1, 2009
Messages
1,067
Location
Israel
Gender
Male
HSC
2009
Yeah I'm sure the company would be really responsive to a sit down

If they make life a living hell for the CEO (I hear she now needs bodyguards) and make life difficult for the company (by attacking sponsorships etc) it will be a deterrent for other companies thinking of doing something similar. The pacific brands jobs aren't coming back but if they can crucify the company and its executives the unions will have got something out of it so it makes total sense for them to do what they are doing.
You're right, intimidation is amazingly effective.

That doesn't make it right though.
 
Last edited:

Graney

Horse liberty
Joined
Jul 17, 2007
Messages
4,434
Location
Bereie
Gender
Male
HSC
2005
It does seem slightly immoral to receive government assistance, then quit the country.

But I guess the government's really the one to blame for the situation, for choosing to subsidise industry.
 

whatashotbyseve

It all counts
Joined
Nov 13, 2008
Messages
1,855
Location
Randwick or Rosehill racecourse.
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
That depends of how ulterior their motives were. Maybe they genuinely thought the grant would keep jobs in the country. Maybe jobs would have been lost overseas earlier had the grant not been implemented.

Intimidating the CEO will not get the workers jobs back, nor will it deter other companies from laying off workers if they deem it necessary for the company to survive. Unions want to have their cake and eat it to - in the good times a few years ago, the government urged restraint in regards to wage increases. Of course, the unions went for figures well above CPI. Maybe if they were realistic with their demands, these jobs could have been saved.
 

dood09

Frontier Psychiatrist ☻
Joined
Apr 11, 2008
Messages
291
Gender
Male
HSC
N/A
im alittle tired of onions
 
Joined
Apr 7, 2007
Messages
469
Gender
Female
HSC
2007
hmmm, even if they get paid out... it doesnt matter, these days its hard to find a job. I Bet 30% of those ppl sacked from pacific brands will not find work in the next 6 months...
Besides why do they pay those models and CEO's of Bonds so much money???
 

withoutaface

Premium Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2004
Messages
15,098
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
hmmm, even if they get paid out... it doesnt matter, these days its hard to find a job. I Bet 30% of those ppl sacked from pacific brands will not find work in the next 6 months...
Besides why do they pay those models and CEO's of Bonds so much money???
What? Where did the models' salaries ever come up? The sponsorship of the festival is likely to generate more profit back to the company than cash was expended purchasing it, otherwise it would be a waste of money. If anything this sponsorship will help retain jobs.

Secondly CEOs get paid a lot of money because they have a unique skill set and, again, save the company significantly more money than their own salary costs.
 

JonathanM

Antagonist
Joined
Feb 1, 2009
Messages
1,067
Location
Israel
Gender
Male
HSC
2009
hmmm, even if they get paid out... it doesnt matter, these days its hard to find a job. I Bet 30% of those ppl sacked from pacific brands will not find work in the next 6 months...
Besides why do they pay those models and CEO's of Bonds so much money???
Most CEO's of major companies would get paid $500, 000+. My dad has a friend who sits on a board of some major company. He gets paid around $200, 000 a year to attend 6 meetings and he isn't even a CEO.
 

johony

Active Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2006
Messages
1,521
Gender
Male
HSC
2009
isn't the majority of bonds stuff made in china anyway?

so pretty much this mass sacking would've happened eventually, it's just that pacific brands chose the wrong time to do it and the media chose to spin it as much as they could.
 

blue_chameleon

Shake the sauce bottle yo
Joined
Mar 7, 2003
Messages
3,078
Gender
Male
HSC
2003
Most CEO's of major companies would get paid $500, 000+. My dad has a friend who sits on a board of some major company. He gets paid around $200, 000 a year to attend 6 meetings and he isn't even a CEO.
And of course, everyone can walk into a directors position on a major company's board. :rolleyes:
 

whatashotbyseve

It all counts
Joined
Nov 13, 2008
Messages
1,855
Location
Randwick or Rosehill racecourse.
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
Most CEO's salary is tied to their KPI bonuses. I think you will find base CEO salaries are a fraction of what they potentially take home. It's called performance based pay - you don't meet your job requirements, you suffer financially.
 

katie tully

ashleey luvs roosters
Joined
Jun 15, 2008
Messages
5,213
Location
My wrist is limp
Gender
Female
HSC
2005
Consider the 500k a marketing ploy to increase sales. Pacific Brands don't disclose how much they pay for print and tv advertisements, (which I can assure you are well in excess of 500k). Also, this 500k wouldn't go far in terms of keeping the 1800+ employees employed for more than a few months.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top