No free rides to union rally

 
  RedneckGreenie Train Controller

Location: City of Notrainingham
Good luck to the ALP if they want to repeal these laws, if and when they get into office..... they'll automatically be kicking themselves out of office. Too many people would be outraged at the repealing of the laws, even though plenty will be happy if they are repealed.
"psr85"


Even if the ALP win office, the laws will not be repealed, at least not in full.  Too many people are employed on new contracts/conditions for it all to go back as it were.

Sponsored advertisement

  Camster Chief Commissioner

Location: Geelong
I can't imagine why they would allow free transport to a rally like this. It would be the perfect opportunity to make money off people.
"Camster"
Conex aren't giving people free travel.

It is the unionised Authorised Officers saying that they will not be checking tickets, so as a result one could travel without a ticket and not risk getting a fine. The unionised workers said that in order to help out other unionised workers - that's the whole point of a union...
"wongm"


Well they should have gone on strike like the people who attended the rally, going to work and doing a half arsed job was in effect, sitting on the fence.
"Camster"
Not everybody disagrees with these new laws.  Why should everybody have to strike? How would you get to the rally if everybody did a "half arsed job" and sat "on the fence"? Rolling Eyes

It's a shame the crazy unions, and obviously you Camster, don't realise that not everyone wanted to be involved with the protests.

"psr85"


Whoa, hang on there, nothing I have posted says I supported the rally Mad
All I said was it was either all or nothing. Why should some people risk their job, while others give half arsed support. If anything, I was against the protest.
  psr85 Chief Commissioner

Location: Sandringham Line, Melbourne
Ah ok, well I misunderstood that one then. Having read it in the full context makes a bit of sense!!

Apologies!  Smile

And this way, the AO's got paid more than likely didn't they??  Razz
  Camster Chief Commissioner

Location: Geelong
Ah ok, well I misunderstood that one then. Having read it in the full context makes a bit of sense!!

Apologies!  Smile

And this way, the AO's got paid more than likely didn't they??  Razz
"psr85"


I guess they did Very Happy
  RedneckGreenie Train Controller

Location: City of Notrainingham

And this way, the AO's got paid more than likely didn't they??  Razz
"psr85"


Yeah, that sounds like solidarity with their comrades. Rolling Eyes
  Dreadnought Assistant Commissioner

Location: Oooh, look! [Pointing upwards] An eagle!!
For all those who are going, BY A TICKET as the goons will be standing at Jolimont checking tickets.
"Z181"


Neddie, Eccles, Henry Crun or Bloodnok???
Surely that's not too bad....
Cheers,
Dreadnought
  ninthnotch Dr Beeching

Location: Not here. Try another castle.
[quote="Dreadnought"][quote="Z181"]For all those who are going, BY A TICKET as the goons will be standing at Jolimont checking tickets.[/quote]

Neddie, Eccles, Henry Crun or Bloodnok???
Surely that's not too bad....
Cheers,
Dreadnought[/quote]

"I don't have a ticket, sorry"

"You silly, twisted boy, you..."
  Dreadnought Assistant Commissioner

Location: Oooh, look! [Pointing upwards] An eagle!!
"He's fallen in the wartaaaar!"
Cheers,
Dreadnought
  John of Melbourne The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Melbourne suburbs
Connex people might not (as Connex doesn't get the money). But DoI people might, especially if they're involved with the spat and have no love for the ACTU.
"mjja"

And then this will be used as an excuse by agent-provocateurs to forment violence, and then blame it on "union thuggery".
"PalmerEldritch"

Not necessary.  The union thuggery (albeit not physical) is already evident in them encouraging people to break the law by travelling without a ticket, in (allegedly) arranging for the Connex ticket inspectors to not perform their duties properly, etc. etc.

They seem to think that they run the state.
"John of Melbourne"
You've been practicing for this sort of Right-wing vitriol ...
"ninthnotch"
What "right-wing vitriol"?

...on the talk pages of creationwiki, haven't you?
"ninthnotch"
Shocked
  ninthnotch Dr Beeching

Location: Not here. Try another castle.
Connex people might not (as Connex doesn't get the money). But DoI people might, especially if they're involved with the spat and have no love for the ACTU.
"mjja"

And then this will be used as an excuse by agent-provocateurs to forment violence, and then blame it on "union thuggery".
"PalmerEldritch"

Not necessary.  The union thuggery (albeit not physical) is already evident in them encouraging people to break the law by travelling without a ticket, in (allegedly) arranging for the Connex ticket inspectors to not perform their duties properly, etc. etc.

They seem to think that they run the state.
"John of Melbourne"
You've been practicing for this sort of Right-wing vitriol ...
"ninthnotch"
What "right-wing vitriol"?

...on the talk pages of creationwiki, haven't you?
"ninthnotch"
Shocked
"John of Melbourne"
- I'll highlight it for you, PJoM...
  John of Melbourne The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Melbourne suburbs
That's too mild to be considered vitriol, even if you consider it to be right-wing.
  ninthnotch Dr Beeching

Location: Not here. Try another castle.
That's too mild to be considered vitriol, even if you consider it to be right-wing.
"John of Melbourne"
I see, so if I was to say 'creationists are thugs and want to take over the state', that's not at all vitriolic?
  John of Melbourne The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Melbourne suburbs
That's too mild to be considered vitriol, even if you consider it to be right-wing.
"John of Melbourne"
I see, so if I was to say 'creationists are thugs and want to take over the state', that's not at all vitriolic?
"ninthnotch"

Exactly how I would describe it would probably depend on the context in which it was said, and of course I would object to something like that being said as being untrue, but I don't believe that I would describe it as vitriol, especially if it was said in a similar context to my comment.
  ninthnotch Dr Beeching

Location: Not here. Try another castle.
That's too mild to be considered vitriol, even if you consider it to be right-wing.
"John of Melbourne"
I see, so if I was to say 'creationists are thugs and want to take over the state', that's not at all vitriolic?
"ninthnotch"

Exactly how I would describe it would probably depend on the context in which it was said, and of course I would object to something like that being said as being untrue, but I don't believe that I would describe it as vitriol, especially if it was said in a similar context to my comment.
"John of Melbourne"
And the judges gave that 2 1/2 somersault with pike from the evasion of a question board an 8.5...
  John of Melbourne The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Melbourne suburbs
I didn't evade the question—I answered it, albeit with qualifications.  To put it more clearly as an (almost) unqualified simplistic answer, no, in my opinion, it is not vitriolic.
  ninthnotch Dr Beeching

Location: Not here. Try another castle.
I didn't evade the question—I answered it, albeit with qualifications.  To put it more clearly as an (almost) unqualified simplistic answer, no, in my opinion, it is not vitriolic.
"John of Melbourne"
And in my opinion it is.

But at least I will say it without trying to dislocate something in avoiding speaking plainly.

Sponsored advertisement

Display from:   

Quick Reply

We've disabled Quick Reply for this thread as it was last updated more than six months ago.