NZ moving to red within next 48 hours?
Wedding will be postponed to 2023 - better in election year.
There is still hope that nobody else will attend the spin mistress wedding and we will be roped in to make up the numbers?
Printable View
Two vaccines are not as effective as three - a response to a new variant.
Even conservative friendly un-Australian is having a go at the Aussie corona deaths.
https://www.theaustralian.com.au/
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/lifestyle...JZOO5WPNQRPZI/
Wedding postponed - Cindy is so predictable. The spin mistress only ever has one thing on her mind - how to milk anything for electoral advantage.
If she could create disasters, she would do a Christchurch event every year.
Vince has had to close the corona thread so we should attempt to keep this Labour conversation civil.
We need this platform to express how our politicians perform.
Wonder if Robertson has put in the new Order of a further $100 Bills in with
Adrian Orr for some creative shuffling to cover another 18 months of
Labour tiptoeing on Lilly pads ? ;)
It makes sense to postpone something with a large crowd size.
Can’t have Cindy’s ‘go to reporter’ Tova be subjected to a commercially agreed and contracted restraint of trade for 3 months so Labour wants to get the law changed.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/127...alling-for-ban
Shows how top of mind & critical friendly reporters are to the spin mistress and her team of nincompoops.
Apparently coverage of Waitangi Day events at Waitangion TV is pretty special this year
Even the Navy was there last week as part of the filming ,..along with the PM.
They have had to deal with it, even if they have made a bad job of doing so and squandered any extra time NZ had before Omicron seeped through the border. They have to try to delay the inevitable because of the poor capacity of health services, and lack of booster and testing preparedness. National on the other hand have been able to luxuriate in soul-searching and in-fighting.
I think the Government is dealing with it very well. They are learning from other countries how to handle omicron, which is an advantage for NZ. I listened to Ardern on Sunday and was impressed with how she is handling it.
The Government made a big change on Sunday and NZ will now have to learn to live with virus.
You have been wanting the Government to end restrictions and now they are moving in that direction. At the same time, they are making sure the health system is not overloaded, and that supply chains are maintained ie supermarkets are stocked. They will impose more restrictions if that happens.
It is a huge culture change for NZ and some people will be slow to adapt. Just as some people have been slow to take up the vaccine, or boosters. Elimination was a successful strategy for a while and now it is time to move on to. With omicron in the community, we just have to learn to live with it which may cost hundreds or even thousands of deaths.
https://www.newsroom.co.nz/a-big-cul...w-zealands-way
These draconian awful Restraint of Trade clauses which were introduced by National's Bill Birch if I remember correctly, are an impediment to general productivity.
People become stuck in jobs, stagnating when they have outgrown the positions they hold & want to move on.
By preventing them from earning a living for several months, they reduce the natural competition between potential employers to get the best employee possible, & allowing talent to continually rise.
While there may be a few justifiable cases, the broad brush law captured everyone, even lowly paid workers.
Just as competition between employees for the best jobs is a good thing, competition between employers for the best employees is a good thing and impediments or hurdles reduce productivity in the economy.
The key word there is "willingly". Employment Law recognises there is almost always an imbalance of power between the employer and the employee. From the Employment Relations Authority to the Employment Court and all the way up it is recognised that the choices available to workers are constrained, and that it is a legitimate function of the ERA sitting in "equity and good conscience" to determine what is "fair and reasonable"in considering whether contractual terms are enforceable. The ERA does that routinely.
You may have a moral problem when people try to overturn contracts. I don't - particularly when there is an imbalance of power involved as in an IEA.
Over the last twenty years I have advised literally hundreds of workers who signed IEAs without advice and who had only the vaguest idea of many of the provisions in a multipage boilerplated agreement.
I certainly do. It's despicable behaviour to agree to something that binds another party and then turning against them. If there is an imbalance of power that prevents a satisfactory deal - walk away. It's not compulsory to deal.
Bash out the terms first. If you agree then sign the agreement. If not - forget it. Be a man, not a wimpy little twit.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/heal...-shattered-arm
Hey dobby41, here is an update of that storey you said was probably just another beat up on this poor government. "nothing to see here", no facts you said.
BE KIND....
There is a cult that believes in magic glasses and underpants, heard of it?
LOL. It sounds like that is from the era of Victorian sweatshops. Those sweatshop owners fought tooth and nail against workers co-operating to try to address the power imbalance. They also relied on desperation, imbalance of information and stand-over tactics to get workers to agree to their terms of labour.
“Restraints are anti-competitive,” says Hamish Kynaston, an employment law partner at Buddle Findlay. “Which is why they are considered as unlawful as a starting point – uncompetitive and against public policy.”
https://www.newsroom.co.nz/tova-obrien-a-public-face-to-the-restraint-of-trade-debate
“To justify a restraint of trade it must be reasonably necessary to protect a proprietary interest of the employer. Commonly, an employer may have a legitimate proprietary interest in things such as its confidential information, its business strategy, and its customer relationships.
“Even with such a proprietary interest, a restraint of trade must be no wider than is reasonably necessary to protect that interest. If it is wider than is reasonably necessary it will again be unenforceable.”
The starting position is restraints of trade are prima facie unlawful because they go against the public policy of free market and free movement of labour.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/127540439/how-enforceable-are-restraints-of-trade
An employer had to show it had a proprietary interest to protect, such as confidential information, and that the restraint it was trying to enforce was reasonable.
Buddle Findlay partner Hamish Kynaston said the restraints were common in hairdressing, along with other industries, stopping a departing hairdresser working for at a nearby salon for a period of time.
The businesses would argue the hairdresser had developed client relationships during work, and those clients were an investment for the business which was entitled to protect its property. But, clients might still decide to follow their hairdresser regardless of the legalities.
The point is, why the heck did she sign/agree to it at the start?
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/entertain...E5WWGJUTQYRJI/
Tova has lost her case against Discovery and must pay costs.
That's irrelevant to Tova O'Whatsit's situation in 2022. She's a grown woman, who should be well able to take care of herself, behaving in a cowardly sleazy manner and then engaging a lawyer to fight her battlles.
Would you sign a contract and then engage a solicitor to overturn it? Think about it.
I did not realise that your post I was replying was related specifically to Tova O'Brien as you mentioned "Be a man, not a wimpy little twit." Perhaps you mis-wrote and really meant "Be a woman?" She is probably working in a field in which the employers call the shots and not to accept their terms means no work in her field of expertise.
(I think that O'Brien was the person to whom you were referring, although her Irish surname seemed to give you some trouble, perhaps you need a Te Reo transliteration? )
Thanks - turned out fine as I suggested (she was given space - 5 days is probably pretty good for the bureaucracy (it isn't the 'Govt' per se which grants this (ie not the Ministers) - not as fast as I'd like but it did happen).
"nothing to see here" - I didn't say. You're the one that was asking the question and I answered with a view.
No I haven't - are you a member?Quote:
There is a cult that believes in magic glasses and underpants, heard of it?
Equating an extremely well paid high profile broadcaster trying to wriggle her way out of a binding contract she signed willingly and with full knowledge, with Victorian sweatshop laborers - this is the best you can do?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~
"In his closing submissions on Thursday, Discovery’s lawyer Peter Kiely said O’Brien sought legal advice and spoke to her then-boss about the restraint of trade provisions before taking up her position as political editor in 2018.
“That's what she negotiated, that’s what she agreed to.”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~
Pathetic.
I did assume the fungi's gender so I will apologise for that.
Failure to build anything like the 100,000 houses promised - KiwiBuild is the biggest political lie in NZ history. This government was rescued by COVID-19. Robbo is certainly happy, allows him cover to borrow $1 Billion a week with virtually no questions asked.
You are seriously suggesting that this* :
is the equivalent of the broken promises and failed undertakings of Clueless Cindy & her team of incompetents?
Just consider two :
1. Kiwbuild & affordable housing - spectacular failures resulting in hardships & miseries for hundreds of thousands of NZers
2. Child poverty - getting worse, inflicting miseries on tens of thousands of children
* Find one poster on this forum who did not have a good chuckle over the posting, knowing full well that you would never write that even though they agree that's exactly how you think. :D
Actually, child poverty is reducing.
Plus free trades training now training a whole generation of NZers.
Another lie from the paid resident Labour shill.
Jacinda Ardern has described child poverty as the reason why she got into politics. Grant Robertson has also mentioned the issue in his Budget Day speeches, including the various measures and targets Labour will use to hold itself accountable.
In his Budget 2019 speech, Robertson reaffirmed the Government’s promise to halve child poverty over 10 years, a back-down in itself given Labour promised Kiwis it would lift 100,000 children out of poverty by 2020. This original promise would have been a 63 per cent reduction over three years.
Using the same measure Ardern based her promise on, her Government has actually overseen an increase of 1,500 children living in poverty between 2017 and 2020 according to official Stats NZ child poverty data.
Promised a 100,000 reduction. Delivered a 1,500 increase.
Contracts are not necessarily indefeasible under NZ Law. I am not sure if it is pathetic to refuse to be bound to all the terms of a contract where there has been misrepresentation, economic duress, undue influence, fraud or misrepresentation. As I say the circumstances are important.
She received proper legal representation before signing said contract.
And ERA has ruled against her, finding that she knew what she was signing.
Can’t say she received proper legal representation at the ERA however :
‘Lawyer Charlotte Parkhill said O’Brien had given 14 years of service to the company and would have to rely on bartending work if the clause was upheld.’
Bartending? Is she really so useless outside of her grovelling interviews with Cindy? How pathetic an argument!!!!
BTW, do you support broken promises like only 1,400 out of 100,000 Kiwibuild houses promised being built? Promise made under pressure (misrepresentation, duress, undue influence, fraud) to hoodwink NZers to vote for Cindy?
A non sequitur. However fwiw, I assign a probability of less than 50% to a promise, made by a political party during a campaign, coming to fruition if they achieve the Treasury benches.
I am not sure if it would be in the best interests for the country to require promises previously made to be enacted should changing circumstances render these campaign promises no longer appropriate. However if political manifesto promises were intended to be contractual offers and were enforceable against a government under contract law, the Political Party Manifestos would be blank sheets. A couple of big "ifs" though....
Australia corona situation a mess:
https://edition.cnn.com/2022/01/23/a...dst/index.html
Not sure how it was handled at all since their PM "left it to the states".
Imagine Jacinda saying local councils are responsible.
Let’s hope the Government does not deliver this on this.
There could be "tens of thousands" of cases of the Omicron variant each day "within weeks", according to COVID-19 Response Minister Chris Hipkins.
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zealand/2022/01/coronavirus-latest-on-covid-19-community-outbreak-monday-january-24.html
Meanwhile, a leading data modeller says the highly transmissible variant could infect half of the population within just a few months.
Well that's very clever, but doesn't address my point. So (in the hope that you will be willing to actually engage) let me restate it as best I can.
I have spent the last 50 years as a psychotherapist and employment advocate, dealing latterly with Family Violence and workplace bullying, and involved in the menz movement.
I have found that the majority of the people I have met hold other people to a higher moral standard and judge them more harshly than they judge themselves. I have observed that this is especially true of people who hold their own moral views particularly rigidly.
I was inviting you to examine your own beliefs and behavior.
Anyone in senior positions know and understand restraint of trade. It is very very common practice to take & enjoy ‘gardening leave’ as is commonly referred to for the prescribed restraint period when one leaves one job to another within the same field or industry.
So you have no idea of what you are writing about (as usual) when one lives in the real world rather than your make believe paradise.
It's just not credible that o'brien signed a contract, potentially for millions of $ (over time - not p.a.) without having a legal eye giving it the OK. And for H White to support o'brien by suggesting a law change is such poor optics.
I have been engaged as a paid representative acting as an Employment Advocate in more than 300 cases over the last twenty years and given free advice to another 5-600 enquirers. How many cases have you taken?
Relax - I don't expect you to withdraw and/or apologise.
What's there to apologize?
There're good advocates vs lousy advocates - quality vs quantity.
Your musings so far on Tova's case shows just how out of touch with the real world you must be. I pity your enquirers but knowing the sort of people that they are, they deserve you.
The broken promise from you was later when to said you would delete the post but didn't.
Which bit of going back on a promise don't you get?
For your information, and you know this, there were many posters that wanted you banned for posting false quotes.Quote:
* Find one poster on this forum who did not have a good chuckle over the posting, knowing full well that you would never write that even though they agree that's exactly how you think.
It is obvious to all that you have no honour or integrity.
Garbage.
As usual from one of Clueless Cindy’s hapless helpers. Any outcry would only ever come from the Labour cancel brigade who cannot handle the truth.
And, Refer me to the posting which offends your lack of sense of humour (# which I could not locate) and I will delete it.
You couldn't locate it - you just posted a copy of the post above (4748)??
Attachment 13440
I don't know the original post number now but given you posted at 4748 you must.
You seem to struggle to keep track of what you are doing.
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/...nts-neighbours
This how Kainga Ora operates and freely spends taxpayers’ funds under Clueless Cindy’s government.
Incompetent and with no accountability.
Breed more beneficiaries & dependents.
The employment numbers are all fudged, real unemployment rate is well above the number reported.
https://i.stuff.co.nz/national/polit...bject-nonsense
But of course - a hand up rather than a hand out is what human kindness is TRULY about.
But you & your ilk prefer this of course comes 2023:
https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/c...g?format=2500w
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/rising...KRO23XGOZUPB4/
Music to the ears of davflaws - do gooders preaching social unrest, more crime and civil disobedience. So the government better give them more money - how about another $240m as incentives to get vaccinated?
Unfortunately what they are saying is probably true. Central bank policies of money printing and interest rate suppression that started with The Federal Reserve have caused dangerous asset bubbles and inflation that is threatening to get out of control. Inequality and the effects of inflation do have consequences. Unless we can find some way out of our housing market mess rents will keep rising. The problem is the mess has been in the making ever since the GFC and there is no fix apparent to anyone.And yes, the Labour response will probably be more intervention in the form of pumping money around.....which will have more unintended consequences such as more inflation. Unfortunately Robbo's big spending policies will be difficult to walk back even if he wanted to. And if we don't raise interest rates the NZD will lose purchasing power and you'll be paying obscene prices at the petrol pump.
The alternative is mass unemployment rather than full employment
The effects of an ordinary recession are often overstated, they are usually short and sharp and clear out malinvestment and reset asset prices. Giving the Reserve Bank here a dual mandate was pure folly.
Of course, you won't get a short sharp recession at the end of the sort of money printing and ultra-low interest rate policies that central banks have pursued since the GFC. I doubt you can hold back the tide no matter how much state intervention is done now, the situation is too far gone. I think the eventual crash will make the GFC look pretty tame by comparison. Intervention by the central banks in markets and through QE and interest rate suppression can never end well. Of course inflation will show up at some point, and once it does the game is virtually up. Of course you need to anticipate Black Swans. But they went down this road with no clear exit strategy and without considering Murphy's Law, and have ended up hopelessly trapped.
Ayesha gives me very little confidence these monkeys are capable of anything other than picking fleas off each other and eating them.
I think its probably already stopped in the US, what anyone is hearing now are the faint echo's like the light from some long dead star. They had the patient on life support since the GFC and kept pumping it full of the medicine that near killed it in the first place: debt and moral hazard. They added a couple of other experimental medicines, being QE and long-term interest rate suppression, and then inflation has come along and killed it. It's stone dead but they haven't broken the news to the citizenry yet. The markets have heard a rumour that the patient is dead and they have reacted accordingly. They still hope it can be revived. The rest of us will find out in the coming days and months.
If you think central banks allow for a free market, then you as just as deluded as the rest of them. In a free market you have price discovery and normalised interest rates, savers don't compete with the government as a source of capital for investment, your central banks don't interfere directly in the markets and they don't purchase 'assets' using funds created at the stroke of a computer keyboard. The balance sheet of the Federal Reserve is sitting at close to $9 Trillion at the moment, that is $9 Trillion in excess 'liquidity' that they have injected into the markets. Sorry, that isn't free market capitalism, that's about as interventionist as it gets.
It's because of inflation. You can't keep pumping in liquidity and keeping interest rates close to zero when inflation is already running at 7%. So the Fed faces an impossible situation. If you withdraw the support mechanisms that keep the asset bubbles propped up and they'll collapse. If you don't do it, inflation runs rampant and you run the risk of hyperinflation. Moreover, it is politically untenable for the Fed not to actively fight inflation. Price stability is one half of their mandate in any case.
I disagree that the majority of people hold other people to a higher moral standard and judge them more harshly than the judge themselves. On the surface they appear to do this, but if you look deeper judging other people’s moral failings is usually projection when people deny their own dark side and project it onto others. You will probably find that people who have rigid moral views have a lot of self-hatred.
Shaming people is a common practice in society. As a child I was called stupid, useless and given other negative labels. I wasn’t stupid but my behaviour may have been stupid. Often self-hatred is called low self-esteem or feeling insecure. But when I don’t meet my expectations, in other words when I don’t measure up, or when I’m not good enough then I have feelings of self-hatred. I get angry and I may blame other people and get angry at them, but if I am honest, I am angry at myself for not being “perfect.”
A person with genuine high self-esteem does not shame and judge other people’s moral failings. They accept that the person was doing their best at the time.
We are in agreement - mostly. But your explanation dives into "what is really going on" and that is ultimately unknowable in any particular case.
For myself - I have wrestled with my own internal processes all my adult life (latterly with more success).
Usually I can accept that everyone is doing their best with what they know and feel (even me), but most people I observe make excuses for themselves and judge other people at least some of the time, and I continue to catch myself doing just that more often than makes me comfortable.
You are writing about yourself - so keep it at that.
Meanwhile, in the fantasy world that Clueless Cindy, her supporters & you live in :
https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/c...g?format=2500w
If there is low or full employment as claimed, why would there be poverty out there?
Keep your lies & Cindy's spins & BS to yourself.
https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/c...g?format=2500w
Labour fast-tracking about 150,000 people into residency to try to keep the housing market propped up.
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-z...cy-scheme.html
Thousands become New Zealand residents under new fast-track skilled migrant residency scheme
By Gill Bonnett, 26/01/2022
About 5000 people have become residents under a fast-track government scheme launched last month, with migrants from India, South Africa, and Philippines topping the approvals.
Almost 30,000 people have so far applied for the one-off residence visa, and up to 165,000 may be eligible by the end of the year.
Migrants are eligible if they are settled (three years-plus in New Zealand including a minimum number of days), a skilled worker (based on wages) or scarce (in short supply).
Immigration statistics show migrants from India topped the approvals in the scheme's first month, followed by South Africa, Philippines, UK, and Sri Lanka. One in five applications was rejected.