I refer to a story that's doing the rounds on the internet.
A woman who owns a children's entertainment business in the ACT, has chosen not to contract a "contractor" because she displayed a neo-conservative political view on her Facebook page.
There has been outcry via the usual channels, claiming that it's 'ok to fire someone for one view, but not the opposite view.'
I really don't believe that to be the case. I think it actually works both ways. It's NEVER ok for an employer to fire someone for expressing a political view outside of the workplace. Trade Unions fought tirelessly for decades, in order to ensure that people were not persecuted in the workplace for their political beliefs, regardless of what they might be. In terms of industrial law, that still carries as far as most employees go.
But was the "contractor" who expressed her views, in fact fired?
The answer is quite simple. No she wasn't. As a contractor, she is the proprietor of her own business. What she publishes on her personal social media pages, whether she likes it or not, is a reflection on that business. Other businesses are therefore entitled to decide whether or not they contract the services of that same business. Views espoused by that business' sole representative are therefore grounds to cease contracting them, should they be contrary to those of the contracting business. If there was a written contract in place that determined a contractual agreement or time frame, the contractor would be entitled to make a civil claim for breach of contract. It appears that no such contract was in place.
It's my personal opinion that the view espoused by the contractor was the product of neo-conservative thinking, which unveils somewhat of an irony. Neo-conservatism was behind the system that has led to a climate in industrial law that set a course for the contractor's downfall.
Major tax reforms by the Howard / Costello government were sold as a means of strengthening the economy and subsequently heralded as such by the right leaning media. The economic reality is that the Hawke / Keating years in fact paved the way for Australia's economic security throughout the late 90s and early 2000s. An economy that was upheld until the Rudd / Swann years, largely by means of minimal expenditure on necessary infrastructure.
The Howard / Costello tax reforms were far more to do with buoying corporatism by means of traversing an industrial landscape laid out by the Hawke / Keating governments. Whilst the Australian worker's industrial rights were largely upheld, they were essentially made innocuous by the seduction of workers away from industrial subordination and into the heady heights of self employment. In even the most traditionally working class professions, the worker was relegated to the annals of history and the "tradie" was born.
Borrow with abandon, Costello told the tradie and borrow they did. The banking sector thrived, interest rates dropped and real estate inflation created almost an entire population that lived beyond it's means. The perfect workforce. Corporations no longer had to concern themselves with industrial law, the tradies were self employed and to the great delight of big business, virtually enslaved by debt. They could get whatever they wanted out of them.
Never had the Australian working class been so poorly paid. Things that had previously been taken for granted by workers, came out of the tradie's pocket. Tools, work clothing, safety equipment, workers compensation, holiday pay, superannuation; the list goes on. No longer did the companies have to pay for them, that was down to the tradie and the tradie borrowed some more.
Corporations thrived, the same corporations that threw their support behind the LNP. Corporate cronyism was at an all time high. Privatisation was out of control and the 'everyone to themselves' mentality spread like wild fire, because suddenly the "tradie" was the "small business owner." There was no need to build public hospitals, "tradies" were borrowing money to pay for private health insurance. There was no need to build public schools. "Tradies" were borrowing money to send their progeny to private schools.
Everything working Australians once took for granted was coming out of their own pockets. Howard rubbed his hands, spent very little on infrastructure and sat on the Hawke / Keating nest egg, claiming to have built a strong economy. Of course the working class fell for it and lapped it up, for they had become "small business owners" and the LNP spoke for them. It didn't matter that housing was becoming unaffordable and income insufficient due to the costs associated with being a "contractor." They were "small business owners" and the LNP spoke for them.
As the LNP spoke, they listened. they were told how difficult it was to be a small business owner. The hardships they faced weren't due to corporations cutting back on labour and forcing workers to be contractors. The hardships weren't due to excessive borrowing for private health insurance, work related expenses or over inflated properties. Oh no, their problems hailed from the unemployed, single mothers, refugees, migrants, greenies and anyone who dared to challenge conservative norms. The biggest threat to the small business owner's existence was of course the cost of paying real wages, which became their responsibility as contractors. The working class were seen as Australia's primary problem by a growing band of petit bourgeois who threw their votes at the LNP, who in turn promised to disarm those 'over paid working class bludgers.'
When faced with challenges to conservative norms, it's vitally important that we ask ourselves why. We must remember where we came from and who our real enemies are. What is it about social anomalies that are indeed challenging. Is it fear? Is it a natural instinct to protect what one identifies as? Is it a propensity to protect one's financial situation?
Fear is rampant and indeed our values are being threatened. However they aren't under threat from challenges to social norms. They're under threat from neo-conservatism that espouses views that create a fear of social anomalies through media borne blame. It's a fear that paves the way for nothing more than increased corporatism, which put us in this bloody awful mess in the first place.
So, the next time a "contractor" posts a neo-conservative view on their own page, they need to give some consideration as to why they wish to espouse that view point. It might be the kind of viewpoint that has helped to sculpt the current industrial landscape. The neo-conservative dogma that's devouring its own.
No comments:
Post a Comment