Little: The only parasites are employers

May 8th, 2012 at 1:00 pm by David Farrar

Labour MP reveals his views on . Think if a National MP referred to some as parasites.

Incidentally I would have though a parasite would be a union which deducts PAYE off its employees wages and then spends it on political campaigns instead of paying it to the IRD, as legally obliged.

Hat Tip: Whale Oil

Tags: , ,

114 Responses to “Little: The only parasites are employers”

  1. tom hunter (4,852 comments) says:

    What a laughable suggestion it would be to say here in the 21st century that Andrew Little is a communist. Nobody believes in that silly theory anymore and … oh wait:

    The only useful people today are those engaged in producing the wealth. It is they alone who must eliminate the parasites and usher in a new social order.

    First Published: by the Proletarian Party, 1935

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Lloyd (125 comments) says:

    When I was a secondary teacher, I watched in bewilderment as the PPTA took my fees and donated them to the Labour Party. Then when a colleague was shafted by an unfair acting-principal, they were quite hard to contact and reluctant to get involved. Someone was a parasite, all right…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. WineOh (630 comments) says:

    What is the original source of the comment DPF so we can rebut with trademark wit & illumination?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. vto (1,131 comments) says:

    It is solely the unions who helped us out of these dark ages. You lot are bloody fools.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    i presume you are highlighting the last statement..

    ..and what is incorrect about that..?

    basic comprehension tells you he is talking about ‘some’ employers..

    ..not all..

    ..just those mega-sized/greedy ones who pay minimum wage..and rely on the corporate-welfare of w.f.f. to prop up/help exploit their business model..

    ..what’s to argue about there..?

    phillip ure@whoar.co.nz

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. somewhatthoughtful (465 comments) says:

    Excuse me? You even included the source quote on this one which just amplifies how disingenuous you’re being. He clearly isn’t talking about all employers. Typical.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Lee01 (2,171 comments) says:

    “just those mega-sized/greedy ones who pay minimum wage..and rely on the corporate-welfare of w.f.f. to prop up/help exploit their business model”

    Over the years I have had many jobs, and by far and away the best employers were those “mega-sized” multinationals the left hates so much.

    On the other hand the only time I have been physically threatened in the workplace it was by a unionist because I refused to go on strike for no good reason.

    And morally speaking, unions are criminal organisations.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. Pete George (23,567 comments) says:

    What is the original source of the comment

    It seems to have disappeared from Little’s Facebook, but this picture is still there: Little Mana

    Captions welcome.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. dime (9,972 comments) says:

    “It is solely the unions who helped us out of these dark ages. You lot are bloody fools.”

    Yea unions were helpful back in the day. that doesnt get them a pass for all time though.

    Arent the left supposed to be “progressive”? if so, why are they so in love with organisations from the past?

    Unions are outdated and sad.

    I did laugh on the weekend though. Driving to Hamilton on friday there were a ton of “workers” who had been locked out at affco. all protesting.. on saturday their werent so many. on sunday i spotted 2 lol

    i guess they needed the weekend off after a long week of shouting and showing the world what sad little people we are. they should have some pride and just get another job.. if they can find someone to pay them what they think they are worth

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Alan Wilkinson (1,878 comments) says:

    Actually the dark ages were feudal. Capitalism rescued us from them.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. vto (1,131 comments) says:

    Yes, no you’re right everybody, no need for unions anymore. All bow down to the great new wave of humanity ….. LOL.

    Bloody fools. I’m sure you will know of the saying that those who do not know their history are destined to repeat it. Especially you dime you useless turd.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Alan Wilkinson (1,878 comments) says:

    Actually the history is that when the Left run out of assertions they resort to playing the man. Which never takes long.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Ryan Sproull (7,153 comments) says:

    DPF, your post title seems to be missing the following words: “who exploit their extraordinary powers to pay their staff the least and otherwise treat them appallingly.”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Keeping Stock (10,342 comments) says:

    vto demonstrates the caring, sensitive side of the Left…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. vto (1,131 comments) says:

    Exactly Ryan Spoull – Farrar you are deceiving. You are creating a false impression by selective use of the words. This sort of behaviour is banned in trade, because it is deceptive lying scumbag behaviour.

    Keepingstock – it seems to be the MO around here. Just following suit.

    Farrar you have all the characteristics of a liar and a goon. You will be pulling on a brown short soon. Wanker.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. Pete George (23,567 comments) says:

    In case anyone couldn’t pick it, vto is a Standard regular.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. Keeping Stock (10,342 comments) says:

    Godwin’s law invoked by vto at 2.21pm

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. vto (1,131 comments) says:

    So anything to say to those points?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. Marybelle (20 comments) says:

    Who is Andrew Little’s employer? What a stupid backward thing to say.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Alan Wilkinson (1,878 comments) says:

    vto, you haven’t made any points, just tried to insult people which merely amuses us.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. Richard Hurst (859 comments) says:

    This just shows that Labour better hope and pray that Little never becomes party leader- he is just to easy to provoke and has the self-control of a child. Reminds me of Trev.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. holysheet (391 comments) says:

    what has happened to matt and the missing paye monies? anybody have an update?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. double d (225 comments) says:

    Gee Ryan …. that would be a short punchy title for the post.

    what a silly post.

    DPF – note to self – please title your posts with more balance and if this runs to 16 word titles this is the price we pay for being fair ….

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. vto (1,131 comments) says:

    ffs, alan wilkinson, talk about a brick wall. I made a point and posted a clip about the treatment of unions in the past. I made a point about Farrar’s lying deceiving ways. I made a point about how it is important to understand and remember our history lest we repeat it.

    And I sprinkled it with kiwiblog flavours.

    Have you got a point to make?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. hmmokrightitis (1,590 comments) says:

    Pete said:

    “In case anyone couldn’t pick it, vto is a Standard regular.”

    No, really? From the abuse you would never have picked it. I was thinking social worker, or flower arranger. Who would have thought he was of the demented small dick brigade.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. krazykiwi (9,186 comments) says:

    It is solely the unions who helped us out of these dark ages.

    Anyone who believes that is still there.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. Richard Hurst (859 comments) says:

    bloody fools, scumbag,wanker,useless turd,goon etc – vto I think any “points” you were trying to make got lost in the personal abuse. Reminds me of Trev.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. graham (2,335 comments) says:

    I have a point to make, vto.

    What about those employees who would like to exercise their democratic right and choose not to belong to a union? What is it unions call them again? Oh, that’s right – scabs. Blacklegs.

    I see your YouTube video and raise you the song “Blackleg Miner”.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackleg_Miner

    It’s in the evening after dark,
    When the blackleg miner creeps to work,
    With his moleskin pants and dirty shirt,
    There goes the blackleg miner!

    Well he takes his tools and doon he goes
    To hew the coal that lies below,
    There’s not a woman in this town-row
    Will look at the blackleg miner.

    Oh, Seghill is a terrible place.
    They rub wet clay in the blackleg’s face,
    And around the heaps they run a trace,
    To catch the blackleg miner!

    So, dinna gan near the Delaval mine.
    Across the way they stretch a line,
    To catch the throat and break the spine
    Of the dirty blackleg miner.

    They grab his duds and his pick as well,
    And they hoy them down the pit of hell.
    Doon ye go, and fare ye well,
    You dirty blackleg miner!

    So join the union while you may.
    Don’t wait till your dying day,
    For that may not be far away,
    You dirty blackleg miner!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. graham (2,335 comments) says:

    http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2007/04/07/18390823.php

    On the 2nd day of an indefinite teachers’ strike, Hayward teachers remind us all how scabstitutes should be treated. The scabs should consider themselves let off easy and take it as a lesson to never cross a picket line again.

    HAYWARD — Tensions on the picket line boiled over into violence in Hayward Friday morning, with a striking teacher assaulting a substitute at an elementary school, according to the Hayward schools chief.

    About 10 picketing teachers surrounded a substitute’s car as he drove into the parking lot of Palma Ceia Elementary School this morning. The teacher was verbally abused and shoved hard by a picketing teacher, Hayward Unified School District Superintendent Dale Vigil said.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. dime (9,972 comments) says:

    “Yes, no you’re right everybody, no need for unions anymore. All bow down to the great new wave of humanity ….. LOL.

    Bloody fools. I’m sure you will know of the saying that those who do not know their history are destined to repeat it. Especially you dime you useless turd.”

    lmao which union do you currently “work” for VTO?

    unions are irrelevant. we have laws that protect workers rights now.

    all you fuckers do is convince idiots to go on strike. i think they sign read “day 67″ since the lock out began of the meat workers. if the meat workers end up getting the pay increase they want, how many years will it take to recoup the 67 lost days pay??

    the union guy isnt going without though?? thought not.

    you people are the lowest of the low. you pray on morons to advance your shitty political ideology.

    and im a turd? lol how ever will i go on knowing VTO thinks im a useless turd.. it could be worse, i could be a little victim like vto i guess. i wonder what sent him so far left – physical or sexual abuse? or maybe hes just ugly as fuck

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    David Farrar says it’s ok for employers to pay workers crap wages and to treat them appallingly. I always thought that was probably the case.

    [DPF: Nope. Nice try. Do you agree that a union taking PAYE off its employees and not paying them to the IRD is a parasite?]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    If someone pays workers crap wages and treats them appallingly, then ‘parasite’ is not really the term I’d chose. Too polite.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. Alan Wilkinson (1,878 comments) says:

    vto, I guess there was a simple point you could have made but got lost in dirt you were throwing, that Little confined his abuse to employers who don’t pay their staff more than they have to. Does his union?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. hmmokrightitis (1,590 comments) says:

    On a slightly more serious note, Im almost certain that silly little meant those employers who arent the best of employers, and there are some around. As noted, and Im preaching to the choir, large employers tend to be really good, primarily because they know the cost of not being so – so yet again sad little drug adled criminal is wrong.

    But, and this is the point for me, little needs to understand that what he says is scrutinised, and dumb shit like this lets people know what a right numpty he really is. Hence why he pulled it I suspect. Doesnt give one huge confidence in his abilities to communicate, particularly given his former trade. But then, lawyer, union leader, one shouldnt get ones hopes up too high for smarts really.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. vto (1,131 comments) says:

    Alan Wilkinson, did it not occur to you that the very headline was the first piece of dirt thrown by Farrar? What do you expect, that it just gets accepted like the hapless chap killed by the company goons in the “vigilante man” clip?

    People who forget or purposely ignore the history of the working class are wankers, goons, useless turds and bloody fools. It is not abuse, it is reality, learn it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    [DPF: Nope. Nice try]

    Oh so you agree with Little that employers are parasites who pay crap wages and treat their employees appallingly. You might like to highlight such agreement in future. I presume you are allowed to agree with Little.

    [Do you agree that a union taking PAYE off its employees and not paying them to the IRD is a parasite?]

    I would say that any union doing as you allege is breaking the law, and if you have any evidence of such law-breaking you should go to the police. I assume you have done exactly that.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. adze (2,126 comments) says:

    As always, there’s a classic Simpsons quote to suit every occasion: :)

    [Two goons seize a waifish worker and turn out his pockets]
    Burns’ Grandfather: “Aha – atoms! One, two, three, four… SIX of them! Take him away! ”
    Waif: “You can’t treat the working man this way! One of these days we’ll form a union, and get the fair and equitable treatment we deserve! Then we’ll go too far, and become corrupt and shiftless, and the Japanese will eat us alive! ”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. Nookin (3,344 comments) says:

    Vto

    You and the the extremists at the other end of the political spectrum epitomise why NZ’s industrial culture is fucked.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. Nookin (3,344 comments) says:

    “Oh so you agree with Little that employers are parasites who pay crap wages and treat their employees appallingly. You might like to highlight such agreement in future. I presume you are allowed to agree with Little.”

    Little didn’t say that Ross. He said “employers who exploit ….”. Not all employers do that. Those who do deserve condemnation. So do those who generalise, distort and abuse.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. vto (1,131 comments) says:

    Oh really Nookin? So the state of workplace relations around the time of the clip were normal and now that unions have more power the state of the workplace is more extreme?

    that is simply brainless

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. Nookin (3,344 comments) says:

    I am talking about your attitude vto, not the clip, not unions nor employers in general but people like you who do not seem capable of carrying on any sort of rational conversation without vomitting bigotry and abuse. Your response to my clip proves that. If you took the time to think about it you would have noted that I was having a shot at extremes at each end.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. Alan Wilkinson (1,878 comments) says:

    vto, yes, it occurred to me as soon as I read this blog that Farrar had probably misread what Little meant to say because it is ambiguous depending where you pause in the sentence.

    I expect it was a genuine misinterpretation which could simply have been corrected in a rational manner. It wasn’t.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. Nookin (3,344 comments) says:

    Alan
    That is just as I see it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. RKBee (1,344 comments) says:

    The original source of Andrew Little’s comment from Whale Oil.

    https://www.facebook.com/rusty.kane1/posts/195660887222344

    Rusty’s FB reply to EPMU staff getting a 45k rise.

    Rusty Kane .. Bad as each other… as I said once before .. everybody that derives their income from the efforts of the honest working man doing a fair days work for a fair days pay .. is a parasite.

    Andrew Little .. No Rusty, staff at ETEF didn’t gt a $45k pay rise. This is more of Slater’s dodgy reporting motivated by his intense hatred of unions. Your own comments betray a stunning anti-unionism. Maybe you think union staff who negotiate employment agreements, enforce those agreements and other employment rights and campaign for better conditions and laws for all workers should do it for nothing. the only parasites are employers who exploit their extraordinary powers to pay their staff the least and otherwise treat them appallingly.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. simonway (387 comments) says:

    Andrew Little says, “The only parasites are employers who exploit their extraordinary powers to pay their staff the least and otherwise treat them appallingly.”

    David Farrar says, “Andrew Little says, ‘The only parasites are employers.'”

    What a disgusting and misleading smear. I’m tempted to go through this blog’s archives to find material that I can similarly doctor and attribute to you.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. Nookin (3,344 comments) says:

    Simonway

    While you are considering diving into the archives, why do not you also consider, for the moment, that Mr Little could have said, more appropriately and in a less misleading manner:
    “The only parasites are those employers who….” which is, I am sure, what he intended to say. If he intended to generalise about all employers (which is the strictly correct interpretation of his comment) then he has shown a form of bigotry which we do not need in Parliament.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. Alan Wilkinson (1,878 comments) says:

    simonway, it is simply ambiguous whether the parasites are “employers” or “employers who exploit their extraordinary powers to pay their staff the least and otherwise treat them appallingly”.

    In the first case it means that all employers “exploit their extraordinary powers to pay their staff the least and otherwise treat them appallingly”.

    Andrew meant it one way and David read it the other way.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. vto (1,131 comments) says:

    Alan Wilkinson “vto, yes, it occurred to me as soon as I read this blog that Farrar had probably misread what Little meant to say because it is ambiguous depending where you pause in the sentence.

    I expect it was a genuine misinterpretation which could simply have been corrected in a rational manner. It wasn’t.”

    Well, time is marching on and Farrar has been on this thread since. It is noted that his “genuine misinterpretation” has not been corrected in anyway whatsoever. This means that he has not “probably misread what Little meant to say”, but that he has deliberately portrayed the situation in a deceptive manner for political gain.

    You should be objectively assessing this.

    I stand by my accusation that Farrar is being a lying deceptive goon and wanker. Prove it wrong.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. Pete George (23,567 comments) says:

    We don’t actually know what way Little meant it, and which way DPF meant it. The only way of finding out is asking them, and then their explanation may have changed from when they wrote.

    If you want to analyses thoroughly it’s worth looking more of what DPF said:

    Labour MP Andrew Little reveals his views on employers. Think if a National MP referred to some unions as parasites.

    This is also potentially ambiguous. “employers” could mean “some employers” or “all employers”.

    And it may be worth noting that DPF refered to “if a National MP referred to some unions”, not all unions. Is it likely he was thinking “all employers” and just “some unions”?

    Does it matter?

    The best thing to happen would be for a journalist to ask Andrew Little what his views on employers was – or for Little to offer his thoughts.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. Nookin (3,344 comments) says:

    Actually, as I have pointed out above, David correctly interpreted the statement and Andrew ineptly made a statement that we think he intended to make or provocatively made a statement that he should never have made.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    “..The best thing to happen would be for a journalist to ask Andrew Little what his views on employers was – or for Little to offer his thoughts…”

    are you that thick you can’t understand the quote..?

    ..what don’t you ‘get’..?

    phillip ure@whoar.co.nz

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    and you ..nookin..once again are displaying yr basic comprehension ‘issues’..

    ..you must be braindead if you can’t see/understand he was talking about ‘some’..not ‘all’..

    ..and just repeating yr lies/dissembling dosen’t make them any less that..

    phillip ure@whoar.co.nz

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. Pete George (23,567 comments) says:

    pu – I’m not that thick that I can’t see there’s confusion and dispute over this quote – and in any case it’s fair to give Little the chance to clarify and expand on his thoughts on employers.

    I don’t think the world will just accept your interpretation (whatever that may be) without question.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. MT_Tinman (3,187 comments) says:

    From memory (I can’t be bothered checking) Mr Little’s only non-taxpayer funded employer has been a union so I can see how he could come to think that way.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. Nookin (3,344 comments) says:

    Philu

    If you happen to wave the smoke away from your eyes you will see that I initially took Little to refer to some but not all employers. Commenters are getting stuck into DPF for distorting the comment. On reflection, he isn’t. Little ineptly expressed himself (probably). I also pointed out how he could quite easily have expressed himself more accurately. GFY.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. dime (9,972 comments) says:

    its fun watching vto have a cry.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. Pete George (23,567 comments) says:

    Ok, I asked Andrew to clarify and this is what he said:

    No, I wasn’t referring to all employers. It was a reference to those employers who do so exploit. There are plenty who don’t but there are those who do. Unlike the proprietors of Kiwiblog and Whaleoil I have worked with literally hundreds of employers and their workforces, and I’ve seen great employers (a couple of weeks ago, one of those employers reminded me of how I had spoken publicly of their qualities as an employer; I had described them as one of the best in NZ) and I’ve seen the truly appalling employers. The latter are disrespectful of workers and their rights, and of their representatives.

    David Farrar is up to his increasingly more common mischief. He has previously commented on my ability to forge good quality relationships with employers, so any conclusion he draws that I am hostile to employers takes an extraordinary leap on his part.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. KiwiGreg (3,255 comments) says:

    I would have thought in these slave-free times all these terribly exploited workers would just go and get another job.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    Thanks for that Pete. It clarifies things – DPF is fomenting his happy mischief again.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. slijmbal (1,236 comments) says:

    @PG – he did write it ambiguously in a manner that easily implies he meant employers as a group – and I struggle to believe that was accidental.

    Now if he said ‘.. THOSE employers ….’

    I think there is a reasonable likelihood he is being disingenuous.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. Nookin (3,344 comments) says:

    “It was a reference to those employers who do so exploit. ”

    So there you go then. If only he had said so in the first place.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. bereal (3,137 comments) says:

    Hey Nookin and graham,

    A quick question.

    Why do you try and converse with a bludging smartarse parasite ?

    Is it because you value his opinion ?

    Is it because you enjoy being ridiculed and mocked ?

    Is it because you like knocking your head into a brick wall ?

    Do you realise that this type gets his oxygen when he can pull your strings. (and he is pulling yours)

    If you cut off his oxygen he would die.

    Why ?

    Why do you let him control you ?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. jaba (2,142 comments) says:

    Little is not used to being questioned .. he is a union boss and they tend to be arseholes .. vto is having a bad hair day and Phillip is simply standing up for his union .. what union do you below to Phillip?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  64. Nookin (3,344 comments) says:

    I do so only occasionally, beryl. 99% percent of the time I don’t even read what he has to say because even if you try it is incomprehensible.

    You have to admit however that he has this admirable ability to prove daily –nay on an hourly basis — what a complete and utter waste of space he is.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  65. Nookin (3,344 comments) says:

    “… what union do you below to Phillip?”

    URE — Union of Redundant Endomorphs

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  66. simonway (387 comments) says:

    Little ineptly expressed himself (probably).

    Even this isn’t true. If I said, “The worst kind of scum are parents who violently abuse their children,” do you think anyone would interpret that as me saying that all parents, ever, are “the worst kind of scum”? Nobody would because it’s not ambiguous, and the grammatical components of the sentence are the same as in Little’s.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  67. Alan Wilkinson (1,878 comments) says:

    simonway, how about: “The worst kind of scum are socialists who make me want to vomit”?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  68. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    Oh come on simonway, since when did the truth get in the way of a rant by DPF? At least while he’s ranting about unions, he’s not whining about teachers or performance pay.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  69. Nookin (3,344 comments) says:

    Or do we interpret the statement, despite its shortcomings, knowing that not all parents are scum and therefore the make of the statement could only have been referring to “those parents who..”?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  70. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    “..Phillip is simply standing up for his union..”

    i am standing up for accuracy in reporting..

    ..and against dissembling..

    phillip ure@whoar.co.nz

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  71. big bruv (13,904 comments) says:

    vto

    Do you not see the irony in DPF letting you stay here and have your say?

    Unlike the real wankers over at your normal hangout (the EPMU and Labour party funded and staffed Standard)

    DPF has not banned you, DPF has not jumped in and deleted your post because you dared to disagree with him.

    It’s called freedom of speech, something you left wing fuckwits know very little about.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  72. burt (8,271 comments) says:

    The unions… a great concept of tax the lowest paid workers to help the highest paid workers advertise themselves.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  73. RKBee (1,344 comments) says:

    How does … the only parasites are employers who exploit their extraordinary powers to pay their staff the least and otherwise treat them appallingly..

    Turn into … No, I wasn’t referring to all employers. It was a reference to those employers who do so exploit. There are plenty who don’t but there are those who do. Unlike the proprietors of Kiwiblog and Whaleoil I have worked with literally hundreds of employers and their workforces, and I’ve seen great employers (a couple of weeks ago, one of those employers reminded me of how I had spoken publicly of their qualities as an employer; I had described them as one of the best in NZ) and I’ve seen the truly appalling employers. The latter are disrespectful of workers and their rights, and of their representatives.

    Without very carefull consideration day’s after the initial statement.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  74. slijmbal (1,236 comments) says:

    @simonway when you regularly refer to all parents as a group in your statements and you have a history of making negative statements about parents as a group then one would think you meant all parent and if the statement can be reasonably interpreted to be understood you actually believe you mean all parents as a group then your example falls over.

    It was ambiguous. Deliberately or unconsciously so I suggest.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  75. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    shit..!..i agree with obese-sibling@ 5.53 pm..

    (and now i need a long hot shower..)

    phillip ure@whoar.co.nz

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  76. vto (1,131 comments) says:

    is it big bruv?

    and god knows why you all think i vote to the left because that has been far far far from the average. i don’t like many things currently going on with the government and this (union attacks via farrar) is one of them. label me left if you want i dont care. i only know what i will stand up for what will make our communities stronger. i have no care for left or right, though currently the left is where things are at. you lot should notice the receding tide before your are completely stranded.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  77. dime (9,972 comments) says:

    i love it when lefties are too embarrassed to admit they are left. in dipshits case, far left.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  78. Right of way is Way of Right (1,122 comments) says:

    The only parasites are employers? Really?

    May I introduce you to Craig Thompson then?

    http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/thomsons-credit-card-lies-confirmed-20120507-1y964.html

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  79. ObligatoryMarxist (37 comments) says:

    Hi, far left here :).
    I’m sleepy, so I’ll keep it simple
    (And these are just my opinions, they’re put in this overly statement way for style.)

    No, not -all- employers are evil goblins. Anyone who says that is being silly.
    Yes, an employer who takes advantage of workers and pays them far less than they deserve is a dick. Just as a Union official who takes taxes from employees and spends them on a political campaign is corrupt and a criminal. And a dick. And a Tautology is a Tautology.
    Point is, for the Union official, he can A) Be voted out or B) Arrested for corruption. The employer can’t get voted out, or arrested. All you can do against such an employer is take industrial action. And you’re right to strike. Just as the Union official is right to be voted out.
    Lots of employers are nice. Doesn’t stop the fact that they, as a class, get far, far much more money than workers, without actually contributing more to the final product than the workers. (Labour theory of Value, know you disagree, not going to argue about it)
    Point is, if you are on the left, Employers, as a class, are parasites. Or if you prefer, Surplus Value Extractors. Not the only Parasites, but the only parasites we actually celebrate as a culture.

    But Andrew Little probably is just trying to be insulting, rather than actually make a critique of the idolization of employers. Ho Hum

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  80. questions (207 comments) says:

    David, I think your line about Unite is just about due for a cam belt change (every 100,00kms..), let me know if you need any advice on finding a good workshop.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  81. Liberal Minded Kiwi (1,571 comments) says:

    The history of the unions is a very interesting subject to bring up. All were aligned to one or more extremist non democratic Communist movement, either with the Russians, who sent dissidents and “enemies” to work camps (and they were the lucky ones) or the Chinese who didn’t blink an eye when killing 100 million of their own citizens.
    They were workers movements that were designed from top to bottom to be like their comrades in Europe and Asia -where the top were well looked after while the workers, most often in low paid, manuel labour jobs, were easily convinced that partaking in their marches and industrial action was a good idea. It was easier back then to exploit those of limited education.

    There was hardly a dry eye in the union movement when the Iron Curtain fell and communist movements fell around the world. People forget that the Soviets cash crisis wasn’t helped by their continual subsidies to unions and communist parties around the world. Why else did prominent radicals and unionists in NZ go on “fact finding” trips to Moscow and other Soviet satelites.

    Before you believe in the so called romantic era of the unions, think about the hate and bloodshed they have left on our nation. They are the militants that turned brother against brother and still even today violently attack their “enemies” of which we saw with the POAL incidentsn and the smears of Scab at anybody who chooses to go about their day to day work. Todays unions prey on the uneducated, how else did Unite do so well in the fast food industry and school kids? Just as the communists swept into Europe off the backs of WW2 amongst desperation and fear, the unions exploit others weaknesses for their own advantage. McCarten knows this, and isn’t worried he hasn’t paid his taxes. Andrew Little doesn’t care as he has his unionist accolytes backing him even more for such militant posturing.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  82. graham (2,335 comments) says:

    Great. Affco protestors go to Mr and Mrs Talley’s private home and try to harass his family.

    Classy.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/video/news/video.cfm?c_id=1501138&gal_cid=1501138&gallery_id=125443

    Watch the video, then tell me there’s no irony whatsoever in this little quote from Helen Kelly:

    ‘Trade Union Council president Helen Kelly … said the workers remained opposed to the company’s “aggressive” stance.’

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/nelson-mail/news/6866350/Workers-to-protest-outside-Talley-family-homes

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  83. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    Liberal (ha!) Minded Kiwi chimed in with some made-up history in the middle of the night. He should do some actual reading.
    The labour movement over the past 150 years has ked to many things. At the extreme socialist end, it spawned the murderous dictatorships in Russia, China and elsewhere. In much of the world, however, it has led to huge advances in human rights and general welfare. To ignore that is to overlook one of the main contributors to our present state.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  84. vto (1,131 comments) says:

    You’re right again graham, it’s not personal at all is it. It is just business, no human element, no effect on the workers families. The workers families are not being used as cannon fodder in the arsenal of Talleys.

    I say good on them. Talleys have been using personal discomfort and distress of the workers families through the lockout to advance their own cause, and now the workers families are using the exact same tactic. It is called karma, and there is much more headed Talleys way methinks.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  85. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    Yes, locking out workers has no effect on families, so there can be no reason to target the Talley family, can there?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  86. krazykiwi (9,186 comments) says:

    So to be clear vto, you support orchestrated harassment of private individuals in the own homes. You are a Neanderthal, and the sooner you and your extremist unionist mates go the way of the dinosaur the better.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  87. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    So kk, to be clear, when Peter Talley finishes a hard day at the office calling his locked-out workers drug addicts, he really should be left in peace and quiet?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  88. krazykiwi (9,186 comments) says:

    mm – Yes. That’s the right thing to do. Based on what you’ve just described, you’d feel justified in punching someone who dinged your car in the supermarket carpark. Two wrongs, and all that. Whatever, I’ll mark you down as also supporting orchestrated harassment of individuals in their own homes. You unionists really are scum.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  89. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    Um no, I didn’t say I condoned violence, but if you want to make things up you can ‘mark me down’ (whatever that threat is supposed to mean) however you like.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  90. vto (1,131 comments) says:

    kk, why don’t you simply read what I wrote rather than make something up and attribute it to me. Fool.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  91. krazykiwi (9,186 comments) says:

    vto –

    I say good on them…. It is called karma, and there is much more headed Talleys way methinks.

    Either that’s supporting harassment, or it’s doublespeak. Looking for a fool? Find a mirror.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  92. vto (1,131 comments) says:

    Oh, so it is ok for one party to harass and not the other.

    Would you rather that unions be banned altogether?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  93. graham (2,335 comments) says:

    vto:

    As I understand it, the lockout started following the latest disagreement in an 18 month dispute over a collective contract.

    Sorry, but if the workers choose not to accept the contracts or conditions being offered to them by the company, then it is their own fault when their actions result in Talleys having to take the next logical step. The workers have brought this on themselves and their families. They should be apologising to their families.

    They had choices: accept the offer that the employer who pays you is making, negotiate a better one if you can, and when it becomes clear that the employer is not willing to meet the employee’s demands, either STFU and do your job and be grateful that you have a job, or go and find a better job. If the employee can find a better job with better conditions, then they should and Talley’s will quickly find out they made a mistake.

    But hey – as we won’t agree on that side things, how about this? If you think it is perfectly acceptable for the workers to take it to Talley’s wife and kids, then you’ll be fine when the company reps go to the employee’s houses, sit their wives and kids down and explain to them exactly why Daddy hates them. Sound good to you?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  94. graham (2,335 comments) says:

    And no, I don’t want unions banned. I used to belong to one, but left when I realised that the union was making unrealistic demands on the company I was working for.

    But just as I don’t support unions being banned, I would expect the same respect from unions. That is, they don’t expect individual rights to be banned. An individual should have the right to join a union, and an individual should also have the right not to join the union, and be treated with respect if he makes that choice – not called “scab”, hissed and spat at, and bullied.

    I loathe that attitude of the unions. They expect everybody to sign up (“it’s your right!”) and ostracise those who exercise their right not to join the union. It is an abhorrent double-standard, and I loathe it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  95. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    That’s be just fine graham. You may think that strangers coming to your house and telling your kids that ‘Daddy hates them’ would work (well, I can see why it might work on your kids), but do you really think that is the same as a protest outside the Talley mansion?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  96. vto (1,131 comments) says:

    graham, the company reps have already been to the family’s homes and caused them considerable distress (certainly far more distress than the poor old Talley goons), that is the point you keep ignoring or glossing over.

    As for the wider issue of union’s place in society, the best thing all of us can do is read a balanced history of the workers and the capitalists. I have done so and have made my stand based on what is best the community as a whole. It is not a simple situation capable of resolution in a few short one-liners like “take it or leave it” – that is not even close to an understanding.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  97. graham (2,335 comments) says:

    mikenmild: The protest where they compared the company to the Taliban, outside the house?

    vto: “The company reps have already been to the family’s homes and caused them considerable distress (certainly far more distress than the poor old Talley goons”. Really? I was unaware of that. Do you have a link to a report about this?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  98. vto (1,131 comments) says:

    Empty pay packets and no money to buy the family groceries. Do you think that is somehow not harassment of the families in their own homes?

    But keep apologising and glossing and searching hard for excuses wont you.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  99. graham (2,335 comments) says:

    vto: Thanks for explaining that. So what you mean is, you’re talking crap.

    I think the answer is quite simple – if the workers don’t want to work for Talley’s because it’s so bad, then … don’t. Fixed.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  100. big bruv (13,904 comments) says:

    Did I miss the bit about it being compulsory to work for Talley’s?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  101. graham (2,335 comments) says:

    big bruv, apparently we both did!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  102. vto (1,131 comments) says:

    No what I mean is that emptying their pay packets so there is no money to buy the family groceries is personal harassment.

    And as for simplicity, well simple is as simple does. Good luck with that approach to mankind and all its machinations.

    And big bruv, again, simplistic one-liners are just that. You clearly think unions should be banned. Go read some history.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  103. vto (1,131 comments) says:

    Hey you fullas, seeing as workplace relation are a simple matter of freedom of choice, lets just remove all regulation of the workplace and employment environment. There you go, that will keep your simple minds at ease.

    Similarly, given that everything in the world should be a simple matter fo choice, how about we deregulate the finance sector…. oh, wait ….

    And also the mine safety sector …. oh wait ….

    What is the need for regulation at all. If people don’t like it then well they can just fuck off.

    God you guys are dumb

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  104. big bruv (13,904 comments) says:

    vto

    “You clearly think unions should be banned”

    Not at all, it is advantageous to have an easy way of easily identifying the terminally stupid. We used to have secure mental facilities a few years back but sadly these were done away with.

    Unions now fill that gap, the authorities (and the Police) can simply check union membership to locate the criminals and the mentally ill, I look upon unions as a form of sheltered environment and in that way they do an enormous service to the community. In some ways they are like the leper colonies from times past. You know where they are and you go out of your way to avoid them.

    Apart from that, unions serve no useful purpose at all.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  105. Luc Hansen (4,573 comments) says:

    I see DPF has taken the accusation of presenting misleading information in his headline on the chin, rolled with it, taken some smelling salts and dished up even more.

    I hear punch drunk boxers do something similar.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  106. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    Yes Luc, but it seems he’s been doing it even more frequently lately.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  107. graham (2,335 comments) says:

    big bruv: I was drinking coffee when I read your 10:49, you owe me a new screen and keyboard.

    vto: Still talking crap.

    As I said earlier, I don’t want unions banned. I used to belong to one, but left when I realised that the union was making unrealistic demands on the company I was working for.

    But just as I don’t support unions being banned, I would expect the same respect from unions. That is, they don’t expect individual rights to be banned. An individual should have the right to join a union, and an individual should also have the right not to join the union, and be treated with respect if he makes that choice – not called “scab”, hissed and spat at, and bullied.

    Unions. They expect everybody to sign up (“it’s your right! Nay, your DUTY!”) and ostracise those who dare to exercise their right not to join the union. It is an abhorrent double-standard, and I loathe it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  108. vto (1,131 comments) says:

    Ok graham, so your view on where the regulation gets set is firm and you clearly don’t think the employment environment should be unregulated. Just had to clear that up. Because the crap you were spouting previoulsy suggested that it is a simple matter of free choice.

    Do you know why union membership was made and kept compulsory by the NZ government in the past? The issues such compulsion was addressing? Because your crap does not acknowledge this at all and so your view is really simplistic and shallow, just as I said above.

    and big bruv you are just a bore.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  109. graham (2,335 comments) says:

    vto: “… your crap …”

    So, the fact that I belonged to a union for a number of years, participated in some strike action, but made a conscious decision to leave when I matured and decided that (a) the union was making unrealistic demands on the company I was working for (b) did not represent my personal values, and (c) was not benefitting me, counts for nothing?

    Thanks for clearing that up.

    I always find it funny when people loudly decry and condemn the ‘unrealistic demands’ that employers make of their employees. Because I think back to the unrealistic demands that the union I belonged to made of the company, and got away with. If an employer expected an employee to work for 8 hours but only pay them for 30 minutes, that would be wrong, wouldn’t it? Yet the union demanded that in certain situations the company should pay me for a full 8 hours, even when I only worked for half an hour. Yes I enojoyed the extra money, but gradually realised that I could not live with screwing my employer in this way.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  110. vto (1,131 comments) says:

    graham, firstly why do get upset at me referring to your views as crap when you first referred to my views as crap?

    And secondly, it is clear that your view on workplace relations is singularly framed within your own particular set of personal circumstances. All you have referred to is your time at one workplace and what went on there. I suggest you get out more, or do some reading.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  111. big bruv (13,904 comments) says:

    “Do you know why union membership was made and kept compulsory by the NZ government in the past? ”

    Oh…do tell.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  112. graham (2,335 comments) says:

    Oh…please don’t. My head hurts when I have to read such nonsense, portraying unions as some kind of saints.

    I still stand by my earlier sentiments. I don’t want unions banned. If someone wants to belong to a union, good for them, it’s a (relatively) free country. And I acknowledge that in some situations, unions have their place.

    All I want it the acknowledgement that I have the right not to join a union. And to be accorded the basic respect of being allowed to make that decision without being treated as a leper by the unions and those who support them.

    As long as unions continue to refer to those people who refuse to be bullied into joining a union as ‘scabs’, I will continue to loathe them and all who support that insidious practice. And as long as they consider it acceptable to use bullying tactics – including taking their battle to someone’s private residence, which, despite vto’s melodramatic ramblings, the company in this case has not done – I will continue to sneer at unions.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  113. markra (200 comments) says:

    This is a BS blog.

    Read what he said:

    “… the only parasites are employers WHO EXPLOIT THEIR….”

    He did not say all, he qualified with those who exploit their extraordinary….”

    If anyone can’t understand that, they need to go back and do intermediate english again.

    This is basic grammar.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  114. markra (200 comments) says:

    “only parasites are employers WHO EXPLOIT THEIR…”

    Honor roll for those to repeat their elementary English again.

    David Farrar
    DPF
    Tom Hunter
    Richard Hurst
    Pete George
    RKBee

    If you can’t understand how “who” is used in this sentence, you need to repeat your elementary English, unless it is your second language.

    see dictionary link for the usage
    http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/who?s=t

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote