On the "7.30 Report" last night. Neither scored a knock-out, but Gillard landed more punches, in my opinion.
It's a long argument, but Gillard's theme is best summed up by the following ...
Most AWAs are not individually negotiated on the basis of how can ... [management] structure it for you. They are given to workers. You want the job, sign the AWA. You want the promotion, sign the AWA. You want to keep your job, sign the AWA.
countered by Hockey ...
So I think if people have the capacity to negotiate to buy a house, to buy a car, if people have the individual capacity to raise children, why don't they have the individual capacity to be able to negotiate employment terms and conditions ...
Everyone knows that "Work Choices" is designed to cut wages and conditions of the weakest section of the community, ie, those that don't have unique experience or skills. Hockey's assertion that these people negotiate their employment conditions on the same footing as buying a car is absurd.
But remember according to the market fundies, we're all rational individuals that participate in the market place, power asymmetries aren't an issue because we're theoretically all the same.