Comments on: Telstra bosses are bastards

By: raydixon

raydixon — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 08:48:32 +0000

My point precisely, Dave.

By: Dave from Albury

Dave from Albury — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 08:25:53 +0000

Let’s not forget that Sophie has publicly backed the retrograde IR stances put forth by Bruck Textiles in Wangaratta in the past. I don’t think that it’s too much of a stretch to think that Sophie supports the comments of these people, given that they have been chosen as a PR prop for her.

By: raydixon

raydixon — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 07:46:06 +0000

Well you’re right, Greg, the words endorsing AWAs, which Sophie clearly endorses too, were attributed to Sorrensen. Not a lot of difference.

By: Greg Naylor

Greg Naylor — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 06:32:53 +0000

Ray, Sophie DID NOT effectively endorse them by referring to AWAs as being a better system in the online Chronicle article. I have not seen the print version so cannot comment further.

By: raydixon

raydixon — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 04:23:36 +0000

And having another read of that BM piece it’s more like a ‘puff piece’. Who is Sarah Dean? She’s not much of a journalist.

By: raydixon

raydixon — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 04:21:49 +0000

Well, the BM just left out the owner’s self-serving and atrocious remarks by the look of it, Greg. Strange to see the Wang Chron actually give a more accurate report for once! Btw, Sophie DID effectively endorse them by referring to AWAs as being a better system.

By: Greg Naylor

Greg Naylor — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 03:40:26 +0000

Ray, I deliberately did not mention Sophie at the cafe as the remarks were attributed to the owners. I too was disturbed by that article and questioned Sophie's support of those remarks. After reading the Border Mail version of the story, I refrained from making such a link.

By: jr

jr — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 01:54:39 +0000

Mark and Belinda Sorrensen, “It’s like us having to pay extra to ANYONE so we can have some quiet time @ our condo on the Gold Coast”.

By: raydixon

raydixon — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 01:30:31 +0000

You know, I copied that Wang Chron article last night (and the ’stunning’ photo of Sophie serving a table!) and I was going to do a post on it.

That statement “It’s like having to pay a diver extra to go under water” was the one that really got me. Well, that and the one about the poor buggers having to “work harder”.

The obvious answer to it is, “Well yes, you DO have to pay a diver ‘extra’ (meaning more than average wages) to put his life in danger and dive under water.”

It’s almost worthy of a ‘Wah like’ rant where he lists equally absurd comparison statements such as:

“It’s like having to pay a pilot extra to fly a plane”

“It’s like having to pay a brain surgeon extra to remove your tumor”

“It’s like having to pay a plumber extra to put his hands down your sewer”

And so on. Anyone got some more “Sorrenson comparisons”?

By: jr

jr — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 01:27:57 +0000

Not supporting either side here, but as a shop stewart in the late eighties I was requested by union members to campaign for penalty rates to off-set having to work with a chemical concoction called “Blue 7″ used to eradicate dry rot in wooden poles below ground level.

The general members’ opinion was that this compound (loaded with ammonia) was dangerous and that extra pay would make it bearable. So when I suggested that a far more important priority should be personal safety and consequently, any additional (Blue 7) wage gains should be passed onto the chemical company to improve the offending compound’s safety, was I howled down!

Oh, no, can’t have that! It’ll be OK to use if we get the extra money. Stupid bastards.