Business brought Mine Host to the big smoke late in the afternoon on Anzac Day. This brought one of life's new experiences; how Anzac Day is finished off in the metropolitan areas of this great nation.
It seems that returned servicemen (or the tail end of them) get awfully merry through over-imbibing, then put the wobbly boot on and lurch off home.
Mine Host has never seen this before. Anzac Day has always been just another day, though a public holiday, and a mandatory half-day closed for pubs. Returned servicemen are always out of the picture by 3pm.
Different in the big smoke.
Mine Host's most memorable observation: (Please, this is not intended in a negative sense)
The current crop of returned servicemen are sporting one helluva lot more medals from the left side of their chest than the blokes who served the entire First World War on the front line.
God, I hope we don't end up like the USA, a country where a serviceman who hasn't even been in battle will have fruit salad all over the left breast of his uniform.
Most of Mine Host's uncles served the full 6 years of World War Two, they have/had between three and five campaign/service medals each. That is Three, perhaps Five, ribbons. In one simple row.
Wednesday, May 01, 2013
Friday, April 05, 2013
Substandard
At 4.18 pm Australian Eastern Standard Time, on Thursday 4-4-2013 Mine Host telephones to an office in NSW.
The call is answered by a recorded message: "Thank you for phoning X-corp, our office hours are 9am to 5pm, Australian Eastern Standard Time, please call back during these hours."
Mine Host checks the time, then tries again. Same result, time after time.
The following morning, the number is phoned again. Mine Host is put through to a director of the company (a significant sized operation, they employ more than 200 people, mostly in office work).
Mine Host mentions the surreal event of phoning between 9-5 eastern standard time, and being continuously met with a recording stating the the office closed at 5pm.
Specifically it is pointed out to the director of X-corp that Mine Host was phoning at 4.18pm Queensland time, (the state of Queensland uses Australian Eastern Standard Time - New South Wales vacillates between standard time and daylight saving time).
The X-corp director acts as if Mine Host has hydrophobia or something, patiently explaining that Queensland does not having daylight saving, whereas NSW does, and this is why 4.18pm in Qld is 5.18pm in NSW, thus 4.18pm in Qld is ..... (etc.etc.etc..... y'all've got the picture by now)
Mine Host rather succinctly points out that he is well aware that NSW occassionally switches from Standard Time to "Brokeback Mountain Time", however the matter at hand is that X-corp is answering the phone with a recording that is somewhat embarrassing to X-corp.
.... Yep, these self-centred dickheads believe that whatever time NSW decides to set the clocks to, is Eastern Standard Time.
Such delusion is not an uncommon one in NSW.
The call is answered by a recorded message: "Thank you for phoning X-corp, our office hours are 9am to 5pm, Australian Eastern Standard Time, please call back during these hours."
Mine Host checks the time, then tries again. Same result, time after time.
The following morning, the number is phoned again. Mine Host is put through to a director of the company (a significant sized operation, they employ more than 200 people, mostly in office work).
Mine Host mentions the surreal event of phoning between 9-5 eastern standard time, and being continuously met with a recording stating the the office closed at 5pm.
Specifically it is pointed out to the director of X-corp that Mine Host was phoning at 4.18pm Queensland time, (the state of Queensland uses Australian Eastern Standard Time - New South Wales vacillates between standard time and daylight saving time).
The X-corp director acts as if Mine Host has hydrophobia or something, patiently explaining that Queensland does not having daylight saving, whereas NSW does, and this is why 4.18pm in Qld is 5.18pm in NSW, thus 4.18pm in Qld is ..... (etc.etc.etc..... y'all've got the picture by now)
Mine Host rather succinctly points out that he is well aware that NSW occassionally switches from Standard Time to "Brokeback Mountain Time", however the matter at hand is that X-corp is answering the phone with a recording that is somewhat embarrassing to X-corp.
.... Yep, these self-centred dickheads believe that whatever time NSW decides to set the clocks to, is Eastern Standard Time.
Such delusion is not an uncommon one in NSW.
Thursday, April 04, 2013
Bring 'em on!
In the really big smoke on business, and feeling the pangs of morning hunger, Mine Host happens upon a coffee-shop sorta place selling Max Brenner chocolate (by the cup).
Max Brenner chocolate, for those who've just arrived from Mars, is apparently the name of a chain of shops that sell hot chocolate or something, and serve it in a cup to patrons seated at a table.
Hmm.. ok.. us yokels never see this sort of thing. Our cultural assimilation used to be obtained by reading the Women's Weekly, but in these more modern times it is the online news that ensures we are kept up to date on the antics of our big city co-citizens.
Individual franchises of the Max Brenner chain are from time-to-time targeted for blockades/pickets and chanting demonstrations by bigoted hippes & others who never work/wash/etc for the apparent crime of having an owner that is Jewish (or somesuch).
Thrilled at having found one of these joints, Mine Host looks around eagerly, hoping for some unwashed bigot to confront him and chant "jew-lover" (or something) in his face. (In such circumstance it is likely the hippie would next speak when the cranio-facial surgeon removed the wire braces.)
Alas, there was to be no "knuckle-on-hippie" action for Mine Host on that morning. All one could see were disinterested office workers & delivery boys going about their daily business.
Phooey!
Gazing uncomprehendingly at the menu by the door, Mine Host was eventually assisted by a giggle-pot of a waitress, who seemed to be unaware of Max Brenner's reputation among the intolerant class, and oblivious to Mine Host's urge to punch a protestor on the nose.
The choclate Mine Host is unable to comment on, for despite being ordered it was never served to him.
The breakfast was indisputably the worst Mine Host has paid for in his life. The staff were shocked at being told so, and deflated when given a comprehensive critique on why this was so. They offered to not charge for the chocolate...
....Mine Host then said something about how them not charging him for something that wasn't provided is a natural expectation of his, not a favour for them to bestow.
Summary: Being as how they can't provide hot chocolate (and the food 5th rate and tasteless), and Mine Host didn't get to exercise himself by having fun rendering hippies unconscious, Max Brenner isn't worth going back to.
Max Brenner chocolate, for those who've just arrived from Mars, is apparently the name of a chain of shops that sell hot chocolate or something, and serve it in a cup to patrons seated at a table.
Hmm.. ok.. us yokels never see this sort of thing. Our cultural assimilation used to be obtained by reading the Women's Weekly, but in these more modern times it is the online news that ensures we are kept up to date on the antics of our big city co-citizens.
Individual franchises of the Max Brenner chain are from time-to-time targeted for blockades/pickets and chanting demonstrations by bigoted hippes & others who never work/wash/etc for the apparent crime of having an owner that is Jewish (or somesuch).
Thrilled at having found one of these joints, Mine Host looks around eagerly, hoping for some unwashed bigot to confront him and chant "jew-lover" (or something) in his face. (In such circumstance it is likely the hippie would next speak when the cranio-facial surgeon removed the wire braces.)
Alas, there was to be no "knuckle-on-hippie" action for Mine Host on that morning. All one could see were disinterested office workers & delivery boys going about their daily business.
Phooey!
Gazing uncomprehendingly at the menu by the door, Mine Host was eventually assisted by a giggle-pot of a waitress, who seemed to be unaware of Max Brenner's reputation among the intolerant class, and oblivious to Mine Host's urge to punch a protestor on the nose.
The choclate Mine Host is unable to comment on, for despite being ordered it was never served to him.
The breakfast was indisputably the worst Mine Host has paid for in his life. The staff were shocked at being told so, and deflated when given a comprehensive critique on why this was so. They offered to not charge for the chocolate...
....Mine Host then said something about how them not charging him for something that wasn't provided is a natural expectation of his, not a favour for them to bestow.
Summary: Being as how they can't provide hot chocolate (and the food 5th rate and tasteless), and Mine Host didn't get to exercise himself by having fun rendering hippies unconscious, Max Brenner isn't worth going back to.
Thursday, March 28, 2013
Reason #251
Anybody who says there is "no valid reason for any person to possess semi-automatic firearms" has never had the experience of discovering that a microsoft (or other software co.) update has afflicted their formerly perfectly working software.
There is nothing like discovering that not only do you have all new different shortcuts, but some of the best features have been written out of the software. "You'll just have to get used to it sir!"
There is nothing like discovering that not only do you have all new different shortcuts, but some of the best features have been written out of the software. "You'll just have to get used to it sir!"
Sunday, March 17, 2013
Life's too Short!! (part 2)
A recent duke-up between a very-junior-lawyer in a very-large-firm and Mine Host has apparently made it to the desk of one of the firm's National Partners.
This escalation may have been precipitated by a progressively sterner exchange of emails between Mine Host & said junior lawyer (she of the still-with-wet-ink-on-her-degree).
When combative (and extremely junior) female lawyers are coming out second-best in a legal argument with a client who didn't even finish high school, they tend to not take it real well.
The National Partner, a very experienced litigator but a very busy man, in Mine Host's opinion made the following mistakes:
"Life's too short for us to bother giving accurate advice"
This escalation may have been precipitated by a progressively sterner exchange of emails between Mine Host & said junior lawyer (she of the still-with-wet-ink-on-her-degree).
When combative (and extremely junior) female lawyers are coming out second-best in a legal argument with a client who didn't even finish high school, they tend to not take it real well.
The National Partner, a very experienced litigator but a very busy man, in Mine Host's opinion made the following mistakes:
- He listened (likely quite briefly) to his subordinate's (emotive) opinion of how she was being bullied by a dumb client.
- He judged Mine Host by his occupation (publican, well they're all drongos).
- He judged Mine Host by postcode (from the country? well he's gotta be stoopid).
- He skimmed the email exchange without actually reading any of it.
- He then put pen to paper (fingers to keyboard actually) and put in writing something into which his nose will be rubbed by Mine Host:
"Life's too short for us to bother giving accurate advice"
Tuesday, March 12, 2013
Offer Withdrawn!
An actual human (i.e. someone with common sense) at the NBN has been in touch with the Wayside Tavern.
It turns out connection to the NBN has not been offered to the Wayside Tavern. An offer was made, yes, but that was for a personal domestic connection.
"The cost for exactly the same connection (and exactly the same useage) is so much higher for a business that you wouldn't be interested."
When pressed, the consultant explained that businesses with employees are slugged "so much more heavily" that he is ashamed to even have to reveal the price. (Note: This is for exactly the same connection, {cough} speed, and useage as either a business with 0-6 employees or for a domestic household)
Rather bad luck for all the staff, most of whom do not have a home connection, and depend upon the connection available at work. No NBN for them either!
It turns out connection to the NBN has not been offered to the Wayside Tavern. An offer was made, yes, but that was for a personal domestic connection.
"The cost for exactly the same connection (and exactly the same useage) is so much higher for a business that you wouldn't be interested."
When pressed, the consultant explained that businesses with employees are slugged "so much more heavily" that he is ashamed to even have to reveal the price. (Note: This is for exactly the same connection, {cough} speed, and useage as either a business with 0-6 employees or for a domestic household)
Rather bad luck for all the staff, most of whom do not have a home connection, and depend upon the connection available at work. No NBN for them either!
Tuesday, March 05, 2013
NBN
The NBN is available to the Wayside Tavern!
Cost: $150-$200 per month.
Speed: 6 mb per second.
Considering how much of Australia's money has been squandered on the NBN, and given the abovementioned cost and internet speed:
How does this offer stack up?
Cost: $150-$200 per month.
Speed: 6 mb per second.
Considering how much of Australia's money has been squandered on the NBN, and given the abovementioned cost and internet speed:
How does this offer stack up?
Monday, February 25, 2013
Why not a Thousand?
Perusing the newspapers (as one does) the eye was caught by yet another of those articles expounding on the evils of the restaurant industry, and how restaurants/cafes are underpaying staff, blah blah blah.
The article was accompanied by the usual photo of an indignant looking former employee standing with arms folded in front of an allegedly offending premises.
Knowing the complexity of the industrial awards, and that most restaurant operators have a choice:...
Try this one for size:
The payscale section of the industrial award or instrument (not my terminology) that applies to the Wayside Tavern has 962 pay rates, yes Nine-Hundred-and-Sixty-Two.
(First published by Mine Host in comments at Prick With a Fork.)
The article was accompanied by the usual photo of an indignant looking former employee standing with arms folded in front of an allegedly offending premises.
Knowing the complexity of the industrial awards, and that most restaurant operators have a choice:...
- Run the restaurant, or
- Devote themself full time to interpreting and applying the award.
Try this one for size:
The payscale section of the industrial award or instrument (not my terminology) that applies to the Wayside Tavern has 962 pay rates, yes Nine-Hundred-and-Sixty-Two.
(First published by Mine Host in comments at Prick With a Fork.)
Friday, February 08, 2013
Visa Breach (part 3)
Wong Gomez Singh is an employer sponsored overseas worker at the Wayside Tavern.
Wong Gomez Singh has been issed their visa on the condition that:
You are obliged to report it to the dept if the sponsored employee leave the job, for any reason whatsoever.
So Mine Host contacts the Immigration Dept to report that Wong Gomez Singh has quit their job.
The immigration officer taking the call stifles a yawn and tersely reminds Mine Host that in this and any future cases Mine Host is legally required to report the matter. ("Thankyou" would have sufficed.)
Mine Host phones the Immigration Dept again with details of Wong Gomez Singh's new job, seething that the new employer has not had to meet any of the pre-conditions, or gone to any cost.
The immigration officer stifles a yawn and makes note of the "additional information".
A few months later, Mine Host phone the department again, to find out why Wong Gomez Singh has not had their visa cancelled?
This is when things start to happen!
The very first thing to happen is the Immigration Officer tersely informs Mine Host that they aren't just going to cancel a visa, not without fully investigating to see if there has in fact been a breach.
(Payroll records would do it, from both my place and the new empoyer)
Mine Host is informed (pretty roughly) that this sort of thing is "playing with people's residency".
Er... no... they don't get residency until they fulfil all conditions of their visa. (So says the brochure, so says the immigration dept's website.)
So Mine Host places a phone call to the "Visa Cancellation Team", and it feels like things are under way at last. Oh boy, are they interested in this. No, there is no record in the dept of Wong Gomez Singh ever being investigated or anything. Yes, there will now be an investigation.
This Visa Cancellation Team really likes to hear from the sponsoring employer, and will take testimony of the employer into consideration when making a decision, blah blah blah....
Mine Host never again hears from either the Visa Cancellation Team, or anybody else in the department.
In the subsequent months Wong Gomez Singh starts working in a totally different field to that prescribed on the visa, then with a move to the metropolis of Melbourne Wong Gomez Singh breaches the final condition of their visa, which is no matter what, to remain in a "regional" area for the full two years.
Wong Gomez Singh is subsquently granted permenant residency, citizenship to automatically follow.
Wong Gomez Singh has not adhered to even one condition of their visa.
This has happened to Mine Host three times. To the neighboring employer, four times.
You may think that the Department of Immigration and Citizenship does nothing to enforce, or even investigate, breaches of visa conditions by visa holders.
You may be right.
You may think that it is a regular event for an employer sponsored worker to breach every condition of their visa, yet be granted Australian citizenship.
You may well be right.
Wong Gomez Singh has been issed their visa on the condition that:
- They remain in the employ of the Wayside Tavern for two years,
- Do not perform a type of job other than that for which they are employed, and
- All work they perform is to be in a specified geographic area (say "Nth Qld).
You are obliged to report it to the dept if the sponsored employee leave the job, for any reason whatsoever.
So Mine Host contacts the Immigration Dept to report that Wong Gomez Singh has quit their job.
The immigration officer taking the call stifles a yawn and tersely reminds Mine Host that in this and any future cases Mine Host is legally required to report the matter. ("Thankyou" would have sufficed.)
Mine Host phones the Immigration Dept again with details of Wong Gomez Singh's new job, seething that the new employer has not had to meet any of the pre-conditions, or gone to any cost.
The immigration officer stifles a yawn and makes note of the "additional information".
A few months later, Mine Host phone the department again, to find out why Wong Gomez Singh has not had their visa cancelled?
This is when things start to happen!
The very first thing to happen is the Immigration Officer tersely informs Mine Host that they aren't just going to cancel a visa, not without fully investigating to see if there has in fact been a breach.
(Payroll records would do it, from both my place and the new empoyer)
Mine Host is informed (pretty roughly) that this sort of thing is "playing with people's residency".
Er... no... they don't get residency until they fulfil all conditions of their visa. (So says the brochure, so says the immigration dept's website.)
So Mine Host places a phone call to the "Visa Cancellation Team", and it feels like things are under way at last. Oh boy, are they interested in this. No, there is no record in the dept of Wong Gomez Singh ever being investigated or anything. Yes, there will now be an investigation.
This Visa Cancellation Team really likes to hear from the sponsoring employer, and will take testimony of the employer into consideration when making a decision, blah blah blah....
Mine Host never again hears from either the Visa Cancellation Team, or anybody else in the department.
In the subsequent months Wong Gomez Singh starts working in a totally different field to that prescribed on the visa, then with a move to the metropolis of Melbourne Wong Gomez Singh breaches the final condition of their visa, which is no matter what, to remain in a "regional" area for the full two years.
Wong Gomez Singh is subsquently granted permenant residency, citizenship to automatically follow.
Wong Gomez Singh has not adhered to even one condition of their visa.
This has happened to Mine Host three times. To the neighboring employer, four times.
You may think that the Department of Immigration and Citizenship does nothing to enforce, or even investigate, breaches of visa conditions by visa holders.
You may be right.
You may think that it is a regular event for an employer sponsored worker to breach every condition of their visa, yet be granted Australian citizenship.
You may well be right.
Wednesday, February 06, 2013
Whining (or the customer is always Wrong).
 |
| Newly delivered wine in the Wayside Tavern cellar. This wine will not be retailed. It is exclusively sold uncorked to diners-at-the-table in the Wayside Tavern restaurant. |
Yalumba must be selling more wine than they can produce or something, as they immediately took action to have their wines removed from sale.
This was the (cough) brainstorm of current Yalumba boss Robert Hill Smith (he is the 5th generation of the family in the business, not the "founder" - as was erronously reported in much of the US media).
Robert Hill Smith would seem to have a brown thumb in marketing:
The money quote:
“Philosophically, I’m not disposed towards the NRA, which runs counter to my family’s, and I would think all my employees’, positions on gun laws,” Yalumba founder (sic) Robert Hill Smith said. “We will act to withdraw our stock or at least not service the account any longer.”
Just as well he owns the company. An employed executive would be fired in seconds, or just however long it took for his boss to learn of that quote.
Mine Host's heart bleeds for the marketing people who have put in years of effort lifting the profile of Australian wine in North America, efforts that have likely just been set back by years.
Yalumba want to "act to withdraw" their stock from gun owners? Mine Host, a long standing and very bitter opponent of gun laws, stands ready to assist.
The wine list at the Wayside Tavern (one of the better wine lists in Qld) will no longer include anything from Yalumba. (Just as soon as current stocks are cleared that is, hehe).
Those who know their plonk will recognise the quantities and quality of the wines in the picture above, and know the subtle damage this decision will do to Yalumba.
Parked beside the (last ever) order of Yalumba Octavius, is an equal quantity of Jim Barry Armagh.
Jim Barry wines boss Peter Barry, had this to say about his wine being offered by the NRA:
"No matter religion, colour or creed, I’m just happy people are drinking and enjoying Australian wine.”
You can't argue with that sentiment! What a fun fellow he must be to those lucky enough to know him.
Jim Barry Armagh, a far superior drop than the Yalumba Octavius, will be promoted heavily by Mine Host. (Update: This is not true. The Armagh is too hard to come by, supplies are too limited, and it is too good, I'm already able to sell 10 times the allocation Jim Barry gives me. But I'll do what I can for a winery that produces such first class wine. For quality, Jim Barry is in the top Five of Australian wines.)
Jim Barry Armagh, a far superior drop than the Yalumba Octavius, will be promoted heavily by Mine Host. (Update: This is not true. The Armagh is too hard to come by, supplies are too limited, and it is too good, I'm already able to sell 10 times the allocation Jim Barry gives me. But I'll do what I can for a winery that produces such first class wine. For quality, Jim Barry is in the top Five of Australian wines.)
Mine Host urges all who enjoy their wines to help these two wine companies:
Yalumba want less customers, (you all know what to do)
Yalumba want less customers, (you all know what to do)
Jim Barry are happy to know you are enjoying Australian wine!
Lets all do our best to help Jim Barry Wines have their wish granted!
Update: For some reason this story received very little coverage in Australia. Therefore Hat tip to Paco for bringing this piece of treason to Mine Host's attention.
Update: For some reason this story received very little coverage in Australia. Therefore Hat tip to Paco for bringing this piece of treason to Mine Host's attention.
Sunday, February 03, 2013
Visa Breach (part 2)
If a visa sponsor breaches a visa condition, the dept responds with a pile driver. Even if the breach is so technical that only those with the mentality of an over-the-top traffic cop would consider it to be even that (technical breach).
Visa holders, on the other hand, breach the conditions of their visa all the time.
How does the dept. respond?
The dept. won't even look into the matter.
The only way anything will happen is if the sponsoring employer makes lots of waves with the dept.
The dept. then will make a (fake) promise to look into the matter.
That will be the last anyone will hear of the matter.
There are a plethora of employer-sponsored visa subclasses. Typical conditions are:
Mine Host knows of countless such breaches being reported to the dept.
Mine Host knows not one of those breaches resulted in a visa cancellation.
This the double standard the dept. applies to visas.
This is the degree of incompetence of the federal government.
This is the disdain with which the dept. treats Australians, and the blind eye the dept. turns to lawbreakers.
Coming up, some real life examples of visa breaches, and the (lack of) response by the dept.
Visa holders, on the other hand, breach the conditions of their visa all the time.
How does the dept. respond?
The dept. won't even look into the matter.
The only way anything will happen is if the sponsoring employer makes lots of waves with the dept.
The dept. then will make a (fake) promise to look into the matter.
That will be the last anyone will hear of the matter.
There are a plethora of employer-sponsored visa subclasses. Typical conditions are:
- To remain in employment with the sponsoring employer.
- To work only at a specified location or geographical area.
- To not go into business or otherwise self-employ.
Mine Host knows of countless such breaches being reported to the dept.
Mine Host knows not one of those breaches resulted in a visa cancellation.
This the double standard the dept. applies to visas.
This is the degree of incompetence of the federal government.
This is the disdain with which the dept. treats Australians, and the blind eye the dept. turns to lawbreakers.
Coming up, some real life examples of visa breaches, and the (lack of) response by the dept.
Friday, January 11, 2013
Visa Breach (part 1)
As raised in comments of the previous post, there is a serious & chronic problem with employer-sponsored visa holders intentionally breaching the conditions of their visa, and the Immigration Dept refusing the police the matter.
A plethora of different employer-sponsored visa subclasses exist. Some of them have very different conditions imposed on both the employer and the visa holder.
Sponsoring employers are held very tightly to their obligations. Many employers are stripped of their licence to sponsor for the slightest mere technical breach of their conditions.
Example: The sponsor is (say) Herb McDonald, of "Wattle Flats" station via Black Stumpville. Herb applies to sponsor skilled farm workers, and is issued a licence to employ overseas staff under subclass 457, for farming work, on "Wattle Flats" station.
It subsequently comes to the attention of the Immigration Dept that Herb McDonald and his 457 visa holders went through the fence into neighboring "Shady Plains" to recover some sheep that had strayed.
The licence to employ very clearly states that any 457 visa holders employed by Herb McDonald can only do work on "Wattle Flats" station. Thus the Immigration Dept writes to Herb McDonald informing him that: As on a certain date he had used his 457 visa holders not on "Wattle Flats", but on "Shady Plains" there has been a clear breach of his conditions as an employer, and his licence to employ sponsored workers is hereby cancelled.
**********
Employers actually have lost their licence to employ for this very thing, and sometimes for much less.
Okay! We have now established just how seriously the Immigration Dept views employer obligations, and just how strictly these obligations are enforced.
Stand by to see how seriously the dept views it when visa conditions are breached by an ... actual visa holder....
A plethora of different employer-sponsored visa subclasses exist. Some of them have very different conditions imposed on both the employer and the visa holder.
Sponsoring employers are held very tightly to their obligations. Many employers are stripped of their licence to sponsor for the slightest mere technical breach of their conditions.
Example: The sponsor is (say) Herb McDonald, of "Wattle Flats" station via Black Stumpville. Herb applies to sponsor skilled farm workers, and is issued a licence to employ overseas staff under subclass 457, for farming work, on "Wattle Flats" station.
It subsequently comes to the attention of the Immigration Dept that Herb McDonald and his 457 visa holders went through the fence into neighboring "Shady Plains" to recover some sheep that had strayed.
The licence to employ very clearly states that any 457 visa holders employed by Herb McDonald can only do work on "Wattle Flats" station. Thus the Immigration Dept writes to Herb McDonald informing him that: As on a certain date he had used his 457 visa holders not on "Wattle Flats", but on "Shady Plains" there has been a clear breach of his conditions as an employer, and his licence to employ sponsored workers is hereby cancelled.
**********
Employers actually have lost their licence to employ for this very thing, and sometimes for much less.
Okay! We have now established just how seriously the Immigration Dept views employer obligations, and just how strictly these obligations are enforced.
Stand by to see how seriously the dept views it when visa conditions are breached by an ... actual visa holder....
Monday, December 24, 2012
Merry Christmas (to all our valued clients!)
On the phone Friday afternoon, for a spot of last minute off-the-cuff legal advice before the world shuts down for the next two weeks, the lawyer wishes Mine Host a "Merry Christmas" before engaging in a brief 45 seconds or so of chitter-chatter about what our respective Christmas plans are.
Thus the phone call extends into an extra 6-minute chargeable block. This really puts to the test Mine Host's seasonal "goodwill to all mankind" resolve.
Call rate is charged at $48 per 6-minute block.
Thus the phone call extends into an extra 6-minute chargeable block. This really puts to the test Mine Host's seasonal "goodwill to all mankind" resolve.
Call rate is charged at $48 per 6-minute block.
Thursday, December 20, 2012
Twit Twitters a Tweet
Copied below is a brief twitter exchange from earlier this week. It is between two well known people and has attracted a minor amount of attention from the news media.
One quick read of it and the phrase "we've a couple of anti-gun crazies here" leaps into the head.
Several people have taken umbrage at Mine Host's assessment. Some of them quite a deal of umbrage.
This has been somewhat puzzling.
Clearly both of these pundus are in the anti-firearm camp. But that is a side issue.
I've made inane banter with all who've brought it to my attention, believing they can see what I see. However many remain cold, or even somewhat cross. Perhaps some people are far more laymen when it comes to firearms that you'd imagine.
A thought popped into the head just now;
Am I the only one who can see the glaring error in the tweet? (It is glaring to me).
One quick read of it and the phrase "we've a couple of anti-gun crazies here" leaps into the head.
Several people have taken umbrage at Mine Host's assessment. Some of them quite a deal of umbrage.
This has been somewhat puzzling.
Clearly both of these pundus are in the anti-firearm camp. But that is a side issue.
I've made inane banter with all who've brought it to my attention, believing they can see what I see. However many remain cold, or even somewhat cross. Perhaps some people are far more laymen when it comes to firearms that you'd imagine.
A thought popped into the head just now;
Am I the only one who can see the glaring error in the tweet? (It is glaring to me).
Sunday, December 16, 2012
Serious Breach
Any venue with a liquor licence must maintain a "Manager's Register."
This register must be available at all times for inspection by an officer of the Liquor Licencing Division (all police officers hold the office of "Liquor Inspector").
The register must show that at all times there is a licenced manager on duty. (i.e. someone who holds a "Licenced Venue Manager's Licence" - sort of like a driver's licence).
For each manager the register shows:
Time started
Time finished
Licence no.
Name of manager
Signature.
The Wayside Tavern downloaded the register from the website of the Liquor Licencing Division.
On a certain evening a police officer from the (cough) specialist Liquor Enforcement section of Qld police called to inspect the register.
As a result of his inspection he issued a citation to the Wayside Tavern, reason: The register incorrectly formatted.
The specific breach: The columns for print name and signature were separated by a single vertical line.
The citation stated that these columns must be demarcated by a double vertical line.
In case anyone missed it above: The Wayside Tavern was using the Manager's Register downloaded from the website of the Liquor Licencing Division.
It should be noted here that nowhere in the Queensland Liquor Act is there any mention of what such a register should look like, or what information it must contain, the act merely mandates that a manager's register must be kept.
You couldn't make it up!
Premier Campbell Newman: Keep-on-firing-them.
This register must be available at all times for inspection by an officer of the Liquor Licencing Division (all police officers hold the office of "Liquor Inspector").
The register must show that at all times there is a licenced manager on duty. (i.e. someone who holds a "Licenced Venue Manager's Licence" - sort of like a driver's licence).
For each manager the register shows:
Time started
Time finished
Licence no.
Name of manager
Signature.
The Wayside Tavern downloaded the register from the website of the Liquor Licencing Division.
On a certain evening a police officer from the (cough) specialist Liquor Enforcement section of Qld police called to inspect the register.
As a result of his inspection he issued a citation to the Wayside Tavern, reason: The register incorrectly formatted.
The specific breach: The columns for print name and signature were separated by a single vertical line.
The citation stated that these columns must be demarcated by a double vertical line.
In case anyone missed it above: The Wayside Tavern was using the Manager's Register downloaded from the website of the Liquor Licencing Division.
It should be noted here that nowhere in the Queensland Liquor Act is there any mention of what such a register should look like, or what information it must contain, the act merely mandates that a manager's register must be kept.
You couldn't make it up!
Premier Campbell Newman: Keep-on-firing-them.
Monday, December 10, 2012
Clueless Partisanship
When Mine Host was a nipper in school, one dictionary that we were not allowed to use was the "Macquarie Dictionary".
The teachers would not allow it, for exactly the same reason we kids loved it: It contained all the swearwords, obscenities, foul language plus any & all "rude" words.
Oxford was the only dictionary allowed, though Cambridge was not actively discouraged. Webster was prohibited on the grounds of being being the anti-christ (as it should be - Mine Host is a John Quincy Adams supporter, and thus of the belief that Noah Webster should have been thrown down a well or something.)
But Noah Webster, even if incredibly misguided, was at least fair dinkum about language. The teachers at school recognised his (misguided) efforts, but regarded the Macquarie Dictionary as nothing more than a sick joke.
Credible dictionaries are collaborative efforts by a large group of scholars.
The Macquarie dictionary has only ever had input from pretty much one person. Ever.
This fact was not known when we were at school. It became obvious several years later when the person who writes it made a series of television appearances, salaciously using foul language, right there on TV, without a thought for decorum or decency.
Mine Host, watching this, thought: that ain't a bad way to get out of being arrested for using foul language, or being hauled before some commission for swearing on TV; write yourself a dictionary, put all the obscenities into it, then strut around in public using those same words.
When the public was shocked by the language used, the author of this dictionary feigned ignorance, and cluelessly stated (paraphrased): "I didn't realise words such as Faaahk, Can't, & others were considered bad"
Being too clueless to realise some words are too foul for television, or decent society, is not what one should profess, not when one aspires to being an arbiter of the English language.
There are also significant differences between the Macquarie definition of many words, and the Oxford/Cambridge definition of those same words. One can imagine Mine Host's distress upon arriving at a courthouse for a hearing, to discover that the Australian courts use the (choke) Macquarie dictionary as the final arbiter of a definition. Oh-My-God!
Given the above mentioned public demonstrations of cluelessness by the author of that dictionary, Mine Host knew how reliable the Macquarie was going to be.
This brings us to the recent incident that brought reputational fallout to the Macquarie dictionary such that it likely will never recover any of the former gravitas it may once have held:
The Prime Minister used a word wrongly in parliament. (Yep, the same Prime Minister who is a qualified lawyer, a profession that owes its very existence to the fact that words have meanings, didn't know the correct definition of a word!)
This caused the Prime Minister some embarrassment.
The author of the Macquarie Dictionary sprang into action, announced that the meaning of this word had "changed", thus the Prime Minister had been "correct".
This event had an air of rushing in to protect an ideological comrade, rather than an authentic attempt to codify our language.
So the committee (cough) of the Macquarie Dictionary had an extraordinary meeting to change the definition of this word, thus making the Prime Minister "right".
This sort of stuff used to happen in the Soviet Union.
It does not happen in free countries.
The pages of the Macquarie Dictionary are too small to use for dunny paper, but they are of just the right size to use for rolling cigarettes.
The teachers would not allow it, for exactly the same reason we kids loved it: It contained all the swearwords, obscenities, foul language plus any & all "rude" words.
Oxford was the only dictionary allowed, though Cambridge was not actively discouraged. Webster was prohibited on the grounds of being being the anti-christ (as it should be - Mine Host is a John Quincy Adams supporter, and thus of the belief that Noah Webster should have been thrown down a well or something.)
But Noah Webster, even if incredibly misguided, was at least fair dinkum about language. The teachers at school recognised his (misguided) efforts, but regarded the Macquarie Dictionary as nothing more than a sick joke.
Credible dictionaries are collaborative efforts by a large group of scholars.
The Macquarie dictionary has only ever had input from pretty much one person. Ever.
This fact was not known when we were at school. It became obvious several years later when the person who writes it made a series of television appearances, salaciously using foul language, right there on TV, without a thought for decorum or decency.
Mine Host, watching this, thought: that ain't a bad way to get out of being arrested for using foul language, or being hauled before some commission for swearing on TV; write yourself a dictionary, put all the obscenities into it, then strut around in public using those same words.
When the public was shocked by the language used, the author of this dictionary feigned ignorance, and cluelessly stated (paraphrased): "I didn't realise words such as Faaahk, Can't, & others were considered bad"
Being too clueless to realise some words are too foul for television, or decent society, is not what one should profess, not when one aspires to being an arbiter of the English language.
There are also significant differences between the Macquarie definition of many words, and the Oxford/Cambridge definition of those same words. One can imagine Mine Host's distress upon arriving at a courthouse for a hearing, to discover that the Australian courts use the (choke) Macquarie dictionary as the final arbiter of a definition. Oh-My-God!
Given the above mentioned public demonstrations of cluelessness by the author of that dictionary, Mine Host knew how reliable the Macquarie was going to be.
This brings us to the recent incident that brought reputational fallout to the Macquarie dictionary such that it likely will never recover any of the former gravitas it may once have held:
The Prime Minister used a word wrongly in parliament. (Yep, the same Prime Minister who is a qualified lawyer, a profession that owes its very existence to the fact that words have meanings, didn't know the correct definition of a word!)
This caused the Prime Minister some embarrassment.
The author of the Macquarie Dictionary sprang into action, announced that the meaning of this word had "changed", thus the Prime Minister had been "correct".
This event had an air of rushing in to protect an ideological comrade, rather than an authentic attempt to codify our language.
So the committee (cough) of the Macquarie Dictionary had an extraordinary meeting to change the definition of this word, thus making the Prime Minister "right".
This sort of stuff used to happen in the Soviet Union.
It does not happen in free countries.
The pages of the Macquarie Dictionary are too small to use for dunny paper, but they are of just the right size to use for rolling cigarettes.
Sunday, December 09, 2012
Do I look like a walking calculator?
One of the drinks in the bar at the Wayside Tavern is priced at $10 (Ten Dollars).
On a quiet afternoon, one of the regulars is in a school of four, and orders 4 (four) of this drink.
When the barmaid serves up the 4 (four) drinks [@$10 each] the customer asks what the total price will be.
The barmaid smiles sweetly and announces that she'll just have to "...go back to the cash register and check".
.... Back at the cash register she reads the total, looks up and cheerfully announces that "Four of those will cost...er.. $40".
So continues life behind the bar!
On a quiet afternoon, one of the regulars is in a school of four, and orders 4 (four) of this drink.
When the barmaid serves up the 4 (four) drinks [@$10 each] the customer asks what the total price will be.
The barmaid smiles sweetly and announces that she'll just have to "...go back to the cash register and check".
.... Back at the cash register she reads the total, looks up and cheerfully announces that "Four of those will cost...er.. $40".
So continues life behind the bar!
Friday, December 07, 2012
No Lifting....!
The Occupational Health and Safety officer mentioned in the previous post was a tad over-zealous when he mandated "4 points of contact" for anyone climbing a stair/ladder, but once he'd made the blunder he wasn't going to back off from it.
His aim was to make it impossible for anything to be carried up the ladder.
In his excitement at being able to make life hard for a business, he failed to notice his directive was actually impossible.
The purpose of the Wayside Tavern's ladder access to the loft was to carry stuff up, or to carry stuff down.
Combine this with the fact that the carrying/storage was for commercial purposes and he couldn't resist issuing a directive that would prevent use of the loft.....
.... For despite the his job title his main interest is not to improve safety, but to hamstring businesses.
Being too lazy/incompetent to write such a manual himself, he issued a directive that the Wayside Tavern was to write a procedure manual for climbing a ladder.
You couldn't make it up!
To Premier Campbell Newman: Keep-on-firing-them!
His aim was to make it impossible for anything to be carried up the ladder.
In his excitement at being able to make life hard for a business, he failed to notice his directive was actually impossible.
The purpose of the Wayside Tavern's ladder access to the loft was to carry stuff up, or to carry stuff down.
Combine this with the fact that the carrying/storage was for commercial purposes and he couldn't resist issuing a directive that would prevent use of the loft.....
.... For despite the his job title his main interest is not to improve safety, but to hamstring businesses.
Being too lazy/incompetent to write such a manual himself, he issued a directive that the Wayside Tavern was to write a procedure manual for climbing a ladder.
You couldn't make it up!
To Premier Campbell Newman: Keep-on-firing-them!
Monday, December 03, 2012
Safer Workplace
A government inspector, from the "Office of Occupational Health & Safety" made a visit to the Wayside Tavern.
He was there to inspect an area in the back of house that had "been reported" as having an "unsafe" method of climbing into a loft.
The inspector assessed the ladder used to get to the loft and as it was simply a common step-ladder, declared it "unsafe".
The inspector issued a requisition that a new ladder be installed, this one to have "bannister rails" (would you believe?), and that the employer was to write up a formal "ladder climbing procedure" (to be signed by any/all staff before they climed this ladder).
Included in the procedure was to be the requirement that any person climbing this ladder must at all times maintain 4 (four) points of contact with the ladder.
.... Anyone wondering why the new state government is going to fire 20,000 public servants, will have part of the answer by reading the above.
He was there to inspect an area in the back of house that had "been reported" as having an "unsafe" method of climbing into a loft.
The inspector assessed the ladder used to get to the loft and as it was simply a common step-ladder, declared it "unsafe".
The inspector issued a requisition that a new ladder be installed, this one to have "bannister rails" (would you believe?), and that the employer was to write up a formal "ladder climbing procedure" (to be signed by any/all staff before they climed this ladder).
Included in the procedure was to be the requirement that any person climbing this ladder must at all times maintain 4 (four) points of contact with the ladder.
.... Anyone wondering why the new state government is going to fire 20,000 public servants, will have part of the answer by reading the above.
Friday, November 30, 2012
Customer Confidentiality
One of the staff from the Wayside Tavern struts into the bank.
This person is often entrusted to carry a deposit to the bank and deposit it over the counter, and that is the full extent of their involvement with banking matters.
They are not a signatory or in any way authorised on any bank account belonging to the Wayside Tavern.
Upon fronting the counter this staff member enquires of the teller:
"Does my boss have any bank accounts that I don't know about?"
The teller gazes at their screen and taps some keys on their console.
"Yes, here's an account which you probably don't know about"
"I didn't know that particular account existed" says the staff member, looking at the screen, "I'd like to know what activity there has been on that account."
"There's actually a fair bit of activity" responds the teller, "in fact too much to tell you about. The account also maintains a significant cash balance!"
The teller then prints statements for the year to date (nine months worth), and hands them over the counter.
***************
Clarification: The major sin in this tale is by the bank.
The staff member's sin is most minor alongside that committed by the bank officer.
This person is often entrusted to carry a deposit to the bank and deposit it over the counter, and that is the full extent of their involvement with banking matters.
They are not a signatory or in any way authorised on any bank account belonging to the Wayside Tavern.
Upon fronting the counter this staff member enquires of the teller:
"Does my boss have any bank accounts that I don't know about?"
The teller gazes at their screen and taps some keys on their console.
"Yes, here's an account which you probably don't know about"
"I didn't know that particular account existed" says the staff member, looking at the screen, "I'd like to know what activity there has been on that account."
"There's actually a fair bit of activity" responds the teller, "in fact too much to tell you about. The account also maintains a significant cash balance!"
The teller then prints statements for the year to date (nine months worth), and hands them over the counter.
***************
Clarification: The major sin in this tale is by the bank.
The staff member's sin is most minor alongside that committed by the bank officer.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)