[capital v labour] it never goes away

I have mixed feelings about this very political issue, which raises the late 1800s Capital v Labour spectre again:

For staff at a Melbourne call centre for internet service provider Netspace, one-fifth of a minute is considered time enough for a rest break between calls. Staff have also been told they are now only to leave their desks four times a day - during set breaks - to increase the number of calls handled.

As a former headmaster and in the light of my current work, it is clear there is a mindset which continually moans about conditions, rights and time off without considering the success and solidity of the company which provides them with their salary and benefits in the first place.

This sort of person is rife in schools and is ultra-quick to react to apparent breaches of his/her rights and knows them all off by heart. If you said there are no rights - only those you gain by securing your workplace in the market in the first place, they think you're Attila the Hun.

And don't even start me on political correctness.

On the other hand, on the face of it, Netspace appear to be out of order, running a sort of sweatshop, using young employees which it knows it can squeeze and this is the worst sort of capitalism. I don't think legislation does a lot because of three things:

1. There really are lazy good-for-nothings who want an easy wicket instead of embracing the company they work for and these are the people forever quoting regulations at you whilst sitting on their bums - in other words, malcontents, ne'er-do-wells and bludgers [naturally I never said anything like this to their faces at the time];

2. It's more effective to hurt the company in the market place over its tactics, such as this MSM article on it. They're far more likely to alter their behaviour on that basis. Legislation simply causes them to shift the problem sideways by taking on, in future, employees least likely to cause a stink.

3. When you tie up a company or an industry in a plethora of regulations and bureaucratic restrictions on every little thing, you stifle the company's effectiveness and freedom to move, i.e. it's ability to keep functioning. A company is not a big mother pig to feed off - it needs space to breathe and expand or restructure to suit prevailing conditions.

It's not a one way street and there have certainly been milestones such as the stopping of child labour and the 40 hour week but then look where unionism went with its little coteries in their cushy positions at the top, dictating to businesses with nothing to lose themselves.

A good worker is a good worker and a good boss will recognize and provide incentive for the good worker to remain. However, when you get the allegedly Alisha the Hutt type and allegedly Netscape type, the pendulum swings and they have to be stopped or exposed for the doings.

As this article said at the outset - a very political issue.