Kerre Woodham Mornings Podcast

Have you ever heard of a placebo policy? That’s what this Three Strikes law is, and I don’t think bringing it back is going to make one bit of difference.  You’ll know what a placebo is when it comes to things like clinical trials where they give someone a sugar pill but tell them it’s medicine, and the person says ‘oh I feel much better, thanks’.   The person thinks they’re using a real pill, or a real drug and their mind tells them that, because they're doing something, it’s working. It’s making a difference. But it’s actually not doing anything.  And placebo policies are exactly the same. They’re policies that people think will work —will make a difference— just because they exist.   Or more to the point, they are policies that politicians latch onto because they think it makes them look like they’re doing something. Even though, at the end of the day, it doesn’t change a thing.    And that’s exactly what the Government is doing with its plan to bring back the Three Strikes legislation. You commit crimes with punishments longer than two years and, the third time, the judge has to give out the maximum sentence. None of this discount business.  That two-year bit is key, because the new version of Three Strikes Version isn’t going to apply to low-level offending.  The idea behind that is to make sure there isn't a repeat of situations that even Labour thought were nutbar. Example: a mentally ill man serving nearly five years in prison for kissing a woman in the street.   Nevertheless, some people love the idea of it. But there is no clear proof that it reduced the amount of serious crime the last time we had it. But the Government is bringing it back anyway because it can and because it will look like it’s doing something.  Criminal defence lawyer John Munro said on Newstalk ZB today that, even though we’ve had this law here before, the Government is pretty much flying blind on this one because there hasn't been any long-term research on its effectiveness the last time we had it.  And some people are saying that it’s likely some criminals, once they’ve been done twice already for serious crimes, will think even less about consequences because they have nothing to lose.  Now don’t get me wrong, I’m not in the least bit sympathetic to criminals. Not in the least bit.   All criminals, but especially the lowlifes who commit the likes of the 41 different violent and sexual crimes we’re talking about with this Three Strikes law. You can imagine what they are, I don’t need to go through a list. Although, this time around, there’ll be a new strangulation and suffocation offence included.        But, in your heart of hearts, do you really think bringing this law back is going to make any difference? I don’t think it is. If the aim is to reduce violent crime, then the Government is barking up the wrong tree with this one. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Well, the Reserve Bank has got what it wanted. Maybe not what it wanted, it's possibly the hard landing that they were hoping to avoid, but it got what it engineered.   Back in 2022 the Reserve Bank told a Select Committee that, yes, it was deliberately engineering a recession to rein back inflation after being slow to raise interest rates. Governor Adrian Orr said as a result of raising interest rates to slow spending, there would likely be a rise in unemployment, but it may be a job-rich slow down because of the severe lack of labour in the economy.   Remember, this was two years ago. Back in 2022, before the influx of migrants in 2023. He predicted that unemployment would peak at 5.7% in 2025 before things started to come right in terms of inflation, in terms of giving mortgage holders a bit of a breathing space.   Figures released yesterday show that those on Jobseeker at the end of March have surpassed 5.7% of the working population already, we’re at 5.9 % in the middle of 2024. Still less than 6.4% of the working population we saw in March 2021, but it will make National’s aim of getting 50,000 people off Jobseeker benefits by 2030 that little bit harder in the short term. However, Social Development Minister Louise Upston isn't letting up on the message that those who can work should work.  “These sanctions will really show up those that are not doing their bit. That's why in the short term it's good to see that there's been an increase. People need to know if they can work, they should. And actually, any job is better than no job. And when times are tough and you need to put food on the table for your family, you get out there and do whatever is available. And that's the message I want to send really clearly, if you can work, you should, and the sanctions will mean you need to do your bit.”  Yep, the number of beneficiaries sanctioned in the March quarter is already 20% higher than a year ago. This is Ministry of Social Development, taking its cue from the Government. Louise Upson said the ministry seems to be taking the initiative on its own. While we'd rather see beneficiaries with work obligations comply to avoid being sanctioned, it's good to see the ministry utilising all the tools at its disposal to incentivise people into work. Those sanctions would have been well used back in 21/22/23, when we were screaming out for labour, and nobody could get workers for love nor money. When unemployment was at its highest, that's when we needed the workers the most.   Right now, though, the job market has tightened and everybody is battening down their economic hatches until mid 2025, when hopefully the storm will have passed.   Louise Upston says people shouldn't be sniffy about the type of work they do. Again, a sentiment I totally agree with, but who's hiring?   I remember a number of people pivoting during Covid; airline pilots went farm labouring and opened cafes, executives went truck driving, but that was again different times. Our borders were closed, everybody was screaming out for workers in any and every field. They'd take all comers.   Times have changed. All well and good to say people should take the jobs available, that they shouldn't be choosy and picky about what sort of work they do, and I'm stunned at the number of people who are. I'm stunned at the number of people who won't go to work because they're worth more. You know, the market kind of dictates.   So, a sentiment I agree with, take the jobs that are available. Ok, what jobs are available? Are the same people who phoned me, the same employers who phoned me, begging for workers saying they'd help with relocation expenses, they would pay anything to anybody, you didn't have to be the perfect employee. Are you still in that same position? Or now can you pick and choose?   Are you in the position of being able to say ordinarily I'd have picked you up, but I've got three people better right now, better qualifications, better work history. What jobs are available? If you're looking for workers, who are you looking for? And if you are one who is looking for work, is it as easy as Louise Upston says? There are jobs out there. Get cracking if you want to put food on the table, off you go. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

New Zealand police officers have overwhelmingly rejected the government's latest pay offer and have given the government one last chance to lift its game. The latest offer was put to the vote on April the 8th by the New Zealand Police Association. More than 75% voted against the offer. That is overwhelming. President Chris Cahill said the outcome sends a clear message to the government that the offer falls well short of addressing officers' concerns and very real needs. Police Minister Mark Mitchell was on with Mike Hosking this morning and says the rejection is an incredibly disappointing outcome.  “In terms of where we are at the moment as a country, which is, we're basically broke in terms of the massive borrowing that was implemented by the previous government. The fact that we're paying $8.5 billion in interest. I mean I could increase our police service three times over with that money. And so, we've put together a package that is a quarter of a billion dollars better than the offer that went forward in August.”  That was Mike Mitchell talking to Mike Hosking this morning.   Look, I have every sympathy for the government inheriting the books they did, the debt they did. I have every sympathy for the government for inheriting pay negotiations that should have been settled under the previous administration, but the police should not have to bear the brunt of an economy that's been mishandled. With all due respect to Mark Mitchell, that is neither here nor there.   The police shouldn't have to care about the economy. They're suffering the impact of a mishandled economy the same way we all are, but it's not their concern. They don't have to carry the can because the economy's down the toilet. The last pay rise police had was two years ago at 3.5%. Inflation that year was 7.2%. So, they've been sold a pup basically. They were let down by the previous administration, but there were many promises during the election campaign that they would be supported. Law and order was a huge issue in 2023 and was given even more prominence than it normally is during any old election campaign, and with good reason.   Mark Mitchell and National, Christopher Luxon promised to crack down on crime, neuter the gangs and support the police. Along with the economy, that was one of their biggest platforms, law and order. The fact that the police had been let down and that they would restore faith for the police and restore the kind of mana the police once eroded under years of, I would say not ‘neglected’ so much, certainly more police were added to the ranks, but you had police ministers that didn't particularly want to be there other than Stuart Nash, and it seemed to be on a high rotate. It didn't seem to be. a portfolio that was given much prominence by the previous administration and national capitalised on that in the election campaign. When Christopher Luxon was in studio with me a couple of weeks ago, I put it to him that he owed the police a decent pay off offer after all the tub thumping.  “We tried to put an enhanced offer in just after, you know, month or so ago, and then we put another new offer on the table just at the end of last week, which you know has been taken out there. I can't really go into the details of that because in fairness, the police are actually all going to digest that objectively themselves and make their own individual decisions as to whether that's something they do want to support or not. But I'm hopeful because the government has put in hundreds of millions of dollars more on the table in order to make sure that we can put our best foot forward in that negotiation. We back our police; we want them to do well.”  Well, pay them more then. Give them the respect that they're due. When you are using the men and women in blue as a marketing tool, as a call to action for all New Zealanders, then I think police can quite rightly expect to see that support come about in a tangible way. With a decent employment offer. The latest one, the one that Christopher Luxon was talking about, hundreds of millions of dollars, well, $250 million, so yes, technically it was hundreds of millions, was rejected by 75% of the police who are members of the Police Association. So no, not even close to good enough.   If it was Poto Williams in charge, sure you wouldn't have much in the way of expectations. But when you have a former cop in the form of Mike Mitchell, and you have a former cop and Police Association advocate, Casey Costello in charge of the portfolio, you would expect more than platitudes. I do not blame the police for being brassed off, and all. They were led to believe, they were told to believe, that under this government, things would be different. That hasn't happened.  Mark Mitchell saying that the economy is in a parlous state, so what? Yes, it is. So, make the savings somewhere else. I'm assuming that MPs won't be accepting their pay rise, that they will introduce legislation, which they can do, to turn it down. To say look, I'm sorry under these conditions we simply cannot accept a pay rise. Take that money, give it to the police.   Obviously, it's not as simple as that, but seriously, if I was a police officer, I would be brassed off. You've been led to expect much and this government hasn't delivered. Kind words and passionate rhetoric do not pay the mortgage or the grocery bill. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Back in the day when I lived in Ponsonby and it was only just starting to evolve as a shopping and cafe destination, we didn't have beggars per say. More, they were people who were living in community houses who would walk up and down the street, and they were simply absorbed into the community.   They were given cigarettes from the smokers who were sitting at the outside tables of the cafes that had established themselves. There was always a meal for them at many of the cafes and the restaurants that were popping up. There was a brush and comb set set aside at Servilles for one of the ladies, who would come in every morning at 10am, and asked to be made beautiful. And they would comb her hair and brush it, and somebody would spritz her with hairspray and off she'd go. They weren't part of the mainstream; they were living in community houses because they had various forms of mental illness, but they were part of the community, you knew their names, you could greet them. You sometimes got a response, sometimes didn't. But everybody knew who they were, and they belonged there. It's just simply not like that now.   And I don't know whether it's a chicken and the egg, whether we've got more uncaring, or they've got more volatile. The square pegs who live amongst us appear to have got a whole lot more aggressive. There's a woman in Ponsonby now, who screams foul-mouth invective all day, every day, while dragging a heavy suitcase behind her, and either cannot or will not engage if you say hello to her. It just means she'll turn and scream the cuss words at you.   There's a bloke who's been there forever, who just about gives me a cardiac infarction when I'm sitting at the lights musing about the day ahead, and all of a sudden there's a bang, bang, bang on the back window, or the side window, or the front window demanding money with menaces. Even if I had actual money in the car, which I very seldom do, I wouldn't give it to him, because he terrifies the living bejesus out of me for a moment while I'm sitting there.   Some of those begging outside supermarkets seem genuine souls. As I say, don't carry cash very often, but when I say that and offer to buy the man or woman lunch instead, the offer is gratefully accepted and the food is eaten immediately, after a thank you. Clearly, there are some who are hungry and have run out of means to feed themselves. What do we do with those amongst us, who feel they have to take to the streets to beg for money or food to get by?    Rotorua is seriously considering a bylaw banning begging after ten Aussie tourists were physically accosted at a cafe last week, and in one suburb in Christchurch, also this week, aggressive begging is making people fear for their safety. Residents are having to change their routines and stop visiting public spaces to avoid confrontation and they're looking to make rules around begging there too.    What happened to being able to absorb those members of the community who are different? Did they change or did we? Is that there are so many people on the streets now? Is it that so many of them are on drugs, and boozed to the eyeballs, and volatile? You don't know what they're going to do, even if you offer something in kindness, you don't know how it's going to be received. Are beggars seen as dangerous now rather than just odd? Are they unnecessarily parading their poverty? Going out of their way to make us feel uncomfortable?   ‘There’s a welfare system there man, for the love of all its holy use it, get yourself out of my sight. Stop hassling me. I've already given through my taxes. If that's not enough, get a job.’ Is that the attitude now? Because a lot of the people that I've seen, don't look to me, I'm no expert, but they do not appear to me to be people who could hold down full-time jobs. They appear unable, not unwilling, but unable to hold down a full-time job, in that case, living in a big city you're probably going to have to depend on the kindness of strangers to get by.   In Christchurch, they’ve said don't give to people who ask. They're waiting outside shop entrances following people to their cars, trying to convince them to cough up cash. And the only reason they're doing that is because people are giving them money. So basically, the Christchurch councillor appears to be saying don't give them anything. Treat them like pigeons. If you feed them, they'll keep coming, so don't. He said, if you've got a kind heart, donate money to the city mission or a social agency that's working in these spaces rather than give money direct. Which may well be the best way.   But I'd love to know in your area how big a problem is begging? It seems to be everywhere now, everywhere. And what changed? Is it the sheer weight of numbers of people wanting? Is it the attitude and the behaviour of those who are demanding money? Because there was a time, wasn't there, where they used to be part of the community. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Inflation is continuing to ease, particularly for essentials.  Latest Stats NZ figures show the Consumer Price Index increased 4% in the year to March, down from 4.7% in the year to December.  Housing's been the biggest contributor to inflation and rents rose at the fastest rate since records began in 1999.  But the Herald's Liam Dann says the cost of most other day-to-day essentials are going up more slowly.  He says grocery prices are stabilising, and fruit and vegetables have actually got a lot cheaper.  LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

When I broke my arm just before the end of the year, I was very grateful to our health system for picking up the pieces, quite literally. They found a bit that was missing at the top of my arm that they weren't expecting, and put me back together again, and it's pretty much back to normal.   I'm very, very grateful for the skill, the ability and the kindness of North Shore Hospital, and I was grateful too for the part funding of the first few physio and acupuncture appointments. Those appointments have made a huge difference in getting back mobility, even though the taxpayer-funded part is now over, I will keep up the appointments because I can see the difference they're making. I'm grateful, too, to the taxpayer for the partial funding of those first physio appointments.   I never needed to use taxpayer funded taxes, though. While I couldn't drive, I found Uber’s far more convenient. I also had lots of friends in town who were lovely, and if I had to pay for Uber’s myself, well so be it - that is the price for convenience. Still, plenty of people are using taxis who are on ACC, or are they? Who would know?   ACC spends $35 million a year on taxis for injured clients, but in a Herald story today, the ACC can see they haven't conducted any audit of the companies that provide the taxi services. Because of course, no one would be rorting the system, would they? Never in the history of ACC has anyone rorted the system? Remember back in 2009? I remember all the hoo-hah about that.   The National government introduced a partial charge on physio visits that we're still paying today, because costs are blown out exponentially. The co-charging scheme was introduced in 2009 because Nick Smith, who was ACC minister at the time, said the free physiotherapy service introduced in 2004 had got out of control in just five years. Costs had gone from $58 million per year to $139 million in 2008. And since the service had become free, the number of clients in higher socioeconomic areas using physios had occurred disproportionately. Fix that golf swing, put it on ACC, go to the physio. Back giving you jip? Put it on ACC. Some of the physio costs were extraordinary, so Nick Smith said I smell a rort when I see one, visits will be limited, and you'll have to pay part charges after a certain time.   In 2008/2009 physiotherapy cost ACC Levy payers $144 million. That was back then. So, we've seen that any system without checks and balances can and will be rorted. Uber has the ability, the boss was showing us, to let them know all the details of staff travel by the month - where they went, what time, how much it cost, what the company business was, all that sort of thing. Basically, an audit on the spot.   I accept the taxi companies don't have that facility and not everyone needing transport through ACC has a smartphone or access to Uber, but surely the least we can expect is an audit of the taxi companies. You cannot tell me that all that money is spent, is being spent wisely and well and on people who need the service. I'd love to hear your experience of it. Numerous complaints have been made about the service. They don't turn up, they turn up late, if they turn up at all meaning some people are missing appointments because they're standing around waiting for their taxi. How many of you gave up on taxis as I did before I even started, and just used Ubers in the cities? It's easy enough.   Can we just have a little bit of accountability and responsibility when it comes to taxpayers' money, please? That's all I ask.  See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Those suffering from Long Covid are afraid of what will happen to them under the Government’s benefit reset.  Social Development Minister Louise Upston announced that sanctions for those on the benefit will begin to ramp up from June.  Long Covid has left some suffering from symptoms such as fatigue, brain fog, cognitive impairment, and severe pain, forcing them to leave work where they subsequently go on the Jobseeker Benefit.  Dr Jaimie Monk, Motu Research Fellow, suffers from Long Covid and told Kerre Woodham that when you have Long Covid you have a very limited budget of energy to spend on your life.  She said that it’s a different type of fatigue to simply being tired, and returning to work can be incredibly challenging as you have to be careful with the energy you’re spending.  Monk said that she knows people with Long Covid who are desperately trying to work part-time to support their families and never have space to recover, trapping them in a loop.  LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

As police in NSW work to establish the motives behind the knife attack at Sydney's Westfield Mall, that left six people dead, 12 in hospital, spare a thought for the families of the victims who were receiving texts up to minutes before all of a sudden, randomly, without any warning or notice their lives were gone. And spare thought too for the family of Joel Cauchi - because they have been left reeling too.   Cauchi was an itinerant with a history of mental illness. He wasn't always like that. His family released a statement over the weekend that spoke of their devastation. They said his actions were truly horrific. They are “devastated by the traumatic events that occurred”. Their thoughts and prayers are with the families and friends of the victims and those still undergoing treatment at the time.   “Joel's actions were truly horrific and we're still trying to comprehend what has happened. He has battled with mental health issues since he was a teenager. We have no issues with the police officer who shot our son, as she was only doing her job to protect others and we hope she is coping all right.”   A family in shock and in pain and their thoughts are with the victims and their families, the policewoman, but they too will be suffering. And I imagine there are many families in New Zealand who would have thought, but for the grace of God go our family.   Despite the billions of dollars that has been chucked at mental health care in recent times, there are so many people and so many families who struggle on a daily, hourly, minute by minute basis to get the care that they need or that their loved ones need. It needs to be stressed and reiterated and repeated that the vast majority of people with mental illness are more of a danger to themselves than they are to other people. It is something that they can manage, that they control, that they live with. But when things go wrong, things go wrong in a spectacular fashion, and when you look at the way the care of those who are mentally unwell has devolved, we as a community only have ourselves to blame. The decision to shut down psychiatric hospitals was based on ideological and financial imperatives. It wasn't based on best treatment. There is no doubt horrors occurred at some of these mental institutions the world over. Absolutely no doubt. But the decision to close them down wasn't based on medical reasons.  It was done out of the prevailing ideology at the time, and because they are jolly expensive to run. And when they were sold off, the last of them in the 1990s, it wasn't a carefully managed withdrawal from the institutions, they were just shut down in a haphazard, piece by piece, hospital board by hospital board kind of a way. There was no overarching plan of how those who were unwell would be cared for in the community. It was complex (shock me). It was messy, because there was also health sector restructuring going on in the 80s and 90s. There were numerous agencies, public, private, voluntary, local, regional, national, then there were the culturally based ones as well, all needing money from all different sources, all funded under different contracts, all with different expectations, all with different promises about how they would deliver. All of them lacked coordination. There was no safety net to ensure that these organisations, (some were good, some were bad) did what it said on the tin. They just got the money, we'll deal with it. Some did and some did not. Patients, families of patients, carers were caught in the cracks and inevitably there were tragic tales of poor communication, missed opportunities, poor support, lack of continuity of care and unsuitable placements. The head of one of the psychiatric institutions said at the time if we do not put the same energy, the same resource, the same money into the care of these people in the community as we have done in the institutions, then we are to blame for whatever goes wrong. And that is quite, quite true.   When you realise that your much loved child has grown into a teenager with difficulties, they're emotionally fragile, you're worried about their state of mind, where do you go? If that's exacerbated by drug or alcohol use again, where do you go? So much is dumped on the shoulders of families. They have nobody to help them. And these are just poor young people with anxiety. The list of callers who have phoned in and said that they have done everything through the private sector, through the public sector, trying to get help for their child, who is suicidal, is enormous. Six month waiting lists in some cases. The vast majority of those with mental illness are no danger to the community. The vast majority of those with mental illness can easily get by in the community with support. But boy, we have failed the families of those who have been left to care for the wide spectrum of mental illness that exists out in the community.   Can you imagine what the Cauchi family had done before they, in effect, had to sever ties with their son? He wouldn't take help from them, the police had been called a number of times, he was estranged from them. And the next thing they see him on the television and the very worst, everything they feared has happened. Where do we go from here? See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

New Zealand’s unions are up in arms over the major cuts to the public sector.  Prime Minister Christopher Luxon told reporters that if the PSA and Council of Trade Unions actually cared about low and middle income workers, they’d support the Government’s planned tax cuts.  PSA National Secretary Dunane Leo said they’re standing firm in defending their jobs, claiming services are being sacrificed for tax cuts.  E Tu Negotiator Michael Wood joined Kerre Woodham to dig into the situation and discuss the relevance unions have today.  LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

You don't really need to watch or read the news at the moment, at least not for the first couple of stories, because all we're really getting at the moment is a union campaign from the PSA and the CTU dressed up as news, with stories about how cuts to the civil service are going to bring the country to ruin.   #Newsalert, the country is already on the brink of ruin and the bloated civil service would have contributed towards some of the cost blowouts that this country has seen. Michael Woods has gone from Labour minister to Union representative. He's campaigning for TVNZ to stay exactly as it is, despite the fact that every single media organisation in this country and around the world has had to face facts and has to change the way it delivers news, it's had to change the way it operates, it's had to see that the way it delivers news is no longer relevant. But no, Michael Woods wants everything to stay exactly as it is.   He says, and I quote, ‘TVNZ isn't just some business, it's a vital part of our society. Kiwis need a strong TVNZ to tell Aotearoa's stories and hold power to account. We invite everybody who wants to build and protect a strong media landscape to support the campaign’. There was a petition to keep TVNZ, exactly as it is. And while I feel for my colleagues, they too know that the format in which news is delivered has to change.   And I could remind Michael Wood that his government, when he was a minister, wasn't so keen on power being held to account. And despite the promises of being an open and transparent regime, given how difficult it was to get information out of the government, given that journalists and news organisations had to resort to the Official Information Act every time they wanted a story, now that the poacher has turned gamekeeper, he's demanding that TVNZ stay exactly as it is, otherwise democracy will suffer. I simply do not buy that.   The unions are against any cuts to the public service and any cuts to the media, any cuts at all, for whatever reason. Even if it means that maintaining the status quo is going to ensure the demise of a particular organisation TVNZ stays exactly the way it is, it won't be around in 10 years. Nonetheless, they're against any cuts at all, for whatever reason. Michael Woods again, you could say as a minister, even when the civil service gave good advice it was ignored.   I mean the number of stories we have now that show bureaucrats whose job was to look at exactly the particular field that the government was making policy on advised against doing a course of action, that the government was intent on that say no, that's not a good idea, the cost overruns are horrendous, there isn't any kind of structure in place to deliver ... no, they just went ahead and ignored them. So even when the civil service was doing their job, the government ignored them. Why have them there?  There were all kinds of jobs and all kinds of workers who do need a union, I absolutely grant you that. There is no doubt that unions can do a good job negotiating pay and conditions for people who can't negotiate for themselves. Workers who experience low pay, who experience poor conditions, poor health and safety practices, there's absolutely no doubt that unions do a good job for them. But ask not what you can do for your union, what has your union done for you, if you are one of those who has belonged to a union over the years?   There's no doubt that those on low pay, who might be exploited through poor health and safety practices can probably get a union to do the negotiation for them. The union rep would be in a much stronger position than each individual worker trying to ensure they got fair pay and fair conditions. It would appear that not everybody, not every paid employee believes that unions work for them, because I assumed back in the day, 60s and 70s that you would have 90%, if I was asked, I would say probably 80 to 90% of New Zealand workers in paid employment were part of a union.   Not at all. It's never reached 50%. So historically, even though we've been one of the most heavily unionized countries in the world, at no point, according to Te Ara, the Encyclopaedia of New Zealand, did we hit over 50% of union membership. So, what does that tell you about the unions? That they are there for those who cannot negotiate for themselves, perhaps, but the majority of us believe we're able to negotiate our own working conditions.   If you have belonged to a union in the past, why did you leave? Did you believe you could do a better job yourself of negotiating paying conditions? Did you believe you were getting value for money from your union dues? If you're still a member of the union, what has the union done for you? Even in the 70s, when you had the freezing workers going on strike at the drop of a hat, it seemed that they weren't quite getting the message that they weren't up with the play, that they weren't quite on top of the way workplace relations are taking place. Generally, it's a working arrangement between an employer and employee. The employer cannot do business without the goodwill and the support of employees. They simply cannot. So, this whole idea of a them and us, and that it's an antagonistic relationship, I don't think exists in the real workplace. What is it about unions that makes them still relevant in the workplace today?   See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.