More on lazy workers/journalists

In his daily round up yesterday Bryce Edwards focussed on Workers versus migrantsDo we need immigrant workers because New Zealand’s unskilled workers are lazy and on drugs?

In this he referred to my post on this yesterday:

But have the Prime Minister and his colleagues been unfairly reported on this issue? According to blogger Pete George it’s not clear that John Key even said some of the words attributed to him, and “it appears to me that some journalists have cherry picked and embellished comments made and have created a week long story out of it” – see: Are lazy journalists drug addled?

However, it seems likely that the National Government has an orchestrated line about the deficiencies of local workers. The Minister of Immigration, Michael Woodhouse has made similar comments.

But my post shows that neither Woodhouse nor Key  used phrases like “drug addled” AND “to lazy” that were subsequently attributed to them and promoted in media stories and interviews.

And Edwards seems to be assuming that it “seems likely” that the Government has “an orchestrated line about the deficiencies of local workers”.

It is actually widely believed that there are a core of unemployed people who are virtually unemployable, or simply won’t or can’t hold down a job for any length of time.

Anyone working in the field of education, work skills and work finding sees examples of this.

But this doesn’t excuse journalists misquoting politicians to stoke up contentious stories.

And back in April, Bill English made some very strong statements about New Zealanders looking for jobs – especially “young males”, saying they are “pretty damned hopeless” and “can’t read and write properly” – see Jo Moir’s Bill English describes some Kiwis looking for work as ‘pretty damned hopeless’.

What Bill English said is sadly quite correct. Helping some of the difficult to employ write CVs can be quite challenging. An alarmingly high proportion of those in prison are illiterate.

But Edwards makes the same mistake, referring to “New Zealanders looking for jobs – especially young males” but the article he links to at Stuff says:

…some Kiwis hunting for work are “pretty damned hopeless” and “can’t read and write properly”.

There is a distinct difference between “some Kiwis” and “New Zealanders looking for jobs”.

I don’t think Edwards is drug addled and looking at how active he is in media he certainly doesn’t seem to be lazy.

But he is echoing the mistakes of media when he misrepresents what politicians have actually said.

Politicians are usually very careful with what they say and how they say it. It can be difficult extracting open and up front assessments from them. That’s an ongoing challenge for journalists.

But that doesn’t excuse making up dramatic stories by embellishing and over-emphasising and sensationalising and generalising what politicians say.

Leave a comment

65 Comments

  1. Corky

     /  13th September 2016

    “It is actually widely believed that there are a core of unemployed people who are virtually unemployable, or simply won’t or can’t hold down a job for any length of time.”

    Its more than a core, Pete. Its endemic. What’s not taken into account are educated job seekers who consider certain jobs beneath them. Another group are what I call short timers. They hop from menial job to menial job. Their work ethic is poor. They get the sack, somehow see out the 13 week stand-down period. Apply for the benefit again, stay on that until WINZ forces them into another job. They then repeat the cycle.

    Our Universities are no help. How many media study graduates will actually get the job they expect upon entering the work force?

    Of course, I can’t mention a certain racial groups on the grounds of being accused of intentional provocation. Suffice to say, if they were taken out of the stats, our employment problems would be minimal.

    Reply
    • Kitty Catkin

       /  13th September 2016

      If someone had to keep themselves for 13 weeks, they’d have to have saved quite a lot.

      It’s unfair to blame the universities if people insist upon doing degrees for which they must know there is too small a market.

      You might as well name the groups, as we all know who you mean. Hinting is as bad as saying it.

      Reply
  2. Nick Ellis

     /  13th September 2016

    You did quote Michael Woodhouse as saying “Geography is definitely one. Skills, attitude, recreational drug and alcohol all prevents some of our young New Zealanders from gaining work.”
    It’s a game of semantics that you are playing. How is “attitude” not ‘laziness’, and how is “recreational drug and alcohol” not ‘drug-addled’. I realise these are the words Guyon Espiner used whist “not wanting to put words in your mouth”, but the Prime Minister did go on to answer “But go and ask the employers, and they will say some of these people won’t pass a drug test, some of these people won’t turn up for work, some of these people will claim they have health issues later on.”

    So the Minister says ‘attitude’ and ‘recreational drugs’ are a problem, the prime-minister says “employees fail drug tests” and “won’t turn up for work”. If anything all the media has done is whittled two statements from the government into easily digestible buzz-words. It’s not the gotcha that you think it is.

    Reply
    • Alan Wilkinson

       /  13th September 2016

      Yes it is. You set up a straw man and attack it. That is basic dishonesty – rampant on the Left.

      Reply
      • Nick Ellis

         /  13th September 2016

        The dishonesty is in trying to claim this as a straw man – the two men both listed drugs and attitude/attendance as barriers to the employment of NZ’ers over seasonal immigrants.

        Reply
        • Alan Wilkinson

           /  13th September 2016

          Are you trying to deny that is a problem or are you just trying to claim that tars all NZ workers?

          The choice is between being an idiot or a liar.

          Reply
          • Nick Ellis

             /  13th September 2016

            I’m not claiming either.
            I’m pointing out that these things were said, and not made up.

            Interestingly, at RNZ after the John Key interview is a Hawkes Bay fruit grower saying that that industry doesn’t test for drugs. So why are people failing drug tests they didn’t take?

            Reply
            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  13th September 2016

              If you are not claiming either then I suggest you correct those who are.

            • Nick Ellis

               /  13th September 2016

              The difference between ‘all’ and ‘some’ is another argument in another place.

            • I have absolutely no faith in our present crop of MSM employees. They lack intellectual capacity and stamina. They are not cross checking the story with the main actors and have adopted a publish or be damned attitude. They meet in their bars and consult each other and adopt a common theme for all. Imagine how it will be when the last two media companies are amalgamated. It will be a major blow against press freedom and the final demise of the print media. We will all be losers mores the pity. It is time for the rights of the media are looked at again because they are not meeting their obligation to research the truth and instead follow their own agendas, altering facts to meet their theme. It is like the question of income disparities and homeless problems. Both areas, if the facts are examined are being reported extremely inaccurately as part of a left-wing agenda to put heat on the Government that has done an acceptable job to turn things around since the Global Financial Collapse in 2008. More remains to be done but lets face it our productivity does not allow us to do everything at once, it has to be phased with our capacity to pay.

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  13th September 2016

              I took the list to mean some or a few, not all.

              If they said that positive things in the young workers today are flexibility, qualifications, degrees and hard work, one wouldn’t think that they meant that all of them were like this. So why assume that a list of problems is meant to be one size fits all ?

  3. ” … a core of unemployed people who are virtually unemployable, or simply won’t or can’t hold down a job … ”

    This, like lazy and/or biased journalists is a new thing, right? When we had so-called “full employment” which, of course, didn’t include a significant portion of the female population, we never have layabouts or hobos, druggies, hippies and surfies … the indolent and the mentally &/or physically &/or psychologically challenged ….

    We don’t know how big this ‘core’ is. We don’t know whether it is “endemic” or not. The fact NZ’s total unemployed is 131,000 people or 5.1% of workers tends to indicate it’s definitely NOT endemic. In many other areas of life people seeking their best or what they most want is seen as a good, healthy thing. But not where getting a job is concerned eh? It can always be interpreted negatively as considering some jobs “below them”.

    The inverse of the picture Corky paints is short term contracts, seasonal piece-work, under-employment, on-call casualisation and increasing ‘menialisation’ – MacDonald’s University – THE PRECARIAT. Work with all independence and creativity removed. Perhaps some workers repeat the cycle because they genuinely feel they have to? But if they’ve been on the unemployment benefit they are forever stigmatised for the likes of Corky, and perhaps for the likes of the politicians themselves, if it suits them?

    You’re damn right PG, “Politicians are usually very careful with what they say and how they say it.” I’m more inclined to apply Bill’s evaluation of workplace drug testing to this subject. What we are engaged in here is random, statistically unsupported social profiling. For me, “an orchestrated line about the deficiencies of local workers” sums it up pretty damn well.

    “Helping some of the difficult to employ write CVs can be quite challenging.”

    Yep, and we’re not up for a challenge any more are we!? Well, if not, we get exactly what we fu%ken deserve. If people can’t read and write properly, how about we help them read and write properly!? And how about we identify jobs that don’t require so much reading and writing? There’s actually plenty of such jobs and plenty more could be created by using people instead of machines … How about we adapt and adjust the system to suit the workers, as much as the other way around? (Note I DID NOT SAY “instead of”)

    Next time you drive through some roadworks Corky old son, have a look at the skin colour of the workers who (often) wave jovially to you … The lollipop men and ‘girls’, the drivers, the labourers. Would you do their job?

    Regardless, you are playing exactly the game of lazy worker journalists we are discussing … We’re all engaged in influence, persuasion and manipulation … for good or ill …

    Which are you … ?

    Reply
    • “Work with all independence and creativity removed.” The work of the machine man.

      But you’ve gotta want it. You’ve gotta take it. It cannot be below you …

      Not to conform, to think there’s a better way – maybe just to ‘sense’ there’s a better way without consciously ‘knowing’ it – perhaps to strive for a better way, this is Looney Leftie-ville …

      Reply
    • Gezza

       /  13th September 2016

      “Choose Your Words: Vocabulary.com – Endemic and epidemic are both words that diseases love, but something endemic is found in a certain place and is ongoing, and epidemic describes a disease that’s widespread.”

      Reply
      • I don’t know exactly how Corky meant to use it Gezza (or whether he gives a shit)?

        http://www.thesaurus.com/browse/endemic

        Native, indigenous, primitive …. or … widespread, prevalent, rampant … ???

        Either way my challenge stands …

        For GOOD or ILL Gezza … there’s the rub?

        Reply
        • Gezza

           /  13th September 2016

          Yes, I don’t know the sense in which he meant to use it either, PZ. One of those words which is actually rather imprecise.

          Reply
          • Corky

             /  13th September 2016

            Kiity will be most upest you have taken over as Grammar Pratt. I don’t know if that’s one or two tees’s….Lol, you can check up. Give me a buzz.

            ps- t’s or tee’s. Ditto.

            Reply
            • Gezza

               /  13th September 2016

              Upest?

            • Corky

               /  13th September 2016

              No, jus posing a epected respone to keep you appy.

            • Gezza

               /  13th September 2016

              I’ve always been very fond of this one Corks:
              “Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn’t mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe.”

            • Gezza

               /  13th September 2016

              And can I just point out, before moving on from this tangential diversion, that whoever proof-read that before posting it on their website is a bloody disgrace. There should be an ‘a’ before ‘porbelm’!

            • Corky

               /  13th September 2016

              Old hat. One of my first mind training tools was based on that principle.

            • Gezza

               /  13th September 2016

              You’re too pugnacious sometimes Corky. I just said I was fond of it. Not that it was something to have a punch up over.

            • Corky

               /  13th September 2016

              Come on. I’m the one whose meant to have thin skIn. That was water off your back.

            • Gezza

               /  13th September 2016

              I left the ring 30 minutes ago & you’re still punching Corks. 😀

            • Corky

               /  13th September 2016

              You left the ring 30 miute ago……yeah, l believe you…Lol

            • Corky

               /  13th September 2016

              * minutes*

        • Corky

           /  13th September 2016

          Here’s a clue.

          “Of course, I can’t mention a certain racial groups on the grounds of being accused
          of intentional provocation. Suffice to say, if they were taken out of the stats, our employment problems would be minimal”

          Reply
      • Corky

         /  13th September 2016

        Disease- the disease of welfarism

        Reply
    • Corky

       /  13th September 2016

      Paragraph 2- No, its just that demographic wasn’t major.They didn’t enjoy the the largesse they now do. They had no great social impact.

      Paragraph 3- Hence my post on the Q&A thread, that 10 major industries should have been polled to get an overview. That would stop political ideologues like you from teeing off, knowing your world-view can’t be challenged. with hard facts. Although, given the delusions, socialists at the Standard are having towards the latest political polls…who knows

      “The inverse of the picture Corky paints is short term contracts, seasonal piece-work, under-employment, on-call casualisation and increasing ‘menialisation’ – MacDonald’s University ”

      Some truth in that. However, that must be must put in context against a changing workplace, new technology and social environment

      “What we are engaged in here is random, statistically unsupported social profiling. For me, “an orchestrated line about the deficiencies of local workers” sums it up pretty damn well.”

      You mean like rich pricks, greedy rich pricks and just plain rich pricks . Agree with the statistic part. But that’s journalists for you. Again you have free rein.

      Paragraph 7- How about we wipe their arse while we are at it each morning? Most jails run reading and writing programmes…but most inmates are interested in dong Maori studies.
      At my local Polytechnic. reading classes are full of immigrants..don’t see many deadbeat Kiwis. Using people not machines? Possible, but sooner,rather than later we have to evolve.

      ‘Next time you drive through some roadworks Corky old son, have a look at the skin colour of the workers who (often) wave jovially to you … The lollipop men and ‘girls’, the drivers, the labourers. Would you do their job?”

      No, because when I helped out my Uncle Mati ( roading supervisor) the abuse I received from some motorists was too much. Beating a motorist up also sealed my fate.

      Given we don’t live in an ideal world, I stick with reality. You stick with ideals and hope. What you dont understand is for ideals to become realities everyone must be on board.

      That’s why I rarely respond to you, I let events do my speaking.

      .

      Reply
      • @ Corky – appreciate your in depth response, truly.

        “don’t see many deadbeat Kiwis [at Polytech reading classes]” …

        The thing is, how many deadbeat Kiwis do you really see in the wide world, full stop? If you’re looking out for them and they constitute 2 people in a crowd of 200, maybe you’ll pick them out because you want them to be your scapegoats …

        “Given we don’t live in an ideal world, I stick with reality …”

        Yeah right Corky, you’ve got a monopoly on reality …

        “Some people see the world as it is and ask “why?”, some see the world as it could be and ask “why not?”

        Reply
        • Corky

           /  13th September 2016

          Yeah right Corky, you’ve got a monopoly on reality …”

          Let me expand.. we all have our realities and ideals. Some of them are adopted by society and the community at large…some aren’t.

          Reality comes to bear by way of political pressure and practicalities ( and a host of other smaller issues). I too have dreams of a fair world. A world without hatred, where we all have time to watch Waxeyes flirt on a tree branch.

          But,at present, those ideals are only partially possible. I work with what is: eg Left and right politics. political decisions, political correctness and human nature etc. I find if I stick with that and their usual outcomes, 7/10 times I’ll will be on the money.
          Sad, but true.

          Reply
    • Gezza

       /  13th September 2016

      “If people can’t read and write properly, how about we help them read and write properly!? And how about we identify jobs that don’t require so much reading and writing? There’s actually plenty of such jobs and plenty more could be created by using people instead of machines … How about we adapt and adjust the system to suit the workers, as much as the other way around? (Note I DID NOT SAY “instead of”)”

      I like this idea of identifying jobs that don’t require much reading and writing (and possibly also maths?). But how practical is it? When you say there are oactually plenty of such jobs, what are they, who would pay the workers, and how economically viable are the jobs or industries likely to be?

      Reply
      • @ Gezza – The short answer is “I don’t know in any detail” and I haven’t done the costings, but an example might be FNDC’s municipal mowing and edging regime. Let’s say for argument’s sake they employ one team of two people plus major capital equipment expenditure on a truck, ride-on mowers, weed-eaters, blowers et al, plus travel, maintenance etc etc …

        An alternative would be to employ local people in each settlement – maybe 60 of them throughout the district – perhaps using their own equipment hired at a fee? Perhaps employing young people as paid ‘interns’, a leg-up into employment, perhaps even as ‘community wage’ work …??? It might cost more? It might provide room for a local Community Trust to also employ an organiser? The Trusts, which most places already have, might access other funding, govt and charitable, plus sponsorship, and might even tap into the WINZ system, as rest-homes tap into the Super system …

        We don’t know because ‘we’ collectively haven’t really tried … All our brain power and creativity and all we can come up with is “maximize profit through productivity and efficiency” … presumably because we’re the pinnacle of creation?

        There’s more to it Gezza, of course. It involves a different way of seeing … of organising society and thinking about work … that one must know “how to see” … “All that is required is to renounce a theoretical individualism which, instead of giving freedom to the individual, has made all men into slaves.

        Community for the sake of the highest development of the individual, that is the meaning of the new economy.

        The work of the future will, despite all external similarity, be fundamentally different … It will not be carried out under the pressure of iron necessity of earning one’s livelihood, with [relative] beggary as the alternative … It will not demand the exertion of the whole of one’s powers to the point of complete exhaustion … It will not mean a life sentence condemning masses to the treadmill of daily monotony [or even precarious variety]

        The work of the future will be easy; it will be the modest contribution of the citizen of the world to the maintenance of this world [the community], and to beautifying it, a contribution to the joy and not to the torment of life.” (Frank E Warner, ‘Future of Man’ 1944 pp 146 – 148)

        They don’t call me a Utopian for nothing Gezza …

        Reply
        • Kitty Catkin

           /  13th September 2016

          Prat has one t, unless it’s Pratt, the surname.

          I see that JonBenet’s brother is called Burke. I hope that he never travels to countries where a burk ? berk ? is an idiot. I also wonder how many Americans whose name is Randy have their faces smacked when they introduce themselves to girls.’Hello, I’m Randy.’ SMACKKKKKKK !

          Reply
        • Gezza

           /  13th September 2016

          “They don’t call me a Utopian for nothing Gezza …”

          Yeah they do – it doesn’t cost them anything. 😀

          I thought from your comment you had a few more low skilled economically self-sustaining jobs you’d spotted. Cheers anyway.

          Reply
          • There’s a good strong representative idea there Gezza … an All Black amongst the provincial team … use your imagination …

            Reply
  4. Its interesting that they claim, ‘dope-smokers’ are lazy & lack motivation.. I know of several cannabis users, who have Uni degrees; inc. a couple of Masters & a PhD. Try telling them they are lazy & lack motivation.

    Just proves the old adage, about using a small sample (from a larger group) to PROVE your theory. BUT ignoring the rest, that do not fit it !! 😦

    It all smacks of the disproved ‘reefer madness’ type rhetoric, that is still being pushed by the prohibitionists & others who are benefiting from it.. etc.

    Reply
    • I’ve said similar things myself Zedd … I’d like to see some of these Righties come here and tell the Maoris they’re lazy, indolent, good-for-nothing bludgers …

      Just like I’d love to see some of the Moonies come around here and tell them they’re not really Maori …

      In a way they’re not, since “Maori” is a pakeha generalised descriptor …

      They are hapu iwi … Ngapuhi, Te Rarawa, Te Aupouri, Ngai Kahu …

      Reply
      • Zedd

         /  13th September 2016

        “Ae” sez I&I

        also this Govt. seem to get a lot of mileage from the ‘mushroom theory’ :
        ‘keep them all in the dark & feed them a large pile of ‘compost’ (ie B-S) !’ 😀

        Reply
        • Gezza

           /  13th September 2016

          All the governments I’ve known have had the tendency to do your latter point, Zedd.
          A good Opposition party should be able to convincingly counter that, but an effective, factual, enquiring media should do too. We seem to have neither.

          Reply
          • Gezza

             /  13th September 2016

            Nigel Latta will be looking at housing tonight at 8.30 on The Hard Stuff, TVONE. Should be worth a look, though much of his stuff is polemical.

            Reply
      • PZ. I also agree that “Maori” is an English noun and does not describe the second group of tangata whenua accurately. The reality is the people we called tangata whenua are not orang asli. But thats not PC, thats why I said it, because it is the truth. The indigenous people of New Zealand were the orang asli who were defeated by the tangata whenua before the English colonised New Zealand. Thats the truth of the matter, and we Kiwis are all immigrants or the descendants of immigrants.

        Reply
        • @ Beejay – Whoa! Orang asli? Now there’s one ‘Right’ out of left field! Are you sure you don’t mean Waitaha people? Or Toitehuatahi perhaps?

          It seems many people dearly love to know “the truth of the matter” concerning pre-Maori humans inhabiting Aotearoa-New Zealand. Often gentle, peaceful humans … living in idyllic harmony together and with nature …

          I suspect it’s comforting? It lets us pakeha off the hook. We didn’t make a Treaty with the ‘real’ indigenous people after all … so we can’t have not honoured it …

          There seem to be two distinct schools of thought about Waitaha, if not meanings of the word –

          1) Waitaha is an early historical Māori iwi (tribe or nation). Inhabitants of the South Island of New Zealand, they were largely absorbed via marriage and conquest first by the Kāti Mamoe and then Ngāi Tahu from the 16th century onward. Today those of Waitaha descent are represented by the Ngāi Tahu iwi … Another iwi known as Waitaha is said to have lived in antiquity in the Horowhenua area of the lower North Island.

          2) Of the Barrie Brailsford book and 67 generations old ‘Waitaha’, “Historian Michael King noted: “There was not a skerrick of evidence – linguistic, artifactual, genetic; no datable carbon or pollen remains, nothing – that the story had any basis in fact. Which would make Waitaha the first people on earth to live in a country for several millennia and leave no trace of their occupation.”

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waitaha

          Toitehuatahi here – http://www.teara.govt.nz/en/first-peoples-in-maori-tradition/page-7

          The only reference I can find in relation to Orang asli and New Zealand is also from Wiki, vis “The former Prime Minister of Malaysia, Dr. Mahathir Mohamad, made controversial remarks … saying that Orang Asli were not entitled [to] more rights than Malays even though they were natives to the land, he posted on his blog comparing the Orang Asli in Malaysia to Native Americans in the US, Maoris in New Zealand, and Aboriginals in Australia.” – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orang_Asli

          I understand there is a genetic linkage to Taiwanese and/or original Malayan people (orang asli?) found in the Polynesian, Micronesian and/or Melanesian inhabitants of the Pacific …?

          Reply
          • Yes PZ it was naughty of me. Your description is as close as my History of Australia and New Zealand training ever got me. My interest was piqued by research my daughter in law did on the Waitaha in the Horewhenua area who occupied tree forts and whose burial practices were shown to be atypical. My eldest son has researched the DNA linkages between Maori and found a direct linkage to the aborigine people of Hainan (Taiwan). So, there is forensic evidence for what we say. I used “Orang Asli” because it means “original people”, as distinct from “tangata whenua” which means people of the land, and similar to Malay/Indonesian “Bumi Putera” sons of the soil, and Fijian :”Tauke”. The pity is that there is no archeological research being done on Waitaha people like the research done at Okains Bay on Banks Peninsular.

            Reply
    • Zedd, I refer to stick with the current medical assessment that is Cannabinoids do cause lasting damage to growing brains (those under 25 more or less). I have no problems with those who are in real pain from cancer and the like to use any drug that can ease their pain

      Reply
  5. Bryce Edwards is repeating the line… who would have guessed. I am just surprised he cited you PG, since yours is a dissenting view.

    And nice to see a new name running a “this equals that” argument to “prove” Key and Woodhouse are tarring all kiwi workers…

    Another attempted political beat up – unfortunately the incompetence level in the left leaning seems to be rising as they fail time after time to hit the target in a manner that resonates with average kiwis who actually vote come election time.

    Reply
  6. Joe Bloggs

     /  13th September 2016

    Following the introduction of WINZ’ drug testing policy:

    – 8,000 beneficiaries sent for jobs requiring drug testing
    – 22 tested positive to drug use or refused to take tests

    Hardly a smoking gun is it.

    There’s no denying that a small number of beneficiaries will likely be drug users (just like a small number of C-level senior executives). And there’s no denying that a few beneficiaries will find reasons to not work.

    But there’s also no denying that a large proportion of beneficiaries don’t do drugs and do want to work.

    Reply
    • Corky

       /  13th September 2016

      Who was doing the tests- Winz or the Employer? I can explain those stats, and the wrong testing they used.

      Reply
      • Gezza

         /  13th September 2016

        I’d be interested in your explanation of those stats & the wrong testing they used.

        Reply
  7. Alan Wilkinson

     /  13th September 2016

    Good stats, Joe. Source? I hope the clear test results gave the employers confidence to employ those people.

    Reply
    • Iceberg

       /  13th September 2016

      He’s quoting a David Fisher article from 2014.

      Maybe anyone who gets govt money should be drug tested, including the pollies.

      Imagine the teachers unions going ballistic on that one. Imagine all the oldies lining up to pee in a cup.

      The drug testing of beneficiaries is largely irrelevant, as everyone going for the job is drug tested if required. Who cares if they are from the ranks of the unemployed, or the already employed. It’s just how it works.

      The nit picking over Keys comments are also irrelevant. Those that vote, know the score. It’s comforting to most of us that he gets it, just like we do. There really are bunch of lazy bastards who are unemployable.

      Reply
      • “There really are bunch of lazy bastards who are unemployable.”

        Since we’re on the subject of lazy ‘journalism’ Iceberg, which might perhaps be extended to include blog comments, have you got any stats or links as to what constitutes “a bunch” …?

        Reply
        • Iceberg

           /  13th September 2016

          A “bunch” is more than a “few”

          So, counting yourself, if you add Blazer, and a “few” others, that’s about the bunch I’m talking about.

          Reply
          • You and Corky aren’t short of words, are you? Especially ad-hominem attack words …

            You’re only wanting for ideas, concepts and musings on the actual topic itself …

            Reply
            • Iceberg

               /  13th September 2016

              Actually PZ, it’s you that rules the word count. 100 to 1.

              Dont fool yourself into thinking word count counts.

          • Blazer

             /  13th September 2016

            I always think of a ‘bunch of fives’…know what that is ?BOL.

            Reply
      • Bill

         /  13th September 2016

        If the figure of 131,000 unemployed, included the entire demographic of those deemed to have a recognised drug dependency. Who makes up the other 100,000, Alcoholics?

        Reply
    • Joe Bloggs

       /  13th September 2016

      Good stats, Alan? Yes-ish… but some sketchiness in the detail, as Fisher notes…

      http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11184479

      Nevertheless these are statistics used by WINZ and the government and in the absence of any better stats …

      oh, and Iceberg? How dare you make an assumption about my gender…what’s in a name? Not much these days, but you could still use mine without leaping to conclusions…

      Reply
  8. Drug testing is done as a matter of course in the NZDefence Force and failure can cost your job. The Military also have an active policy of controlling access to alcohol and provide appropriate medical treatment. The old days of excess alcohol uptake is no longer a cultural thing in the Forces and we have a healthy group of New Zealanders (with the usual percentage of failures). It is a pity that we don’t adopt the same approach in the wider community. The extremely harsh attitude against drugs stems from concern that drug-takers can not meet the requirements of the Armed Forces to huge costs for others who may be killed or wounded by the acts of the few idiots who succumb to drug taking.

    Reply
    • Zedd

       /  13th September 2016

      @bjm1

      I agree there are some industries.. inc. Armed forces that do need to ensure their employees are not ‘high/drunk on the job’ BUT that does not transfer to an across the board ‘drug testing’ requirement, as it seems NZ employers are increasingly demanding.

      btw; I had a few mates that went to Vietnam.. they were never subjected to this sort of treatment.. alcohol was more the problem !

      Reply
      • Zedd, I left Vietnam on 23 December 1972 as the last Commander of HQ NZ ATG Vietnam. Yes alcohol was a problem when our troops were out of action in recreational areas. But they had a lot to forget, including the almost total lack of support from the home base. However I also visited a US Drug detoxification centre at Bien Hoa US Base where I saw non-NZ troops who were aged under 22 years with a life expectancy of less than 1 year because of heroin and opium addiction. Once seen never forgotten. Yes we drank too much booze when out of action but try and regard it as better than dispensing happy pills, beside they paid the price next day as the sweated off their hangover.

        Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s