Talk:Labour hire (Australia)
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Labour hire (Australia) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=logo}
October and November 2009
editWhy did user:MzMcBride delete the previous talk page?
Anyhow, what should we do about these tiny firms who keep editing this entry to promote their own small and insignificant business, eg Contract Synergies Australia and others? Perhaps a new page could be made, "List of labour hire companies" for such listings, and then they be legitimately deleted from this topic?
Davidmwilliams (talk) 21:30, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
No No & No. WP:NOT - Wikipedia is not a soapbox or means of promotion. Any non-notable labour hire company should be a speedy delete. I've noticed the article makes no mention of the Australian "Control Test" used by the legal system or the Australian Taxation Office. Nor is there mention of the use of labour hire to avoid an "Industrial Instrument". And don't forget WP:COI - need I say more.Surfing bird (talk) 10:59, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
Yes - you do need say more. Add the items you think are missing. Be the change you want to see in the world, SurfingBird. Davidmwilliams (talk) 06:46, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
October 2012
editRemoved SKILLED Group's advertising segment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.45.238.60 (talk • contribs) 13:41, 11 October 2012
Pimping
editLabour hire does seem to fit the criteria of pimping for a non-sexual purpose i.e. the profiteering from loaning a person’s services out to others. — Preceding unsigned comment added by K of the net (talk • contribs) 11:09, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
- The problem is that the term is an emotionally charged one in some countries, particularly parts or all of the United States. If there is strong evidence of the term being used in the context of providing labor-related services, then either a Wikipedia article can be written about the term Pimping (labor) or wikt:pimping can be modified to include this usage, and any future use of the term in Labor hire can be wikilinked accordingly. Until then, the term should stay out of Labor hire due to the strong emotional baggage it carries. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 02:08, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
No Pimping is the correct term, employees always get “Fd” over, usually rectally. — Preceding unsigned comment added by K of the net (talk • contribs) 21:06, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
request Merge with LABOUR BROKERING
editcause they are the same thing peoples. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ugutuy (talk • contribs) 23:56, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
Tempory work not that close to Labour Hire
editThis proposed merge is silly and should be taken down. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ugutuy (talk • contribs) 00:21, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
Pay and charge rates
editthis section should be condensed. The employees get very little in proportion to what the employer does. It is one of the fundermental problems when trading people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ugutuy (talk • contribs) 16:48, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
page may have to be locked
editSome employers/unions do have a bias against telling the truth about labour hire and why royal commisions are being called. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ugutuy (talk • contribs) 06:39, 5 June 2014 (UTC)