Talk:Organising model
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Organized Labour, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to Organized Labour. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. | |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. | |
| Mid | This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. | |
 |
This article has been selected for the Organized Labour Portal Article Of The Day for January 30. | |
| If you have rated this article please consider adding assessment comments. |
 |
Organising model is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. | ||
|
Assessment comments
|
|||
[edit] History in Australia
It seems to me that the second and third paragraphs in this section are a little off topic. They seem to discuss the general history of Australian Labour rather than the history of the Organising model. It is all related, of course, but could perhaps be focused a little better. --Bookandcoffee 21:27, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] US vs. uk/aust. terminology
perhaps in the united states vs. uk/other anglo nations, i think the "service model" in opposition to the "organizing model" has a different meaning. here in the US, the image of the "service model" is that of a "business agent" mainly returning phone calls to members about grievances and what not, hence "servicing" the collective bargaining agreement; i think it seems in the UK the "servicing" might mean something different, like a host of legal benefits for members or something. thoughts? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.65.204.205 (talk • contribs)
- No, the meanings are similar on both sides of the Atlantic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.203.146.180 (talk • contribs)
- I agree, the "service model" involves both of the aspects described, where the members are seen as passive recipients of the union's services, both locally and at a national level; rather than as the active participants of the organizing-model union. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:10, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
