Prev
Next

Step up or be stepped over: women’s career mistakes

Karalyn Brown

by Karalyn Brown

01 Feb 05:40am

Must Reads

Facebook’s being a boob over breastfeeding pics - this is a caption

Facebook’s being a boob over breastfeeding pics

100

Don’t blame the beautiful game for riot shame - this is a caption

Don’t blame the beautiful game for riot shame

35

Can you be a “different kind of girl” when you’re 53? - this is a caption

Can you be a “different kind of girl” when you’re 53?

22

Filed under: Careers, Interviews, Men And Women, Work

32 comments

Picture yourself in this situation. You’re a young female business graduate striding up to the board room for an interview with Westpac. You see a picture of CEO Gail Kelly and you think “I can do that.” Think again sister.

Gail Kelly: She owns her achievements

If the latest statistics predict your path, there’s a strong possibility that in 15 years time you’ll be stuck in middle management or if you’re returning back part time from baby, you’ll be sentenced to “special projects.”

The statistics are bleak. Look at these statistics from the EOWA:

  • In 2008 women only represented 10.7% of executive managers in AXS200 companies, down from 12% in 2006
  • In 2008 45.5% of ASX200 companies had no women executive managers, up from 39.5% in 2006
  • In 2009 Australian women’s full time average weekly earnings were 17.4% less than men’s
  • If current earning patterns continue, the average 25 year old male will earn $2.4 million in the next 40 years, while the average female will earn $1.5 million

So what’s the explanation? To start you can quickly and rightly tick these boxes. Women take the majority time out for parenting. Reliable childcare is expensive and difficult to find. Many workplaces still only pay lip-service to family friendliness. Men dominating senior positions see people like themselves as standard bearers for success. Like recruits like and inequality becomes entrenched.

However, what’s often overlooked is where the inequality starts. The latest survey of graduate starting salaries by GradStats found female graduates earned a median starting salary of $47,000 compared to males who earned $50,000. Women were behind men in 15 of the 23 industries surveyed, and ahead in only two.

So what’s really going on here? If women are six steps behind at the starting line, where you would assume opportunities are equal, could it be that men are better at selling their skills in interview than women? Do Australian women lack a lot of confidence? After spending the last six years coaching both men and women to improve their interview skills, it pains me to say yes.

Men seem to own their achievements better than women. Here’s an example:

I asked a male client, an office administrator, what he did. He looked me in the eye and told me he created a paperless office taking three days off the time it took to respond to customers. He introduced software which sent customer reminders out on time and halved the number of complaint calls coming into the office.  He sounded as if he had single-handedly successfully reorganised the US health care system. I was excited because he was excited. When his employers didn’t reward him, he resigned. He didn’t need to be needed.
In contrast I interviewed many female office support staff about how they saw their roles. One woman reflected the views of most when she said: “I’m the invisible glue that holds the office together.” Great analogy, but I wasn’t sure what she did. Being the glue was wonderful. Being invisible was not going to take her places.

I’ve answered hundreds of emails from women who want help to return to the workforce. They’ll say things like: “I have no skills, I’ve just helped my husband in his business”.

Dig deeper and I’ll find they’ve done a whole lot more than that. That “help” might be the book-keeping, the bookings, the complaints, the correspondence, the marketing, the office set up, dealing with the lawyer and the accountant, setting up the website, all the paperwork and hiring and firing the apprentice. In short, they’ve run the business.

I’ve also answered many questions from women who want help explain the parenting gap on their resumes. Emma Walsh, director of Mums@Work, a consultancy advising on family friendly workplaces, says women will typically handle this question by not explaining the gap, trivialising or over-explaining the experience of parenting – all things that get in the way of negotiating what they want, what they can offer and what they’ll need if they want to combine parenting with career.

Ironically, when men have taken time to be the primary care giver, Walsh has seen them more confidently explain the rationale behind the decision. They’ll say for example: “My partner had her own business, or a higher earning role. So we came to a joint decision that I would stay home.”

When something goes wrong on the job, I’ve seen many women take things as their personal responsibility rather than looking more objectively. Their confidence suffers as a result. Many think they could have done something differently or better. If I as an outsider can see, for example, that the boss has been a bastard, I’ve often needed to say: “So you didn’t really trust your manager’s opinion on much, except when he criticised you.”

If someone’s confidence is down they tend to focus on what didn’t happen rather than what did. So if I question the same person about talking about their achievements, they’ll provide a big back-story about the negative, rather than talk about what’s been within their control.

In salary negotiations I’ve seen many women personalise their worth. They’ll see money as reflecting their own skills not looking so much at what the market is offering. Men seem to be able to look more objectively about what they can get. There’s a cost associated with this. When an organisation negotiates salary, they’ll always ask themselves what they need to pay, not what is this person really worth?

Go back to the graduate starting salaries. Guess who’s been missing out in this equation?

Karalyn Brown runs job searching consultancy InterviewIQ. She writes on career issues for the Australian and has just co-authored a book with James Evangelidis: What do Employers Really Want?

Most commented

332Is it sexist? We've got nothing to compare it to
298It takes selective memory to call Howard era a golden age
296Why do our universities teach shonky "magic"?
249Gillard's mapping a route but will probably still be routed
172Friday dilemma: Should smacking be illegal?
170A comedy of errors that's not very funny
163Julia Gillard is on the highway to the danger zone
147Outlaw bikies cannot be judged outside the law

32 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • T.Chong says:

      06:09am | 01/02/10

      Solution: work in industries that have clear-cut gender neutral award structure. This will be found where unions are present.
      Women have most to gain by belonging to unions or “associations” that would ensure equal pay, but ironically, it is women (outside of the public service) who are least inclined to belong to their union.
      Without collective bargaining, the alternative is everyone only looks after themselves, good for some, but at the cost to others.

      Reply

    • Liz says:

      08:01am | 01/02/10

      It’s a start but women need to change their attitudes, take a lesson from men in promoting themselves and not selling themselves short in the way they’ve been taught.

    • EP says:

      08:49am | 01/02/10

      Join a union, because one boss is not enough.

    • Freddo says:

      01:48pm | 01/02/10

      Jo,
      yes you must work at a different company, a very rare company if the men that work there do what you say.
      All research on the subject has consistently shown that men work far longer hours than women.
      No doubt part of the reason for this can be attributed to the examples Brando has listed.

    • Bec says:

      08:13am | 01/02/10

      I really wish more workplaces were supportive of men who want to work part time or take time off work for family. Little will be achieved for women if the barriers between men and their families are dismantled.

      Reply

    • Bellezyx says:

      06:13pm | 01/02/10

      Totally agree!  My personal therory is that managers/hirers look at female graduates and see the potential for a year off, a year part time and a whole lot of annoyance.  If paternity leave was normalised, male graduates would pose the same risk, thereby evening out the playing field and providing more and better choices for parents of young children.  Wouldn’t it be nice?

    • Bateman says:

      09:03am | 01/02/10

      If you want what they’ve got then do what they’ve done to get it.

      Don’t do “soft” option courses at uni, for a start. Do real courses such as accounting, economics, law, engineering and hard sciences. Don’t think that just because you went to uni and did some waffly Bachelor of Attendance that you can get a job as a grad and earn the same as a man (who did a combined Accounting/Law degree and got a job at an investment bank).

      Look for jobs in industries that pay well. Graphic design may be “fun” and “creative” but it doesn’t pay as well as investment banking or law nor is the work as consistent. If you want the big bucks then you have to earn the big bucks.

      Always sell yourself and seek to maximise what you can get out of it. You’re not there to help anyone but yourself. You’re doing no-one any favours by staying late working on that meaningless task or pointless busywork. Do what gets noticed and what gets measured by the bottom line.

      Don’t expect to be able to take 5-10 years off to have kids and then come back into a seamless transition and only work minimal hours. You’ll have to decide whether you’re a career-woman or a family-woman. You’ll find that those male executives in ASX200 companies aren’t spending much time with their family. It’s up to you to choose which one. You can’t have it all.

      It’s up to you to own it, play the game and do what is necessary to earn it. The game won’t change to suit you, you have to change to suit the game.

      Reply

    • Sarah says:

      09:38am | 01/02/10

      Bateman you make perfect sense, but I don’t believe that you’ll get a fair hearing. Today we want it all but are not prepared to work hard for it, we want easy gratification. We want executive jobs without bothering with the second degree (MBA) done parttime while working, the 80 hr weeks, the travel away from hime, and distant family relationships.
      We want to do a straight 3-yr B.Bus,  have 1-5 yrs away from work to be mums, walk right back in as equals to the guys who have worked those 5 yrs we’ve been playing in parks, be able to leave at 5pm to pick up the kids, have weekends free to ourselves for family time, and still get paid $200k in a high management role. Newsflash: that’s called having your cake and eating it too.
      In my opinion it is better to forgo a “powerful” career to raise a family. And like it or not, most men do not have access to the same parental leave rights as women, so they are not the logical choice to do it. But you can’t do that AND be a corporate superhero. And why would you want to? When you’re 70 yrs old, your life will be richer for having a loving family as opposed to having adult kids you never really knew, but gee you reengineered some business processes well (don’t laugh, male execs rarely have close bonds with kids).

    • Bitten says:

      10:52am | 01/02/10

      I agree with Sarah, Bateman, your argument is reasonable and logical and therefore is unlikely to be taken into account in this debate. As a female with two bachelors (Law and Economics) and on her way to her Masters (Economics) all while working full time, I am stunned to have to listen to the drivel from females who complain about their lack of workplace ‘muscle’ only to find on discreet enquiries that they have a diploma or a bachelors in communications at most. Grow up ladies. Do the hard yards and you’ll get the big rewards. Take the soft option - well, you get what you get.

    • stealthpooch says:

      02:07pm | 01/02/10

      A lot of the problem comes down to the fact that there is a perception of ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ courses (or as I’ve also heard them referred to as ‘soft cock’ courses… do you see where I’m going?), and they generally refer to areas traditionally thought of as ‘men’s work’ and ‘women’s work’.  For instance, a lot of people view teaching as a soft option - a lower paying job traditionally associated with women’s work.  What we have to ask then is teaching really ‘soft’, or is it thought of that way because of its roots and associated lower pay?  In my opinion the perception of ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ courses, and their respective pay cheques, has more to do with gender discrimination than actual talent, work or contribution to society.

    • Bateman says:

      05:44pm | 01/02/10

      stealthpooch
      Apologies for lateness (work). Many of the courses women do lead to jobs that are government funded (teaching, nursing etc). The government has limited funds and will not pay what the free market will pay. It simply can’t do it.

      Add to this the fact that schools and hospitals are often not for profit organisations so therefore generating the funds to pay their workers at the same level that other for profit organisations is an unrealistic expectation.

      Therefore, it’s more than just the perception about soft and hard courses (although having done, Economics, Law , Masters in Law and Masters in Commerce I would definitely argue that they are more difficult than teaching or nursing) but whether there is the money there to pay the salary.

      Maybe if thse institutions were privatised and allowed the free market to dictate prices then things may change….......

    • AdamC says:

      09:17am | 01/02/10

      I am surprised about the graduate figures. Might this be explained by different graduate roles in the same industries? For example, engineering graduates, in say mining, may be more likely to be male and human resources graduates more likely to be female?

      I don’t like statistics that make little intuitive sense that are not also explained. Graduates are not in a position to negotiate their salaries. There is no reason why female modesty or whatever would reduce women’s graduate earnings. There must be another explanation.

      Reply

    • Tim says:

      09:45am | 01/02/10

      Adam,
      you are correct. Gradstats even say in the report that part of the difference between male and female starting salaries is that males dominate the high paying fields whilst females dominate the middle paying fields.
      Remember these figures are averages, they do not take into account many factors including the type or location of the employer or total hours worked. Even the overall work fields can be aggregated from similar fields if they cover a large group of smaller fields.
      Using these figures to try and prove some sort of inequality is very foolish.

    • Brando says:

      09:29am | 01/02/10

      I’ve been in the financial services game for almost thirty years and I’ve learned that the most dangerous place in the office is between a woman and the front door at 5pm.

      You can talk about a work/life balance all you want but in real life there’s work to be done and when I look around the office at 7.30pm (or 7.30am for that matter) it’s a rare (note I said rare not non-existent) sight indeed to actually see a woman.

      In a ten year period a woman can easily have three years off on maternity leave and then only want to work part-time until all her kids are at school.  Even after all that it’s I’ve got to pick little Xavier up at 3pm or I’ve got to go to little Madison’s ballet recital or I can’t come in today because little Quinton’s not well and the list of excuses not to be at her desk goes on and on ad nauseam.

      Then after all that they whine how they were not promoted over the men who have put in 10/12 hour days consistently for the last ten years.

      I’m sorry ladies but you need to realise work is a place of business not some social club. If you can’t sort your own lives out then don’t expect to be put into positions of great responsibility.

      I’m already hesitant to hire a woman as their inability to carry their load only puts further pressure on the rest of the team. If these new “family friendly” government regulations come in I’ll never hire another woman again

      Reply

    • D says:

      11:57am | 01/02/10

      I am in total agreement with you Brando but please remember the women like myself that do not want children in the first place. I would hope your hesitations would subside about hiring a woman who WILL be there to do the job at hand and has no interest in going down the parenting road.
      I cannot stand the excuses to leave early from the office etc. What happend to equal opportunity in that respect? I dont have a 5 year old at home with the flu but my dog is looking sick, so can I leave the office early to care for him? I think not.
      If you have a family then care for them properly. This part time, work/family balance crap is rubbish. Your family suffers (with crap childcare facilities and no parent/child relationships) and your workplace suffers.
      Be a real parent, while the kids are young and then come back to work PROPERLY when they are grown up enough to look after themselves.
      Works for everyone!

    • Jo says:

      01:33pm | 01/02/10

      When I returned from work after maternity leave I watched 9 out of 10 of the blokes leave, practically running, to be the pub across the road at 4.30 pm, every day of the week, while myself and my female manager stayed til 7 pm, despite me having a 1.5 hour trip home on CityRail. If one of these guys was needed after 4.30 they would actually be nasty because they were being held up from the pub and not being paid overtime (but neither was I). And who was still sending work related emails at midnight? Not those guys. Guess we are working in different companies.

    • Shorn says:

      10:29am | 01/02/10

      Here’s the harsh truth.  Some men don’t respect women or won’t promote them for fear they will get pregnant etc.  That accounts for a little bit of why women suffer these disparities. 

      The vast bulk of the gender gap is because women and men are different.  Whilst there are exceptions, generally the genders respond differently to stress, to workplace politics and to getting the job done.  The sooner people focus on what matters in industry - getting the job done - instead of perceived inequities - the sooner the gender gap will close.

      Reply

    • Wayne Hutchins says:

      11:18am | 01/02/10

      Eric…Are you there? Eric… Whats happened to Eric?

      Reply

    • Malone says:

      11:38am | 01/02/10

      Its interesting how the posts have focused on the problems, not the solutions, rather ironic from a group of people who, judging by their comments are corporate high flyers. Bring me problems not solutions? I thought it was the other way around… anyway…

      Should women as a group be promoted over other applicants who are more worthy? Of course not.  However I think that the search for better ways to allow humans, not just the wide spread perception of workers as corporate drones working for the company, to better permeate the planning of businesses. This is difficult, time-consuming and a drain on one’s creativity. However without it, business owners may just not have the staff to complain about in future.

      People say life is not fair.It isn’t.  If left to its own devices, folllowing basic laws of entropy, if left unattended, everything goes to shit. Thus we must work at making workplaces better, not just accept them and leave them as unfair, because thats the way it is.

      Sidenote - Seems to be an undercurrent of people trivialising child rearing. Without it no-one would be here. If everyone wanted to be a corporate high flyer than where exactly would yo’ure children go? Then you would really see the value of reliable childcare. However that may be exactly the point.
      Does that mean pick one or the other, parent or ceo? At this stage I think so. However that does not mean we shouldn’t continue searching for ways to make all workplaces far more human-friendly.

      As for the point of the article - women need to stick up for themselves and stop trivialising themselves? Well I think a lot of industries have a lot of money tied up in having women trivialise themselves, fashion, celebrity gossip,  and so on

      I fail to see how women more generally in our culture will develop with better self-esteem when such goals as being smart, ambitious and, hell even just happy in their own skin, are not deemed respectable unless they are paired with more “girly” things such as a ridiculously unbalanced interest in fashion, celebrity gossip and one’s bum size, and not be considered a tom-boy/different/plain. Might be too much to ask…

      Reply

    • stephen says:

      03:13pm | 01/02/10

      He’s getting pregnant.

    • Eric says:

      11:38am | 01/02/10

      You called?

      Heh, I’ve been following this thread with interest, but I really have nothing to add since others have made the points I’d make. smile

      Reply

    • Wayne Hutchins says:

      01:17pm | 01/02/10

      Just wanted to be sure your alright…

    • Bec says:

      12:28pm | 01/02/10

      It is much more important for us women to be caring for families than going for high powered executive careers - maybe the reason that the current youth generation is always being blamed for drinking/partying/being irresponsible and lazy is that their parents were never home to raise them properly.

      I’m not saying women shouldn’t have jobs - I aim to be a journalist when i leave uni - but to try and raise kids as well as trying to become the CEO of a huge company? I don’t think so. It causes too many social problems.

      Reply

    • Old bag says:

      03:49pm | 01/02/10

      Until women and men are not held equally responsible for raising their children (and not “he earns it and I spend it tee hee”) then this kind of delusional thinking will continue and women will continue to be seen as a professional liability.

      The corrolary of this is that women need to step up and earn the money so men can stop being seen as the cash cows. In return, men need to be true equal parents, not the dinner/bath/bed heroes that swoop in and get all the credit for being “hands on fathers”.

      Before you all start screaming women have breasts, I breastfed my child until she was 2, despite working full time from when she was six months old. Her father looked after her when I went back to work. I t can be done if people want to. Sadly, women as much as men take advantage of the gender stereotypes not to step up and be equals when it comes to money and parenting.

    • John Mils says:

      01:48pm | 01/02/10

      A union full of women collectively bargaining. That will be attractive to employers. no!

      Reply

    • Davo from St Kilda says:

      03:32pm | 01/02/10

      Typical lies from the usual suspects… “women graduates earned a median starting salary of $47,000 compared to males who earned $50,000”. Prove it. Give just ONE example of a woman who earns less than the male who studied the same course. Don’t compare salaries from different courses, compare women and men from the same discipline. Do female accounting/nursing/law/arts graduates earn less than the males who studied the same course? No they don’t and Karalyn Brown knows or ought to know this. Saying that a man who graduated from dentistry earns more than a woman who graduated from arts as an example of discrimination is lazy, lazy journalism. Cmon Karalyn. Give just ONE example of a woman who earns less than a man with similar qualifications and experience. Do you earn less than all the men in your workplace? No you don’t. The fact is that every woman is paid the same as every man given the same abilities.

      Reply

    • Bitten says:

      04:23pm | 01/02/10

      Don’t hold a journalist to account Davo - they’re not actually capable of presenting the truth, they ignore the valid points of criticism raised by the reading public, they just have to stay on message.

    • girl says:

      06:19pm | 01/02/10

      Example:  I went for a job interview last week.  They offered to pay me as a law clerk (despite the fact that I am an admitted solicitor) - that is $32,000 (ie less than working at Macc’s full time).  I said no thank you.  Word on the street is a young, male, solicitor just go offered a job there, to be paid as a solicitor.  Admittedly the partner and his Dad and mates from school…

    • Tim says:

      09:02am | 02/02/10

      @Girl,
      yes, but would the result have been any different if the mate’s son was actually a daughter?
      No of course it wouldn’t.

      Reply

    • mericks says:

      11:32am | 02/02/10

      Example 1 - I have a Bachelor Bus (Information Systems) and have started a Masters in Networking and Systems Admin and at my last place of work was getting more than $15K less than a male doing the exact same job with no formal qualifications.  I worked longer hours and looked after a lot more systems than him.  I also managed another Junior Sys Admin and he had no management responisbilities.

      Example 2 - I have also worked in places that I was paid exactly the same as my colleagues and am currently in a well paid Management position because I made the choice to move on.  I had to learn to value myself and my skills.

      I got my degree a number of years ago as a single mother studying full time, working part time and averaging 3 hours of sleep a night.  My kids are now very capable teenagers/adults that can look after themselves and I have a great relationship with them all.  We talk about all the important things and they all come to me for advice on things going on in their personal lives. 

      I had to make choices as a single parent -
      1.  I needed to support my children and find a way of doing it that would make our lives better. 
      2.  I found during my study that I couldn’t do everything - I asked my kids for their help and they gave it.  We worked as a team to get things done.
      3.  I had to give up the idea that I had to be a perfect mother and made conscious choices about what was important.  I always say - fight the battles that are important and forget about the others. 
      4.  Quality is better than Quantity - I took the time to spend with my kids when I was there.  I made sure that I spent time with them individually as well as spending time as a family.  I made sure I talked to them about the things that were important to them.
      5.  Raising kids is hard and so is having a Career - but I shouldn’t have to give up either - men don’t!

      Some of the points raised in other comments show the misunderstanding of this issue.  The first thing is that it shouldn’t matter if a woman wants to have children or not - some don’t, some do, some change their mind at some point, some already have children and are starting their career.  None of that is even considered when asking if men should or shouldn’t work. 

      As a single mother I would be judged by so many other people.  If I am on the pension staying at home looking after my kids then I am “a bludger that is using tax payers money”.  If I go to work I am putting my kids at a disadvantage and not being a caring parent.  It’s hard to win as a woman - other women judge you and so do men.  The comments above are a really good case in point.

      The solution? - I agree with the article, women need to learn to value their skills more highly and be prepared to fight for what they want.  We also need to stop judging each other and allow each person to make the choices that are right for themselves.  I cannot tell you the number of people that have told me that I am not doing the right thing for my kids, myself, my family etc.  Let me be and get on with your own life.

      Reply

    • Karalyn Brown says:

      07:25pm | 03/02/10

      Thanks for all the comments. Merick has nailed what I wanted to raise. The interesting thing about the grad stats is that the median salary for female law students is 48.6K and male law students 53K. I don’t agree that it is foolish to use the statistics in this way because it does reflect what I have seen in my professional career and in my own experience. I read the stats and I ask questions. It’s difficult to write observations without being accused of generalisations, yet I think it’s important to do so, so something is discussed. One of the explanations for the differences is in law is that women are attracted to lower paying roles in legal aid and the like. But again I think that comes down to a confidence issue from women, and a perception issue from people who hire.

    • Jess Fry says:

      09:02pm | 23/02/10

      Merrick, you have hit the nail on the head, I would add that the f word (feminism) is being lambasted because of the perception that women can have it all. We can, but there are only twenty four hours in a day. Spend it on a career, spend it with your kids, your choice but don’t complain that you can’t do it all, becuase of course you can’t! Some thing will have to give. The other area that can stand in a womans way is the secrecy that exists around salaries in most companies, I wouldn’t have a clue if my salary is equal to or above my male colleagues who do the same role. My company has a policy that salaries are not discussed which makes it very difficult.

      Reply
 
Comment

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Lucy Kippist

lucyjk 07 Feb 12 09:10PM

RT @JenBrockie: A take on social media from India http://t.co/5XCerDTB @tehelkadotcom

Lucy Kippist

lucyjk 07 Feb 12 09:08PM

RT @alaindebotton: So many of our problems would be alleviated if we had 3 or 4 exceptional friends living within a 2 minute radius.

Paul Colgan

Colgo 07 Feb 12 07:22PM

RT @latikambourke: Yes, @PeterSlipperMP is genuine.

Paul Colgan

Colgo 07 Feb 12 06:16PM

Can't believe this yoghurt mob thought they'd get away with the John Butler trio sound-a-like http://t.co/Hn0rMchs

See all tweets

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

Interest rate barney barely even rates as interesting

by Tory Shepherd

66

Interest rate barney barely even rates as interesting

Stop all the cheering, cut off the champagne. Prevent the pollies from barking and silence the drums.…

Life slips away while you’re filming it on your phone

by Tory Maguire

71

Life slips away while you’re filming it on your phone

Some friends of mine had lunch on Saturday with a mate who spent so much time artfully composing photos…

Other stuff to be angry about today (with chorizo pic)

by Anthony Sharwood

34

Other stuff to be angry about today (with chorizo pic)

That dopey Spaniard. Three-time Tour de France winner Alberto Contador has been banned for two years,…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: City vs country: What would you change your life for?

Dieter Moeckel says:

We made the tree change from Darwin to Wonbah more than 15 years ago. After fencing, a road, and couple of dams our money was gone. Super is enough to live comfortably. We have geese growing old and stringy the only one that made it to the pot committed Kamakazi by flying into a tree; the chooks are… [read more]

From: I’d rather have a piece of toast than listen to crap lyrics

Erick says:

Led Zeppelin are responsible for my all-time favourite mixed metaphor: "There you sit, sit and stare, like a book on a shelf rusting." (Misty Mountain Hop) I laugh every time I hear it. Hmmm, I believe I've decided what to play on the way to work today. [read more]

Light weight

Gentle jabs to the ribs

No wuckin forries. These nuckin futs are tuckin fops

No wuckin forries. These nuckin futs are tuckin fops

Well, puck me with a fitchfork. The F-word is apparently an acceptable part of Australian speech. That’s… Read more

150 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter

Subscribe to The Punch RSS feed