<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Taxabull &#187; seek.com.au</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.taxabull.com/tag/seek-com-au/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.taxabull.com</link>
	<description>Australian Tax &#38; Accounting news. No BS.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 28 Dec 2009 23:08:28 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Tax Controversy Positions</title>
		<link>http://www.taxabull.com/2009/03/25/tax-controversy-positions/</link>
		<comments>http://www.taxabull.com/2009/03/25/tax-controversy-positions/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Mar 2009 14:14:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>taxabull</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Jobs - Tax]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PWC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[seek.com.au]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tax controversy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tax Jobs]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.taxabull.com/?p=26</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Seek wouldn&#8217;t let us link to the job ad anymore but we thought we would bring you a copy of the PWC tax controversy position before they took it down. We have it on good authority that: &#8220;PWC had made 2 rounds of redundancies, affecting tax area in one of them and getting rid of [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_mwRgbsgDB_w/ScnoA5VZWeI/AAAAAAAAAAM/evWVWb-qNtI/s400/pwc+tax.jpg" style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 395px;" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5317035937175788002" /></p>
<p>Seek wouldn&#8217;t let us link to the job ad anymore but we thought we would bring you a copy of the PWC tax controversy position before they took it down. We have it on good authority that:</p>
<p>&#8220;PWC had made 2 rounds of redundancies, affecting tax area in one of them and getting rid of lower levels, yet now they are hiring managers and senior managers from their seek ads.  A bit of a <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic;">tax</span></span> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">controversy</span></span> given couldn’t they have used existing staff to do the work&#8221;
<div></div>
<div>Hey Seek / PWC, we&#8217;re doing you a favour! We are generating more interest for that position. Maybe someone will take on this poisoned chalice. For the second ad see below.</div>
<div></div>
<div style="text-align: center;"><img src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_mwRgbsgDB_w/ScnphT9csJI/AAAAAAAAAAc/yaVmKT6lZo8/s400/pwc+tax+2.jpg" style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 317px; height: 400px;" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5317037593590542482" /></div>
<div></div>
<div>From the AusTax team &#8211; your tax insider. </div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.taxabull.com/2009/03/25/tax-controversy-positions/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

