Employer bid to cut penalty rates fails

A push by employers to slash the penalty rates of workers in retail and fast food has failed with the Fair Work Commission saying some of the key claims lacked evidence.


 


In a strongly worded ruling, the full bench of the commission said while there was some evidence in elements of the case brought by employer groups to reduce penalty rates ''it was far from compelling'' and there was ''a significant evidentiary gap in the cases put''.


 


In the cases before the Fair Work Commission, employers had sought to reduce Sunday penalties in retail from 100 per cent to 50 per cent and to remove the 25 per cent evening penalty for all non-casual hours.


 


Employers also pushed to remove weekend penalties for the fast food industry, where workers are currently paid 25 per cent penalties on Saturdays and 50 per cent penalties on Sunday.


 


High profile restaurateur, and MasterChef judge, George Calombaris became a public face of the employer push arguing in late 2011 that restaurants would shut due to the Fair Work laws.


 


''Sunday is one of our busiest days, but you never make any money,'' Mr Calombaris said. ''The cost of labour is just astronomical. None of us want to go back to those ghost town days we had years ago, but labour laws are getting tougher and tougher.''


 


The Fair Work decision was in response to a transitional review of workplace awards.


 


It had previously told employers this review was ''unlikely'' to revisit issues dealt with by an earlier overhaul of awards unless ''there are cogent reasons for doing so, such as a significant change in circumstances''. A later review would be the best place to deal with these issues, it said.


 


It noted that a high proportion of workers in retail, food and accommodation were low paid and they had a high reliance on their pay being set by awards. Incomes for full-time adults in those industries were about 70 per cent of average earnings, the full bench said.


 


''While aspects of the (employer) applications before us are not without merit - particularly the proposals to reassess the Sunday penalty rate in light of the level applying on Saturdays - the evidentiary case in support of the claims was, at best, limited.''


 


The shop assistants union welcomed the decision as a ''huge success'' against a ''sustained'' attack by employers.


 


"Today's decision proves once again that that penalty rates are as fair and relevant as ever for people who have to work evening and weekends,'' SDA national secretary Joe de Bruyn said.


 


"The employers didn't substantiate their misconceived claims that people would still work evenings and weekends if the penalties were lower. Nor did their case back up their argument that modern awards don't reflect the modern retail or fast food industries.''


 


Last week Prime Minister Julia Gillard said the government would enshrine in law that penalty rates, overtime, shift conditions and public holiday pay were ''definite, formal considerations for the Fair Work Commission'' when it reviewed awards in the future.


 


The media must embrace reform had previously told employers this review was ''unlikely'' to revisit issues dealt with by an earlier overhaul of awards unless ''there are cogent reasons for doing so, such as a significant change in circumstances''. A later review would be the best place to deal with these issues, it said.


 


It noted that a high proportion of workers in retail, food and accommodation were low paid and they had a high reliance on their pay being set by awards. Incomes for full-time adults in those industries were about 70 per cent of average earnings, the full bench said.


 


''While aspects of the (employer) applications before us are not without merit - particularly the proposals to reassess the Sunday penalty rate in light of the level applying on Saturdays - the evidentiary case in support of the claims was, at best, limited.''


 


The shop assistants union welcomed the decision as a ''huge success'' against a ''sustained'' attack by employers.


 


"Today's decision proves once again that that penalty rates are as fair and relevant as ever for people who have to work evening and weekends,'' SDA national secretary Joe de Bruyn said.


 


"The employers didn't substantiate their misconceived claims that people would still work evenings and weekends if the penalties were lower. Nor did their case back up their argument that modern awards don't reflect the modern retail or fast food industries.''


 


Last week Prime Minister Julia Gillard said the government would enshrine in law that penalty rates, overtime, shift conditions and public holiday pay were ''definite, formal considerations for the Fair Work Commission'' when it reviewed awards in the future.

Message 1 of 54
Latest reply
53 REPLIES 53

Re: Employer bid to cut penalty rates fails


 


Should have always been just for essential services, like nurses, ambos, police.



 


What about hotels or other accommodation places? Should they just operate Monday to Friday 9 - 5? When people are on holidays or away on business etc - they still want to eat, they still want their rooms cleaned and they still want to sleep somewhere. And if they're international visitors, often their time clocks are different to our "norm", so someone has to feed them and wash their sheets etc.


 


Or maybe, you might enjoy someone cleaning the restaurant, mopping floors, vacuuming, repairing broken furniture, other general maintenance like air conditioning, watering the plants, taking out the garbage etc around you whilst you eat (assuming you only do this between the hours of 9 and 5 - Monday to Friday), but I'd be guessing that it would diminish the whole experience for some people.


 


Theme Parks or other attractions? Should they just operate Monday to Friday 9am to 5 pm whilst most people are at work or school?


Some people can go their whole lives and never really live for a single minute.
Message 51 of 54
Latest reply

Re: Employer bid to cut penalty rates fails

If all businesses were only open Monday to Friday, 9 to 5, and thus everyone worked those hours - who would be available to actually shop in the places where the people work?


 


 


Way Back in the old days, the man of the house used to go to work and mum stayed home and minded the kids etc and I'm assuming did all the shopping etc


 


These days, lots of those mums now work too, so if not for extended trading hours, when do they get to do the grocery shopping? buy their kids new shoes etc?


Some people can go their whole lives and never really live for a single minute.
Message 52 of 54
Latest reply

Re: Employer bid to cut penalty rates fails

all I was saying it pays to ask if the staff are getting any thing extra or if the place is just ripping customers off under the pretense they are paying staff extra.


 


I get Peeved when that happens and I make sure the boss is just as peeved as I am, I dont see why I should get ripped off just for extra profit while they blame having to pay staff extra

Message 53 of 54
Latest reply

Re: Employer bid to cut penalty rates fails


we should all just work for scraps and be grateful for crumbs that fall from important peoples tables. they should be allowed to hit everyone with sticks.



 


Ahhhhh , that takes me back, hitting the underclass with wood reeds as they scurry out the way of my horseless cart.

Message 54 of 54
Latest reply