on 23-04-2014 08:29 PM
Paying penalty rates means potentially profitable periods like Easter are a dead zone
IF you wandered around cities or country towns over Easter and wondered why nothing seemed to be open ... get angry.
The main reason is this: penalty rates.
The argument for penalty rates is that people don’t like to be inconvenienced having to work on weekends or public holidays.
So they should be paid extra money for losing that time with family.
That sort of argument might have flown in a different era — the 1950s maybe — but in a 24-7 world, it makes no sense.
For example, you can now internet shop any day of the year, at any time.
You can do your banking, trade shares and order pizza.
It makes no difference to you if this happens to fall on a Sunday, Tuesday or Easter Monday. In other words, your shopping and consumption habits have changed.
But the rules regarding penalty rates have barely moved.
Under the previous Government they went backwards, as enterprise bargaining agreements and workplace contracts were stiffened up by Fair Work Australia.
The Labor government called it “modern awards” — perhaps the worst misnomer ever attributed to any piece of Australian law.
“Modern awards” mean’t employers often had to pay their employees higher hourly rates.
This weekend waiting staff who worked on the four days declared public holidays by the state government earned up to double time and a half their normal rate.
You can see the impost on employers.
And the general rule of thumb for expenditure for many small businesses is this: quarter rent, a quarter wages, a quarter stock and a quarter profit.
But if you double the wages bill a public holiday, the maths tells you the owners profit share from the business quickly evaporates.
That’s where the lack of fairness lies; and it’s why so many shops and tourism attractions were closed over Easter.
And far from helping all employees (some, it should be said, prefer to work weekends because it helps couples with child-rearing) penalty rates are a handbrake on youth employment because if businesses close on weekends, there is less opportunity for young workers trying to get a few shifts.
But if the Federal Government says it can’t stop this archaic system — at least not before another Federal Election — then a simple way to tweak it would be to follow the NSW Business Chamber’s model.
That is to pay people their normal-time wages on the first five days they work (be that Monday to Friday or Wednesday to Sunday).
Then, if they work an extra day — they should then be paid some form of penalty rate.
I recognise this as a compromise — but at least it’s better than the system we have now.
24-04-2014 11:43 PM - edited 24-04-2014 11:46 PM
There was no such thing as penalty rates in the 1950s.
Penalty rates, like the 37.5 hour working week, are conditions which have been fought for and hard-won by unions over the years.
These are improvements in working conditions and should not be given up lightly.
With enterprise bargaining, we are supposed to justify our requests for wage increases by improving our productivity but now it seems a point has been reached where workers are struggling to deliver more, and so the govt wants to pay us less.
My bosses used to tell me and my fellow workers that we had to "do more with less" and i used to reply to them that "a point will soon be reached where the only thing that workers can do with less, is less."
I don't see any calls from employers and businesses to offer to do more with less (that is, to pay their workers more and accept just a little less in profits.
The whole point of unions is to obtain for workers better working conditions and a fair price for the only thing which the workers have to sell; their labour. And surely, if the workers adopt the example which for Business is the Golden Rule, i.e. "charge what the market will bear", then employers have only themselves to blame for setting up such a rapacious and greedy example and holding it out as a reasonable way to behave.
on 25-04-2014 10:03 AM
on 25-04-2014 11:54 AM
I totally agree with penalty rates but in saying that on Easer Saturday you get your time and a half then 150% extra for working the public holiday.. how can that be reasonable?
God help the business if it is a Sunday where you got 100% loading then 150% for working a public holiday.
Don't get me wrong... .I love it when I have to work a long weekend... I did a half day Easter Saturday and that is going to top up my pay cheque nicely... but reasonably how can a business really afford to pay that to their staff?
I worked a Christams break where I did full days Saturday and Sunday and those two days made me more money than the rest of my hours.
on 25-04-2014 12:04 PM
on 25-04-2014 12:23 PM
on 25-04-2014 12:45 PM
It seems that Ross Greenwood is the one with a well-honed sense of entitlement - that he can wander around wherever he was over Easter and every shop would have been open - for him ! And it wasn't ! Oh, the shame, the outrage !
I think Ross needs a bit of perspective. "Get angry" .... really ?
Maybe he's just softening us up for an onslaught on worker's conditions by those champions of big business, the LNP.
I certainly don't begrudge those on base wages a supplement to their income via penalties.
A message to those businesses that can't afford it - if it's that tough opening on a PHol, then don't. Or maybe employ some juniors. Or restructure the way you do business. Or charge a bit more. Or get creative, value-add to the customer experience to attract more custom to cover the penalties. Or, heaven forbid, forgo a bit of profit. You've had all year to think about and plan for it.
Or maybe just have a whinge, attack the soft target (workers), just like our mate Ross did. I am sure we can expect the same old hackneyed arguments to be trotted out by the entitled ones this time next year, and before Christmas, and ...
25-04-2014 01:05 PM - edited 25-04-2014 01:08 PM
on 25-04-2014 01:28 PM
25-04-2014 01:31 PM - edited 25-04-2014 01:33 PM
on 25-04-2014 01:48 PM