4 Aug 2015

Labour Movement Comes Out Swinging Against Mooted Changes To Penalty Rates

By Thom Mitchell

A much anticipated draft of the Productivity Commission’s review of the workplace relations framework has found the system is functioning well, but political battle lines are already being drawn. Thom Mitchell reports.

The Productivity Commission has endorsed a ‘two-tier’ system of penalty rates with the release of a draft report of its sweeping inquiry into the workplace relations system, requested by the Abbott government.

The move has been met with scorn by the labour movement and the Greens, but cautiously welcomed by the Employment Minister who’s refusing to comment in detail until the final report is released in November.

Earlier this year the government refused to direct the Productivity Commission to stop looking at penalty rates, although Employment Minister Eric Abetz has ruled out any changes before the 2016 election.

Commenting on the draft report Abetz said its findings are “consistent with the government’s stated approach to penalty rates; that it is not for government to set or change penalty rates”.

But the Secretary of the Australian Council of Trade Unions, Dave Oliver, said key recommendations amount to “a pay cut for thousands of Australians who work in restaurants, cafes and shops around the country”.

It’s a position backed by Labor which said it will “never support a two-tier penalty rate system that would leave millions of Australian workers worse off”.

While the draft report did not recommend the abolition of penalty rates – which should come as a relief to the agitated union movement – it did suggest that “Sunday penalty rates for cafes, hospitality, entertainment, restaurants and retailing should be aligned with [lower] Saturday penalty rates”.

Shadow Employment Minister Brendan O’Connor said that “the Abbott Government must immediately rule out” this change or risk confirming widespread suspicions that the Productivity Commission review is being used as a “backdoor” to diminish workers’ rights.

“An adoption of this two-tier system would create two Australias,” O’Connor said. “One Australia where some people are fairly remunerated and another Australia where there is a working poor who are unable to sustain a modest, decent standard of living.”

He said that under an Abbott government a ‘two-tiered’ approach would mean “a slippery slope toward the wholesale cuts to penalty rates across the board”.

The government isn’t going to “draw conclusions based on this draft report”, according to Abetz, who noted that a number of the Commission’s draft recommendations “align with those made by the review of the Fair Work Act commissioned by Bill Shorten when he was Workplace Relations Minister but not implemented”.

“Once the final report has been released, the government will carefully consider all recommendations and those that [it] would seek to implement will be taken to the 2016 election to seek the endorsement of the Australian people,” Abetz said.

The Australian Council of Trade Unions was quick to argue that “there is no evidence to show that cutting penalty rates increases employment or productivity,” instead claiming any reduction would “simply [be] a raid on people’s wages that will create an underclass of working poor”.

“The gap between the minimum wage and average wages is currently the widest on record yet the Productivity Commission recommends using this as the starting point for future minimum wage increases, linking those increases to productivity and cutting this modest increase even further during high unemployment,” a spokesperson said.

While the Commission has recommended some changes to the system it was keen to point out it’s in need of “repair not replacement” because “Australia’s labour market performance and flexibility is relatively good by global standards”.

“Many of the concerns that pervaded historical arrangements have now abated,” the draft report said.

“Strike activity is low, wages are responsive to economic downturns and there are multiple forms of employment arrangements that offer employees and employers flexible options for working.”

The Greens’ spokesperson on Industrial Relations, Adam Bandt, was particularly concerned about the “body blow” that young workers would be dealt if the Commission’s recommended changes to penalty rates were adopted.

“With housing prices so high and wages growing so slowly, young people working in retail and hospitality depend on penalty rates to support themselves and make ends meet,” Bandt said.

“The Greens led the Senate in calling on Tony Abbott to exclude penalty rates and the minimum wage from the Productivity Commission report because we feared he would use it as an excuse to resurrect his attacks on the pay and conditions for Australians at work.

“Tony Abbott ignored the Senate’s call and we now fear the ‘dead, buried and cremated’ WorkChoices legislation is set to rise again under his leadership.”

Other recommendations – including “a new form of agreement, the ‘enterprise contract’, to fill the gap between enterprise agreements and individual contracts” – are now being considered in detail by stakeholders.

The final report is due in November this year.

Log in or register to post comments

Discuss this article

To control your subscriptions to discussions you participate in go to your Account Settings preferences and click the Subscriptions tab.

Enter your comments here

Andrew Dumas
Posted Tuesday, August 4, 2015 - 20:59

No surprises here. Just another attempt to crush the lifters into the ground while the leaners live off their labour.

Adam Ford
Posted Wednesday, August 5, 2015 - 08:57

I love the bit about "strike activity being low". After so many years of undermining union membership and effectively burying any information about its benefits, of course strike activity is low. It's still not an indicator of worker satisfaction though.

This user is a New Matilda supporter. boganbludging
Posted Wednesday, August 5, 2015 - 10:17

The union movement needs to modernise itself to counter the shifting attacks from this government.
I'm in a union and i see its relationship with its supposed progressive roots as going backwards, it smacks of conservativeness.
About time they overhauled their relationship with their membership, bring in direct democratic involvement in process, through better online presence and communication.
They have a 20th century attitude.

This user is a New Matilda supporter. swarmi
Posted Thursday, August 6, 2015 - 21:15

I have always been in the union when employed. The TWU was my last one. Unions are the first line of defense for workers.

What a pity than that the leadership have no accountability and doing deals with management usually ends up meaning they benefit at the members expense. For the average union official workers are just an opportunity, a bargaining chip, on their way to wherever - but it is not to a better world. It's not even a world free of exploitation. And it is getting worse as labour leaders make noises about the immediate and fail, willingly or not, to see the trend.

If they did they would be honest and tell those who depend on their advice and representation that the free market for workers is just modern day slavery dressed up as an enterprise bargain.

This user is a New Matilda supporter. aussiegreg
Posted Friday, August 7, 2015 - 16:14

I'm guessing the "two-tier" approach reflects the fact that it is only with small businesses in hospitality etc that we see the phenomenon of cafés, bookshops and the like which were formerly open on Sundays now being closed.

In these instances double-time penalty rates are clearly working against the people employed in those businesses (and not just consumers) since they miss out on work altogether on the Sunday.

It also means the business is more likely to go broke if it cannot increase its prices through the week without losing too many customers, because it has the same fixed overhead for the week (rents, licenses etc) while only taking six days' worth of income.

There are complications with businesses who are forced to open on Sundays by the terms of their leases in major shopping centres like Westfields, even though paying penalty rates mean they must run at a loss for the day.

That said, the "why should Sunday be double-time when Saturday is only time-and-a-half?" argument seems to apply (or not, depending on your ideology) across the board.