You want me to work Sunday? Then pay what's fair!

I’d rather the teens were paid less on weekends, and the full-time workers had their pay rate increased using the penalty-rate money saved.

Ghettosmurf87 said :

Maya123 said :

More sensible, is perhaps the suggestion I’ve seen from someone here to get rid of penalty rates for daytime, but increase the hourly rate. That deserves consideration, because why should someone be paid more for working one day than someone doing the same work and hours on another day. That’s discrimination! And the argument that people need the extra money from Sunday to pay rent, etc, doesn’t take into consideration those that don’t work or have the opportunity to work Sundays, who also have expenses.

I agree with the idea that Sunday pay should be no different to Saturday pay, the religious part of the differentiation is no longer prevalent. But weekends are still a common social construct that most of society follows.

Maya, once again, you have missed the point. Working on the weekend is unattractive to most people as that is the time period in which many social activities are scheduled and is also when the majority of the population is not working and so is able to interact with each other outside of work. If you were to make a flat rate across all 7 days, what incentive would there be for anyone to work on the weekend? You mean I can pick up the same money Mon-Fri and then socialise with all my other friends on the weekend like most of society? Awesome says the usual weekend worker. The only usual incentive to work weekends is the extra pay. Same as the only usual reason to work graveyard shifts. You don’t do it because it is socially convenient and fits you’re lifestyle, you do it because it is made worthwhile through penalty rates and therefore you agree to sacrifice the community standard of free time for it.

You simply come across as upset that someone on a weekend gets paid more for a job then someone who doesn’t work a weekend. If society was truly a 24/7 liquid construct, you would have a point. But it is not. The simple reality is that the majority of workers and society in general is structured around the Mon-Fri 8 hours during the day work week. Be this from schools, to social services, to banks etc.

When requiring someone to work outside of that structure, we pay them more. As history demonstrated that employers would rather strong-arm employees into working these hours without that extra compensation, the compensation, in the form of penalty rates, needed to be legislated so that workers were not exploited by employers seeking to maximise profits at their expense.

“Maya, once again, you have missed the point. Working on the weekend is unattractive to most people…”

What point have I missed? That if everyone is paid the same rate and if enough people don’t want to work certain hours/days they will be paid more as an incentive to work those times? Is that what I have missed? And if it isn’t necessary to pay more for those hours, it means enough people are willing to work those hours. The market will decide. Some people object to working weekends, but not everyone minds working on the weekend. They will get other days off.

“You simply come across as upset that someone on a weekend gets paid more for a job then someone who doesn’t work a weekend. If society was truly a 24/7 liquid construct, you would have a point. But it is not. The simple reality is that the majority of workers and society in general is structured around the Mon-Fri 8 hours during the day work week. Be this from schools, to social services, to banks etc.”

Times have changed and it is getting to be very much more a seven day a week society. Not everyone has school aged children, banks can be accessed much of the time by 24 hour internet, most people no longer save Sunday for church, etc. There are both advantages and disadvantages to a seven day a week society, with flexible hours. Travel to and from work is spread out more and would ease congestion is one advantage. Public transport would be less stressed. Some things, such as childcare would need to catch up, and in some places have, but other places it still needs to. Childcare would find it easier to offer, say weekend childcare, if they didn’t have to pay workers more to work on the weekend. It’s a flow on effect.

Maya123 said :

More sensible, is perhaps the suggestion I’ve seen from someone here to get rid of penalty rates for daytime, but increase the hourly rate. That deserves consideration, because why should someone be paid more for working one day than someone doing the same work and hours on another day. That’s discrimination! And the argument that people need the extra money from Sunday to pay rent, etc, doesn’t take into consideration those that don’t work or have the opportunity to work Sundays, who also have expenses.

I agree with the idea that Sunday pay should be no different to Saturday pay, the religious part of the differentiation is no longer prevalent. But weekends are still a common social construct that most of society follows.

Maya, once again, you have missed the point. Working on the weekend is unattractive to most people as that is the time period in which many social activities are scheduled and is also when the majority of the population is not working and so is able to interact with each other outside of work. If you were to make a flat rate across all 7 days, what incentive would there be for anyone to work on the weekend? You mean I can pick up the same money Mon-Fri and then socialise with all my other friends on the weekend like most of society? Awesome says the usual weekend worker. The only usual incentive to work weekends is the extra pay. Same as the only usual reason to work graveyard shifts. You don’t do it because it is socially convenient and fits you’re lifestyle, you do it because it is made worthwhile through penalty rates and therefore you agree to sacrifice the community standard of free time for it.

You simply come across as upset that someone on a weekend gets paid more for a job then someone who doesn’t work a weekend. If society was truly a 24/7 liquid construct, you would have a point. But it is not. The simple reality is that the majority of workers and society in general is structured around the Mon-Fri 8 hours during the day work week. Be this from schools, to social services, to banks etc.

When requiring someone to work outside of that structure, we pay them more. As history demonstrated that employers would rather strong-arm employees into working these hours without that extra compensation, the compensation, in the form of penalty rates, needed to be legislated so that workers were not exploited by employers seeking to maximise profits at their expense.

rubaiyat said :

chewy14 said :

rubaiyat said :

Maya123 said :

rubaiyat said :

Maya123 said :

recyclewarrior said :

If the public want to shop 24/7 they have to be prepared to pay for the privilege of doing so. If you run a business and cannot price your stock so it covers proper wages for staff working unsociable hours then perhaps it is the customer who should pay a premium price for the article they wish to purchase on a Sunday, be it shoes or food rather than the worker being penalized. If that doesn’t work then the business does not open those hours and the customer has to accept they need to change their expectations of 24/7 availability.

Can you please explain your logic of why you consider working hours on Sunday are more unsociable than working the same hours on Saturday.

Currently Sunday is about the only day we can get to see our children or them to see each other.

But as good and loyal corporate vassals we would not want to at all inconvenience the “needs” of business. Corporations have feelings too, and they feel their employees are selfishly putting themselves ahead of their owners who have so generously looked after them.

If the company can send their employees emails after hours telling them not to show up Monday, the least the employees is give their all as cheaply as possible over the weekend.

“Currently Sunday is about the only day we can get to see our children or them to see each other.”

That still doesn’t explain why Sunday should get more pay than Saturday. Other people might find Saturday more convenient to see their family, or Thursday, etc, or whatever the person individually considers convenient. It would be impossible to cater for everyone’s personal, individual preferred day off. If Sunday isn’t convenient for you don’t take a job that involves Sunday work. There were jobs I didn’t apply for if they weren’t convenient to my lifestyle, even though the job looked a good one. There has been no suggestion here that people won’t still get a couple of days off a week and that people will be forced to work seven day weeks.

There has been no suggestion because that has nothing to do with people being able to get together on a common day off, or being compensated for the deprivation of normal social contact. I waited when I was a student and the only reason I did the graveyard shift and weekends, leaving me a physical wreck, was the money.

You keep saying over and over that you only did odd hours a long time ago and only briefly.

That was the choice you made, even sacrificing pay to quit weekend work, and does not help your case that people who really have no choice, because of their jobs, should not be compensated.

The point is that they will be compensated if no one is willing to work those hours on those days but the businesses shouldn’t simply be forced to pay them extra, just because it’s a Sunday (or a Saturday).

If you remove the penalty loading and employees refuse to work on Sundays, then businesses will have to choose to pay higher rates on those days. If employers don’t have problems getting workers that are freely willing to work those days because it suits their lifestyles, then why should they get paid more?

What is special about that day over others?

We have gone over that multiple times and I bet you are only arguing this because you know you will not be compelled to work those hours at low wages.

The greatest contribution the Jews gave all civilisation was the invention of the universal day of rest not just for the idle rich.

We do not have the mythical level playing nor freedom to choose that you claim.

Children did not just refuse to work down coal mines, or woman decline to work for half pay to subsequently be sacked when they married.

We do not want to revisit every single past struggle for equity just because you refuse to remember history, or never learnt it in the first place.

Though even in Israel, whilst Saturday may be the day of rest, it is only the day of rest for some. Others do of course need to work, mostly in hospitality, service and tourism industries. So very much a two tiered system. No idea if they get penalty rates or not.

rubaiyat said :

chewy14 said :

rubaiyat said :

Maya123 said :

rubaiyat said :

Maya123 said :

recyclewarrior said :

If the public want to shop 24/7 they have to be prepared to pay for the privilege of doing so. If you run a business and cannot price your stock so it covers proper wages for staff working unsociable hours then perhaps it is the customer who should pay a premium price for the article they wish to purchase on a Sunday, be it shoes or food rather than the worker being penalized. If that doesn’t work then the business does not open those hours and the customer has to accept they need to change their expectations of 24/7 availability.

Can you please explain your logic of why you consider working hours on Sunday are more unsociable than working the same hours on Saturday.

Currently Sunday is about the only day we can get to see our children or them to see each other.

But as good and loyal corporate vassals we would not want to at all inconvenience the “needs” of business. Corporations have feelings too, and they feel their employees are selfishly putting themselves ahead of their owners who have so generously looked after them.

If the company can send their employees emails after hours telling them not to show up Monday, the least the employees is give their all as cheaply as possible over the weekend.

“Currently Sunday is about the only day we can get to see our children or them to see each other.”

That still doesn’t explain why Sunday should get more pay than Saturday. Other people might find Saturday more convenient to see their family, or Thursday, etc, or whatever the person individually considers convenient. It would be impossible to cater for everyone’s personal, individual preferred day off. If Sunday isn’t convenient for you don’t take a job that involves Sunday work. There were jobs I didn’t apply for if they weren’t convenient to my lifestyle, even though the job looked a good one. There has been no suggestion here that people won’t still get a couple of days off a week and that people will be forced to work seven day weeks.

There has been no suggestion because that has nothing to do with people being able to get together on a common day off, or being compensated for the deprivation of normal social contact. I waited when I was a student and the only reason I did the graveyard shift and weekends, leaving me a physical wreck, was the money.

You keep saying over and over that you only did odd hours a long time ago and only briefly.

That was the choice you made, even sacrificing pay to quit weekend work, and does not help your case that people who really have no choice, because of their jobs, should not be compensated.

The point is that they will be compensated if no one is willing to work those hours on those days but the businesses shouldn’t simply be forced to pay them extra, just because it’s a Sunday (or a Saturday).

If you remove the penalty loading and employees refuse to work on Sundays, then businesses will have to choose to pay higher rates on those days. If employers don’t have problems getting workers that are freely willing to work those days because it suits their lifestyles, then why should they get paid more?

What is special about that day over others?

We have gone over that multiple times and I bet you are only arguing this because you know you will not be compelled to work those hours at low wages.

The greatest contribution the Jews gave all civilisation was the invention of the universal day of rest not just for the idle rich.

We do not have the mythical level playing nor freedom to choose that you claim.

Children did not just refuse to work down coal mines, or woman decline to work for half pay to subsequently be sacked when they married.

We do not want to revisit every single past struggle for equity just because you refuse to remember history, or never learnt it in the first place.

“The greatest contribution the Jews gave all civilisation was the invention of the universal day of rest”

But you’ve been arguing how special Sunday is, but now you want Saturday as well!!

More sensible, is perhaps the suggestion I’ve seen from someone here to get rid of penalty rates for daytime, but increase the hourly rate. That deserves consideration, because why should someone be paid more for working one day than someone doing the same work and hours on another day. That’s discrimination! And the argument that people need the extra money from Sunday to pay rent, etc, doesn’t take into consideration those that don’t work or have the opportunity to work Sundays, who also have expenses.

chewy14 said :

rubaiyat said :

Maya123 said :

rubaiyat said :

Maya123 said :

recyclewarrior said :

If the public want to shop 24/7 they have to be prepared to pay for the privilege of doing so. If you run a business and cannot price your stock so it covers proper wages for staff working unsociable hours then perhaps it is the customer who should pay a premium price for the article they wish to purchase on a Sunday, be it shoes or food rather than the worker being penalized. If that doesn’t work then the business does not open those hours and the customer has to accept they need to change their expectations of 24/7 availability.

Can you please explain your logic of why you consider working hours on Sunday are more unsociable than working the same hours on Saturday.

Currently Sunday is about the only day we can get to see our children or them to see each other.

But as good and loyal corporate vassals we would not want to at all inconvenience the “needs” of business. Corporations have feelings too, and they feel their employees are selfishly putting themselves ahead of their owners who have so generously looked after them.

If the company can send their employees emails after hours telling them not to show up Monday, the least the employees is give their all as cheaply as possible over the weekend.

“Currently Sunday is about the only day we can get to see our children or them to see each other.”

That still doesn’t explain why Sunday should get more pay than Saturday. Other people might find Saturday more convenient to see their family, or Thursday, etc, or whatever the person individually considers convenient. It would be impossible to cater for everyone’s personal, individual preferred day off. If Sunday isn’t convenient for you don’t take a job that involves Sunday work. There were jobs I didn’t apply for if they weren’t convenient to my lifestyle, even though the job looked a good one. There has been no suggestion here that people won’t still get a couple of days off a week and that people will be forced to work seven day weeks.

There has been no suggestion because that has nothing to do with people being able to get together on a common day off, or being compensated for the deprivation of normal social contact. I waited when I was a student and the only reason I did the graveyard shift and weekends, leaving me a physical wreck, was the money.

You keep saying over and over that you only did odd hours a long time ago and only briefly.

That was the choice you made, even sacrificing pay to quit weekend work, and does not help your case that people who really have no choice, because of their jobs, should not be compensated.

The point is that they will be compensated if no one is willing to work those hours on those days but the businesses shouldn’t simply be forced to pay them extra, just because it’s a Sunday (or a Saturday).

If you remove the penalty loading and employees refuse to work on Sundays, then businesses will have to choose to pay higher rates on those days. If employers don’t have problems getting workers that are freely willing to work those days because it suits their lifestyles, then why should they get paid more?

What is special about that day over others?

We have gone over that multiple times and I bet you are only arguing this because you know you will not be compelled to work those hours at low wages.

The greatest contribution the Jews gave all civilisation was the invention of the universal day of rest not just for the idle rich.

We do not have the mythical level playing nor freedom to choose that you claim.

Children did not just refuse to work down coal mines, or woman decline to work for half pay to subsequently be sacked when they married.

We do not want to revisit every single past struggle for equity just because you refuse to remember history, or never learnt it in the first place.

chewy14 said :

The point is that they will be compensated if no one is willing to work those hours on those days but the businesses shouldn’t simply be forced to pay them extra, just because it’s a Sunday (or a Saturday).

If you remove the penalty loading and employees refuse to work on Sundays, then businesses will have to choose to pay higher rates on those days. If employers don’t have problems getting workers that are freely willing to work those days because it suits their lifestyles, then why should they get paid more?

What is special about that day over others?

The problem with this is that it is contingent on those employees to be able to afford to take a stand and refuse to work for less money. Many of the workers on weekends rely on that money to make ends meet. As with the USA, the lower paid echelons of society can’t afford to say no to any form of paid employment, as they will sink further into poverty while doing so, so instead they accept whatever meagre rations their employers are willing to dole out.

If your option is to say no to work on a weekend for half the amount of usual and therefore be unable to pay rent and so become homeless while waiting for your employer to feel some pressure, or to accept half the pay you previously were, keep the roof over your head, but go without a meal each day, you really have no option at all.

rubaiyat said :

Maya123 said :

rubaiyat said :

Maya123 said :

recyclewarrior said :

If the public want to shop 24/7 they have to be prepared to pay for the privilege of doing so. If you run a business and cannot price your stock so it covers proper wages for staff working unsociable hours then perhaps it is the customer who should pay a premium price for the article they wish to purchase on a Sunday, be it shoes or food rather than the worker being penalized. If that doesn’t work then the business does not open those hours and the customer has to accept they need to change their expectations of 24/7 availability.

Can you please explain your logic of why you consider working hours on Sunday are more unsociable than working the same hours on Saturday.

Currently Sunday is about the only day we can get to see our children or them to see each other.

But as good and loyal corporate vassals we would not want to at all inconvenience the “needs” of business. Corporations have feelings too, and they feel their employees are selfishly putting themselves ahead of their owners who have so generously looked after them.

If the company can send their employees emails after hours telling them not to show up Monday, the least the employees is give their all as cheaply as possible over the weekend.

“Currently Sunday is about the only day we can get to see our children or them to see each other.”

That still doesn’t explain why Sunday should get more pay than Saturday. Other people might find Saturday more convenient to see their family, or Thursday, etc, or whatever the person individually considers convenient. It would be impossible to cater for everyone’s personal, individual preferred day off. If Sunday isn’t convenient for you don’t take a job that involves Sunday work. There were jobs I didn’t apply for if they weren’t convenient to my lifestyle, even though the job looked a good one. There has been no suggestion here that people won’t still get a couple of days off a week and that people will be forced to work seven day weeks.

There has been no suggestion because that has nothing to do with people being able to get together on a common day off, or being compensated for the deprivation of normal social contact. I waited when I was a student and the only reason I did the graveyard shift and weekends, leaving me a physical wreck, was the money.

You keep saying over and over that you only did odd hours a long time ago and only briefly.

That was the choice you made, even sacrificing pay to quit weekend work, and does not help your case that people who really have no choice, because of their jobs, should not be compensated.

The point is that they will be compensated if no one is willing to work those hours on those days but the businesses shouldn’t simply be forced to pay them extra, just because it’s a Sunday (or a Saturday).

If you remove the penalty loading and employees refuse to work on Sundays, then businesses will have to choose to pay higher rates on those days. If employers don’t have problems getting workers that are freely willing to work those days because it suits their lifestyles, then why should they get paid more?

What is special about that day over others?

rubaiyat said :

Maya123 said :

rubaiyat said :

Maya123 said :

recyclewarrior said :

If the public want to shop 24/7 they have to be prepared to pay for the privilege of doing so. If you run a business and cannot price your stock so it covers proper wages for staff working unsociable hours then perhaps it is the customer who should pay a premium price for the article they wish to purchase on a Sunday, be it shoes or food rather than the worker being penalized. If that doesn’t work then the business does not open those hours and the customer has to accept they need to change their expectations of 24/7 availability.

Can you please explain your logic of why you consider working hours on Sunday are more unsociable than working the same hours on Saturday.

Currently Sunday is about the only day we can get to see our children or them to see each other.

But as good and loyal corporate vassals we would not want to at all inconvenience the “needs” of business. Corporations have feelings too, and they feel their employees are selfishly putting themselves ahead of their owners who have so generously looked after them.

If the company can send their employees emails after hours telling them not to show up Monday, the least the employees is give their all as cheaply as possible over the weekend.

“Currently Sunday is about the only day we can get to see our children or them to see each other.”

That still doesn’t explain why Sunday should get more pay than Saturday. Other people might find Saturday more convenient to see their family, or Thursday, etc, or whatever the person individually considers convenient. It would be impossible to cater for everyone’s personal, individual preferred day off. If Sunday isn’t convenient for you don’t take a job that involves Sunday work. There were jobs I didn’t apply for if they weren’t convenient to my lifestyle, even though the job looked a good one. There has been no suggestion here that people won’t still get a couple of days off a week and that people will be forced to work seven day weeks.

There has been no suggestion because that has nothing to do with people being able to get together on a common day off, or being compensated for the deprivation of normal social contact. I waited when I was a student and the only reason I did the graveyard shift and weekends, leaving me a physical wreck, was the money.

You keep saying over and over that you only did odd hours a long time ago and only briefly.

That was the choice you made, even sacrificing pay to quit weekend work, and does not help your case that people who really have no choice, because of their jobs, should not be compensated.

rubaiyat wrote, “There has been no suggestion because that has nothing to do with people being able to get together on a common day off”

Then why did you write, “Currently Sunday is about the only day we can get to see our children or them to see each other.”

rubaiyat wrote, “You keep saying over and over that you only did odd hours a long time ago and only briefly.”

I mentioned it twice. Hardly, to quote you, “over and over”, and only then in response to comments from you such as, “So you admit it is all theory for you. You never actually did it.”
I had to work the odd day on the weekend and evening (more commonly than weekends) right up to my retirement, as my job demanded it, (so hardly “a long time ago” in my working life), but I don’t hide the fact this was not everyday and my core hours were weekdays.

I have still to see a convincing argument as to why Sunday should be paid more than Saturday.

Maya123 said :

rubaiyat said :

Maya123 said :

recyclewarrior said :

If the public want to shop 24/7 they have to be prepared to pay for the privilege of doing so. If you run a business and cannot price your stock so it covers proper wages for staff working unsociable hours then perhaps it is the customer who should pay a premium price for the article they wish to purchase on a Sunday, be it shoes or food rather than the worker being penalized. If that doesn’t work then the business does not open those hours and the customer has to accept they need to change their expectations of 24/7 availability.

Can you please explain your logic of why you consider working hours on Sunday are more unsociable than working the same hours on Saturday.

Currently Sunday is about the only day we can get to see our children or them to see each other.

But as good and loyal corporate vassals we would not want to at all inconvenience the “needs” of business. Corporations have feelings too, and they feel their employees are selfishly putting themselves ahead of their owners who have so generously looked after them.

If the company can send their employees emails after hours telling them not to show up Monday, the least the employees is give their all as cheaply as possible over the weekend.

“Currently Sunday is about the only day we can get to see our children or them to see each other.”

That still doesn’t explain why Sunday should get more pay than Saturday. Other people might find Saturday more convenient to see their family, or Thursday, etc, or whatever the person individually considers convenient. It would be impossible to cater for everyone’s personal, individual preferred day off. If Sunday isn’t convenient for you don’t take a job that involves Sunday work. There were jobs I didn’t apply for if they weren’t convenient to my lifestyle, even though the job looked a good one. There has been no suggestion here that people won’t still get a couple of days off a week and that people will be forced to work seven day weeks.

There has been no suggestion because that has nothing to do with people being able to get together on a common day off, or being compensated for the deprivation of normal social contact. I waited when I was a student and the only reason I did the graveyard shift and weekends, leaving me a physical wreck, was the money.

You keep saying over and over that you only did odd hours a long time ago and only briefly.

That was the choice you made, even sacrificing pay to quit weekend work, and does not help your case that people who really have no choice, because of their jobs, should not be compensated.

rubaiyat said :

Maya123 said :

recyclewarrior said :

If the public want to shop 24/7 they have to be prepared to pay for the privilege of doing so. If you run a business and cannot price your stock so it covers proper wages for staff working unsociable hours then perhaps it is the customer who should pay a premium price for the article they wish to purchase on a Sunday, be it shoes or food rather than the worker being penalized. If that doesn’t work then the business does not open those hours and the customer has to accept they need to change their expectations of 24/7 availability.

Can you please explain your logic of why you consider working hours on Sunday are more unsociable than working the same hours on Saturday.

Currently Sunday is about the only day we can get to see our children or them to see each other.

But as good and loyal corporate vassals we would not want to at all inconvenience the “needs” of business. Corporations have feelings too, and they feel their employees are selfishly putting themselves ahead of their owners who have so generously looked after them.

If the company can send their employees emails after hours telling them not to show up Monday, the least the employees is give their all as cheaply as possible over the weekend.

“Currently Sunday is about the only day we can get to see our children or them to see each other.”

That still doesn’t explain why Sunday should get more pay than Saturday. Other people might find Saturday more convenient to see their family, or Thursday, etc, or whatever the person individually considers convenient. It would be impossible to cater for everyone’s personal, individual preferred day off. If Sunday isn’t convenient for you don’t take a job that involves Sunday work. There were jobs I didn’t apply for if they weren’t convenient to my lifestyle, even though the job looked a good one. There has been no suggestion here that people won’t still get a couple of days off a week and that people will be forced to work seven day weeks.

rubaiyat said :

JC said :

rubaiyat said :

curmudgery said :

Oh what a wonderful world some people live in! I am bemused to see how much gobbledegook some people can extrapolate from a post.

This thread is about penalty rates, business opening hours and vacant buildings in Canberra and my post, if you care to read it slowly, simply points out that there are factors affecting people that are not of the employers making or responsibility nor under their control.

No it isn’t.

As the title quite clearly says: “You want me to work Sunday? Then pay what’s fair!” with a photo of a barista employee demonstrating who this about.

Your take on this clearly demonstrates that no matter what is said you only see the “needs” of business, and the needs of the vast majority, the employees, the ones actually being discussed, don’t even exist.

curmudgery said :

It goes on to suggest that if a proposition isn’t cost-effective, business owners are unlikely to do it (and nor would you). It doesn’t mean that the business, as someone suggested, is going broke. What nonsense.

Next, the income on ‘good’ days is amortised over the whole trading period i.e. good trading days offset the bad trading days (they’re the days when you’re in your cubicle checking your horoscope). Did you know that the rent, wages and utilities don’t fall on bad trading days? No, they don’t. Do you see how that works?

Now that is so obviously wrong, it makes me wonder if you are really in business or just someone who fantasises they are part of the cigar smoking end of town.

Businesses selectively employ and distribute their staff, services and products as they see fit. They put on staff when they are needed and reduce them when they are not. This puts the burden on staff who are not paid for down time but expected to be on call to meet the employers needs.

Even the rent and utilities are not uniformly distributed. Utilities are run as needed and rent is not uniform. As in the case of supermarket aisles and display space where there is prime space going right down to basic non-earning storage which is changed to meet expectations.

Funny I just read what you wrote and it sounds to me like you agree with the post your replying to, especially when he said “amortised over the whole trading period”. You example is a perfect example of that.

Amortising is the paying off of the initial cost or debt of the business over a period of time and has nothing to do with the variable and manageable costs of labour and utilities.

Whilst it may not have been the technically correct choice of terms, the context that the poster was using the word in made it quite clear that he was referring to spreading the cost of business over the whole week.

JC said :

rubaiyat said :

curmudgery said :

Oh what a wonderful world some people live in! I am bemused to see how much gobbledegook some people can extrapolate from a post.

This thread is about penalty rates, business opening hours and vacant buildings in Canberra and my post, if you care to read it slowly, simply points out that there are factors affecting people that are not of the employers making or responsibility nor under their control.

No it isn’t.

As the title quite clearly says: “You want me to work Sunday? Then pay what’s fair!” with a photo of a barista employee demonstrating who this about.

Your take on this clearly demonstrates that no matter what is said you only see the “needs” of business, and the needs of the vast majority, the employees, the ones actually being discussed, don’t even exist.

curmudgery said :

It goes on to suggest that if a proposition isn’t cost-effective, business owners are unlikely to do it (and nor would you). It doesn’t mean that the business, as someone suggested, is going broke. What nonsense.

Next, the income on ‘good’ days is amortised over the whole trading period i.e. good trading days offset the bad trading days (they’re the days when you’re in your cubicle checking your horoscope). Did you know that the rent, wages and utilities don’t fall on bad trading days? No, they don’t. Do you see how that works?

Now that is so obviously wrong, it makes me wonder if you are really in business or just someone who fantasises they are part of the cigar smoking end of town.

Businesses selectively employ and distribute their staff, services and products as they see fit. They put on staff when they are needed and reduce them when they are not. This puts the burden on staff who are not paid for down time but expected to be on call to meet the employers needs.

Even the rent and utilities are not uniformly distributed. Utilities are run as needed and rent is not uniform. As in the case of supermarket aisles and display space where there is prime space going right down to basic non-earning storage which is changed to meet expectations.

Funny I just read what you wrote and it sounds to me like you agree with the post your replying to, especially when he said “amortised over the whole trading period”. You example is a perfect example of that.

Amortising is the paying off of the initial cost or debt of the business over a period of time and has nothing to do with the variable and manageable costs of labour and utilities.

gooterz said :

Most casuals already get 20% casual loading. This covers them working weekends and late and night odd hours.

You have to look at Sunday pay and age based awards together. You end up with middle management putting on cheap 14 year olds on the Sunday to save money. At least if it was an even playing field they’d be able to put regular staff on the Sunday and improve services.

The 15 year olds that work Sundays would work for less anyway. They’re there to earn some money but get experience. The ones who’ll benefit is the actual adult employees that will get increased wages.

I think you may be confusing the loading that higher hourly rate that casual workers get to compensate for no holiday pay loading and other indemnities that permanent workers get.

rubaiyat said :

curmudgery said :

Oh what a wonderful world some people live in! I am bemused to see how much gobbledegook some people can extrapolate from a post.

This thread is about penalty rates, business opening hours and vacant buildings in Canberra and my post, if you care to read it slowly, simply points out that there are factors affecting people that are not of the employers making or responsibility nor under their control.

No it isn’t.

As the title quite clearly says: “You want me to work Sunday? Then pay what’s fair!” with a photo of a barista employee demonstrating who this about.

Your take on this clearly demonstrates that no matter what is said you only see the “needs” of business, and the needs of the vast majority, the employees, the ones actually being discussed, don’t even exist.

curmudgery said :

It goes on to suggest that if a proposition isn’t cost-effective, business owners are unlikely to do it (and nor would you). It doesn’t mean that the business, as someone suggested, is going broke. What nonsense.

Next, the income on ‘good’ days is amortised over the whole trading period i.e. good trading days offset the bad trading days (they’re the days when you’re in your cubicle checking your horoscope). Did you know that the rent, wages and utilities don’t fall on bad trading days? No, they don’t. Do you see how that works?

Now that is so obviously wrong, it makes me wonder if you are really in business or just someone who fantasises they are part of the cigar smoking end of town.

Businesses selectively employ and distribute their staff, services and products as they see fit. They put on staff when they are needed and reduce them when they are not. This puts the burden on staff who are not paid for down time but expected to be on call to meet the employers needs.

Even the rent and utilities are not uniformly distributed. Utilities are run as needed and rent is not uniform. As in the case of supermarket aisles and display space where there is prime space going right down to basic non-earning storage which is changed to meet expectations.

Funny I just read what you wrote and it sounds to me like you agree with the post your replying to, especially when he said “amortised over the whole trading period”. You example is a perfect example of that.

gooterz said :

Most casuals already get 20% casual loading. This covers them working weekends and late and night odd hours.

No it isn’t. Casual pay is there to help cover you for not having holidays, no sick leave, not having any guarantee of shifts, far easier to sack etc.

Odd hours, split shifts, weekends are remunerated through penalty pay.

Maya123 said :

recyclewarrior said :

If the public want to shop 24/7 they have to be prepared to pay for the privilege of doing so. If you run a business and cannot price your stock so it covers proper wages for staff working unsociable hours then perhaps it is the customer who should pay a premium price for the article they wish to purchase on a Sunday, be it shoes or food rather than the worker being penalized. If that doesn’t work then the business does not open those hours and the customer has to accept they need to change their expectations of 24/7 availability.

Can you please explain your logic of why you consider working hours on Sunday are more unsociable than working the same hours on Saturday.

Currently Sunday is about the only day we can get to see our children or them to see each other.

But as good and loyal corporate vassals we would not want to at all inconvenience the “needs” of business. Corporations have feelings too, and they feel their employees are selfishly putting themselves ahead of their owners who have so generously looked after them.

If the company can send their employees emails after hours telling them not to show up Monday, the least the employees is give their all as cheaply as possible over the weekend.

Most casuals already get 20% casual loading. This covers them working weekends and late and night odd hours.

You have to look at Sunday pay and age based awards together. You end up with middle management putting on cheap 14 year olds on the Sunday to save money. At least if it was an even playing field they’d be able to put regular staff on the Sunday and improve services.

The 15 year olds that work Sundays would work for less anyway. They’re there to earn some money but get experience. The ones who’ll benefit is the actual adult employees that will get increased wages.

recyclewarrior said :

If the public want to shop 24/7 they have to be prepared to pay for the privilege of doing so. If you run a business and cannot price your stock so it covers proper wages for staff working unsociable hours then perhaps it is the customer who should pay a premium price for the article they wish to purchase on a Sunday, be it shoes or food rather than the worker being penalized. If that doesn’t work then the business does not open those hours and the customer has to accept they need to change their expectations of 24/7 availability.

Can you please explain your logic of why you consider working hours on Sunday are more unsociable than working the same hours on Saturday.

If the public want to shop 24/7 they have to be prepared to pay for the privilege of doing so. If you run a business and cannot price your stock so it covers proper wages for staff working unsociable hours then perhaps it is the customer who should pay a premium price for the article they wish to purchase on a Sunday, be it shoes or food rather than the worker being penalized. If that doesn’t work then the business does not open those hours and the customer has to accept they need to change their expectations of 24/7 availability.

Maybe you’re right and there is no difference between Saturdays and Sundays. Let’s put Saturdays and the higher Sunday rate then.

chewy14 said :

You mentioned the US specifically because of their industrial relations and lower protection for workers such as low or no minimum wages. No one has suggested moving to anything like the US system and I specifically have said that if penalty rates are dropped, the normal rate should be raised to compensate.

The Australian System is an arbitrated, negotiated, minimum pay rate with compensation for aditional burdens placed on employees.

Taking that away, in whole or in part IS a movement towards the American system of management dictating to staff, with a largely unrestrained fist inside the glove to back it up.

The example of the USA is constantly raised by those who see it as the other man’s fields always being greener but never really looking at the whole picture or specific details of what that means.

Economic prosperity is actually built on a broad distribution and reward for effort, which circulates back into the economy as the middle and lower classes spend their wages.

America’s post Reagan shift to strip wealth from the lower and middle classes and move it under the mattresses of the rich, which is where it gathers dust, has been the single greatest cause of America’s economic decline, as those rich have also manipulated the tax system so their accumulated wealth dries up the government income that they mine.

Their parimonious attitude to “Big Government” doesn’t stop them freeloading off taxpayers’ subsidies and government contracts or sending the chidren of the poor into senseless mismanaged wars that vanish unbelievable quantities of money into the hands of military contractors or other major corporations who clean up the fiscal spill.

curmudgery said :

Oh what a wonderful world some people live in! I am bemused to see how much gobbledegook some people can extrapolate from a post.

This thread is about penalty rates, business opening hours and vacant buildings in Canberra and my post, if you care to read it slowly, simply points out that there are factors affecting people that are not of the employers making or responsibility nor under their control.

No it isn’t.

As the title quite clearly says: “You want me to work Sunday? Then pay what’s fair!” with a photo of a barista employee demonstrating who this about.

Your take on this clearly demonstrates that no matter what is said you only see the “needs” of business, and the needs of the vast majority, the employees, the ones actually being discussed, don’t even exist.

curmudgery said :

It goes on to suggest that if a proposition isn’t cost-effective, business owners are unlikely to do it (and nor would you). It doesn’t mean that the business, as someone suggested, is going broke. What nonsense.

Next, the income on ‘good’ days is amortised over the whole trading period i.e. good trading days offset the bad trading days (they’re the days when you’re in your cubicle checking your horoscope). Did you know that the rent, wages and utilities don’t fall on bad trading days? No, they don’t. Do you see how that works?

Now that is so obviously wrong, it makes me wonder if you are really in business or just someone who fantasises they are part of the cigar smoking end of town.

Businesses selectively employ and distribute their staff, services and products as they see fit. They put on staff when they are needed and reduce them when they are not. This puts the burden on staff who are not paid for down time but expected to be on call to meet the employers needs.

Even the rent and utilities are not uniformly distributed. Utilities are run as needed and rent is not uniform. As in the case of supermarket aisles and display space where there is prime space going right down to basic non-earning storage which is changed to meet expectations.

rubaiyat said :

chewy14 said :

Maya123 said :

rubaiyat wrote, “If you want a USA lifestyle, move there and take the rough with the smooth.”
On most subjects normally I like what you write and consider your writing sensible, but on this subject you are getting carried away and silly.
I have not read anywhere of any suggestion to drop the basic hourly rate, so not a good comparison. Only to drop the Sunday rate to the basic rate. If market forces are otherwise, a higher rate will be paid. From Wikipedia I read the following, “The American federal government requires a wage of at least $2.13 per hour be paid to employees that receive at least $30 per month in tips.”
I don’t believe anyone has suggested, or you have any facts that suggest that Australian wages will be dropped to $2.13 an hour; your “USA lifestyle” suggestion.

Yeah but who wants to have a reasonable debate when you can chuck cute strawmen around?

A strawman within the strawman!

Who mentioned Australian wages dropping to to $2.13 other than Maya123?

The strawman argument itself is a strawman in itself. A classic case of if we are not slavishly copying the Americans in practice we are mouthing all their half informed language.

I argue for everyone to actually think and act for themselves. That step begins with using your own language and words, not copying and pasting set phrases from the online desert of ideas.

btw 11 American states do not even have a minimum wage, to allow for the possibility of no wages at all and the eventual return of formal legislated slavery once all this post Civil War insanity is finally over.

You mentioned the US specifically because of their industrial relations and lower protection for workers such as low or no minimum wages. No one has suggested moving to anything like the US system and I specifically have said that if penalty rates are dropped, the normal rate should be raised to compensate.

chewy14 said :

Maya123 said :

rubaiyat wrote, “If you want a USA lifestyle, move there and take the rough with the smooth.”
On most subjects normally I like what you write and consider your writing sensible, but on this subject you are getting carried away and silly.
I have not read anywhere of any suggestion to drop the basic hourly rate, so not a good comparison. Only to drop the Sunday rate to the basic rate. If market forces are otherwise, a higher rate will be paid. From Wikipedia I read the following, “The American federal government requires a wage of at least $2.13 per hour be paid to employees that receive at least $30 per month in tips.”
I don’t believe anyone has suggested, or you have any facts that suggest that Australian wages will be dropped to $2.13 an hour; your “USA lifestyle” suggestion.

Yeah but who wants to have a reasonable debate when you can chuck cute strawmen around?

A strawman within the strawman!

Who mentioned Australian wages dropping to to $2.13 other than Maya123?

The strawman argument itself is a strawman in itself. A classic case of if we are not slavishly copying the Americans in practice we are mouthing all their half informed language.

I argue for everyone to actually think and act for themselves. That step begins with using your own language and words, not copying and pasting set phrases from the online desert of ideas.

btw 11 American states do not even have a minimum wage, to allow for the possibility of no wages at all and the eventual return of formal legislated slavery once all this post Civil War insanity is finally over.

BenjaminRose1991 said :

As a person working in retail, I like penalty rates however I echo the remarks made about penalties between Saturday and Sunday. I do not support Sunday penalty rates, Weekend penalty rates should be equal across both days. A “Weekend Penalty” should be something attractive to staff but not insane. Time + 25% sounds good to me being someone in retail.

A Vicious cycle is in effect. Sunday rates create the financial motive to restrict trading hours, fewer trading hours means less customers leading to lower sales leading to tightening the hours to ensure the day is a break-even one. Lather-Rinse-Repeat.

What fewer hours, what restricted trading hours? Staff are working public holidays AND longer hours.

Supermarkets are about the only area that even vaguely could be considered to usefully open the really early and late hours and even they have given up the graveyard shifts because the public didn’t agree and didn’t show up, amply showing that the “need” did not exist.

As has already been said we have a huge surplus of retail outlets, and businesses are casting about for things THEY CAN CHANGE or BLAME. The poor staff who are sent into battle the void of shoppers, who thankfully have found a limit to their pointless consumption, are the ones who are supposed to make the sacrifices on management’s behalf.

As a person working in retail, I like penalty rates however I echo the remarks made about penalties between Saturday and Sunday. I do not support Sunday penalty rates, Weekend penalty rates should be equal across both days. A “Weekend Penalty” should be something attractive to staff but not insane. Time + 25% sounds good to me being someone in retail.

A Vicious cycle is in effect. Sunday rates create the financial motive to restrict trading hours, fewer trading hours means less customers leading to lower sales leading to tightening the hours to ensure the day is a break-even one. Lather-Rinse-Repeat.

So it would appear we’ll be heading the way of the US for restaurant/cafe/bar staff. They’ll be relying on tips.

I think this is actually a conversation that Australia needs to have. I can see pluses and minuses to both sides of the issue.

Now, before people go berserk, I should point out that I don’t like the idea of the American model at all, for any number of reasons. The first is that it has a potent psychological effect on the entire society, in essence (in my view) setting in concrete that ideals of economic purity are more important than treating people with respect, no matter what work they do, and essentially shifting the culture from one of “work to live” towards “live to work”.

The second is that while economic purists may point to economic theories that suggest unemployment rates in a nation with high wages will always be higher than those in a nation where market forces determine wages is disproven by the last 20 years of economic history. Australia’s unemployment rate has been below that of the United States for much of that time. I’m not suggesting that’s always true, but I am arguing that the opposite argument is also not conclusive – in both cases there must be more to it.

I also wonder if part of the reason Australia did not crash in the GFC is because our relatively high wages allowed aggregate economic demand to hold up more than it did in countries where people did not earn enough to boost their consumption even in good times (looking at the UK and the USA in this respect).

So, I hope that I’ve established I’m not a ruthless capitalist with no concern for the broader consequences of economic policy. But I do think that penalty rates should be looked at, and possibly cut in some cases.

My reasoning comes from having spent time in Japan, which seems to sit halfway between Australia and the USA on this front. Japan has no penalty rates that I know of, or if they do apply (I’m not sure), it appears to occur on an industry or even an enterprise level.

Japan has some of the world’s best customer service, and part of the reason for it is that there are enough staff to assist with customers in most places, even when it gets busy. What it also means is that the AVERAGE cost of living is lower than Australia’s in many places. Outside of Tokyo, in many places, on current exchange rates of about Y90/$A you can buy a meal for as little as 300yen (roughly $3.30), and a good meal for 1500 yen ($A16.50). A lot of other services are cheaper than their Aussie equivalents as well.

What this means in practical terms is that for the majority of Japanese people (not all, granted) is that even those people working in the convenience store or small cafe can afford to pay for most of these services because the average cost for everyday goods is affordable for them. And Japan differs from the USA because it has a good public health system, and a reasonably funded public education system.

By contrast, in Australia, people in professional jobs can afford to pay $25-$35 for a meal when necessary – but it’s a much tighter argument for those working in child care for only $18-$20/hour.
And for people working in service industries in Australia, how much more expensive (relative to their wages) is it to try to pay for professional services – dentists, medical specialists, or even trades like plumbers or sparkies?

The trouble with high minimum wages is that I think it may contribute to Australian levels of customer service, and stress for the people who are employed on the weekend, because there are just not enough other staff around to call upon for help.

In light of all this, rather than just screaming blue murder about the removal of penalty rates, what else could we do that would (a) ensure that people earnt a living wage, regardless of what day of the week they worked, and (b) helped to bring our overall cost structure down for everyone?

Could it be possible to apply a lower tax rate on the weekends (both days) across all industries, meaning that while employers did not need to pay more for staff on these days, but that the people working upon these days, got to keep more of what they earned? Conversely, those of us lucky enough to work standard hours may need to pay higher taxes to cover the cost of this. It is possible (especially with the removal of penalty rates as a trade-off for this) that such a move could actually help to create employment, and/or to help our customer service levels across many industries.

vintage123 said :

Umm, that is my point. If defence cannot work out that one role deserves a larger service allowance than the other then what hope in hell does civilian enterprises have.

Anyway of my two colleagues, have a guess which one was divorced twice in nine years, left in financial ruin and who now is very cynical and negative about that stage of his life. He is also the one who is in and out of St John of God and Hyson Green. Now we shouldn’t be exposing anyone to this kind of discrimination and treatment. The least we can do is pay them fairly for the work they do.

You clearly missed my point. I am saying that all of them are paid to work 24×7 so that is already factored into their pay. The fact that some only work 9-5 M-F is not the point, good luck to them of course.

curmudgery said :

Vintage123 – my posts are generally short and to the point. I don’t wish to burden the reader with a lot of ill-considered ramblings. I don’t know why you’re fixated with the idea that the business must be going bust or pear-shaped or I’m blaming wages. That’s just something you’ve made up.

I’m saying that in business, if the numbers don’t make sense then the proposition is a bad one – whether it’s about investing in a new advertising scheme or stocking a new line of product or opening on Sundays.

Think . . . then type.

Righto. I thought about it for five minutes.

So that I am crystal clear on this. Your three posts were basically saying, if the numbers don’t add up, then don’t start the business.

Ummmm…………..I am fairly sure I worked that out selling apples at age 5, but thanks anyway.

As for my ramblings, someone must like them……your government pays me handsomely for my views and extensive business knowledge.

But hey, it’s not me versus you, we all use this post for different agendas, my companies use it for feedback on concepts in preparation for lobbying government, and for this purpose it works quite well. I do offer some personal advice free of charge to those who care to take the time and effort to read my “ramblings”, but hey, if your not keen for the free info, by all means call the office and I will gladly sit down and have a chat.

V123

curmudgery said :

Vintage123 – my posts are generally short and to the point. I don’t wish to burden the reader with a lot of ill-considered ramblings. I don’t know why you’re fixated with the idea that the business must be going bust or pear-shaped or I’m blaming wages. That’s just something you’ve made up.

I’m saying that in business, if the numbers don’t make sense then the proposition is a bad one – whether it’s about investing in a new advertising scheme or stocking a new line of product or opening on Sundays.

Think . . . then type.

……….ok

Weekends are an anachronism. We should be paid penalty rates for working after hours, but not for weekends.

JC said :

vintage123 said :

JC said :

vintage123 said :

The more I think about it, Dept of Defence has had it correct the whole time, nil overtime and nil penalty rates with a 24/7 work roster. Yeah let’s just follow their lead.

I used to work for Defence and got quite good penalty rates. I was a civilian of course.

Though in the case of the ADF thye do get quite substantial compensation for the 24×7 lifestyle and if they need to go and do what they are there for get even more again. Not saying that is a bad or wrong thing however.

What compensation is that JC? Not sure their is actually any compensation directly linked to work hours. There are entitlements linked to other things though.

In fact I have two colleagues who both served with th military, as uniformed members. Both were of the same rank, and worked for 9 years. One did 24/7, which consisted of one 8 days total off a month, one day off between, rotating through 05-16, 14-23, 21-05, 07-17, 16-06. The other did no weekends and a M-F 08-17. Both same pay and allowances and entitlements.

They are all paid on a 24×7 basis even if that isn’t what they actually work.

Umm, that is my point. If defence cannot work out that one role deserves a larger service allowance than the other then what hope in hell does civilian enterprises have.

Anyway of my two colleagues, have a guess which one was divorced twice in nine years, left in financial ruin and who now is very cynical and negative about that stage of his life. He is also the one who is in and out of St John of God and Hyson Green. Now we shouldn’t be exposing anyone to this kind of discrimination and treatment. The least we can do is pay them fairly for the work they do.

Vintage123 – my posts are generally short and to the point. I don’t wish to burden the reader with a lot of ill-considered ramblings. I don’t know why you’re fixated with the idea that the business must be going bust or pear-shaped or I’m blaming wages. That’s just something you’ve made up.

I’m saying that in business, if the numbers don’t make sense then the proposition is a bad one – whether it’s about investing in a new advertising scheme or stocking a new line of product or opening on Sundays.

Think . . . then type.

vintage123 said :

JC said :

vintage123 said :

The more I think about it, Dept of Defence has had it correct the whole time, nil overtime and nil penalty rates with a 24/7 work roster. Yeah let’s just follow their lead.

I used to work for Defence and got quite good penalty rates. I was a civilian of course.

Though in the case of the ADF thye do get quite substantial compensation for the 24×7 lifestyle and if they need to go and do what they are there for get even more again. Not saying that is a bad or wrong thing however.

What compensation is that JC? Not sure their is actually any compensation directly linked to work hours. There are entitlements linked to other things though.

In fact I have two colleagues who both served with th military, as uniformed members. Both were of the same rank, and worked for 9 years. One did 24/7, which consisted of one 8 days total off a month, one day off between, rotating through 05-16, 14-23, 21-05, 07-17, 16-06. The other did no weekends and a M-F 08-17. Both same pay and allowances and entitlements.

They are all paid on a 24×7 basis even if that isn’t what they actually work.

curmudgery said :

Oh what a wonderful world some people live in! I am bemused to see how much gobbledegook some people can extrapolate from a post.

This thread is about penalty rates, business opening hours and vacant buildings in Canberra and my post, if you care to read it slowly, simply points out that there are factors affecting people that are not of the employers making or responsibility nor under their control.

It goes on to suggest that if a proposition isn’t cost-effective, business owners are unlikely to do it (and nor would you). It doesn’t mean that the business, as someone suggested, is going broke. What nonsense.

Next, the income on ‘good’ days is amortised over the whole trading period i.e. good trading days offset the bad trading days (they’re the days when you’re in your cubicle checking your horoscope). Did you know that the rent, wages and utilities don’t fall on bad trading days? No, they don’t. Do you see how that works?

As for the appalling cost of pizza slices in New York, well … I think we should invade.

But your posts are somewhat vague, and I am guessing like myself, we are not sure if you are a business owner, or if you have had any experience running a business.

There are many respondents like myself who have many years owning and running both successful and not so successful businesses.

My point is that if things are going pear shaped and if you are blaming the wages, then you are not competant to be running the business.

Oh what a wonderful world some people live in! I am bemused to see how much gobbledegook some people can extrapolate from a post.

This thread is about penalty rates, business opening hours and vacant buildings in Canberra and my post, if you care to read it slowly, simply points out that there are factors affecting people that are not of the employers making or responsibility nor under their control.

It goes on to suggest that if a proposition isn’t cost-effective, business owners are unlikely to do it (and nor would you). It doesn’t mean that the business, as someone suggested, is going broke. What nonsense.

Next, the income on ‘good’ days is amortised over the whole trading period i.e. good trading days offset the bad trading days (they’re the days when you’re in your cubicle checking your horoscope). Did you know that the rent, wages and utilities don’t fall on bad trading days? No, they don’t. Do you see how that works?

As for the appalling cost of pizza slices in New York, well … I think we should invade.

JC said :

vintage123 said :

The more I think about it, Dept of Defence has had it correct the whole time, nil overtime and nil penalty rates with a 24/7 work roster. Yeah let’s just follow their lead.

I used to work for Defence and got quite good penalty rates. I was a civilian of course.

Though in the case of the ADF thye do get quite substantial compensation for the 24×7 lifestyle and if they need to go and do what they are there for get even more again. Not saying that is a bad or wrong thing however.

What compensation is that JC? Not sure their is actually any compensation directly linked to work hours. There are entitlements linked to other things though.

In fact I have two colleagues who both served with th military, as uniformed members. Both were of the same rank, and worked for 9 years. One did 24/7, which consisted of one 8 days total off a month, one day off between, rotating through 05-16, 14-23, 21-05, 07-17, 16-06. The other did no weekends and a M-F 08-17. Both same pay and allowances and entitlements.

Maya123 said :

rubaiyat wrote, “If you want a USA lifestyle, move there and take the rough with the smooth.”
On most subjects normally I like what you write and consider your writing sensible, but on this subject you are getting carried away and silly.
I have not read anywhere of any suggestion to drop the basic hourly rate, so not a good comparison. Only to drop the Sunday rate to the basic rate. If market forces are otherwise, a higher rate will be paid. From Wikipedia I read the following, “The American federal government requires a wage of at least $2.13 per hour be paid to employees that receive at least $30 per month in tips.”
I don’t believe anyone has suggested, or you have any facts that suggest that Australian wages will be dropped to $2.13 an hour; your “USA lifestyle” suggestion.

Yeah but who wants to have a reasonable debate when you can chuck cute strawmen around?

rubaiyat wrote, “If you want a USA lifestyle, move there and take the rough with the smooth.”
On most subjects normally I like what you write and consider your writing sensible, but on this subject you are getting carried away and silly.
I have not read anywhere of any suggestion to drop the basic hourly rate, so not a good comparison. Only to drop the Sunday rate to the basic rate. If market forces are otherwise, a higher rate will be paid. From Wikipedia I read the following, “The American federal government requires a wage of at least $2.13 per hour be paid to employees that receive at least $30 per month in tips.”
I don’t believe anyone has suggested, or you have any facts that suggest that Australian wages will be dropped to $2.13 an hour; your “USA lifestyle” suggestion.

curmudgery said :

It’s not the employer’s fault that child care is expensive or that public transport is poor or that someone wanting an income is also trying to juggle family life, social life and a thesis on the inner workings of the criminal mind. It’s not the employer’s making or responsibility.

An hour’s work is an hour’s work; nothing more – and margins are tight. If that hour costs 1.5 times that of the previous hour, does it generate 1.5 times the income? No?

Well actually the answer is YES. During the normal working week many of the industries they are talking about dropping penaty rates from are significantly quieter then they are at weekends. At weekends these people come out to shop, drink and eat.

So quite clearly the amount of money earned per employee is actually different based on day of week.

Personally I am astonished by some of the arguments in this thread for cutting rates and in particular people justifying some industries to keep it and some to cut it. Clearly I am against it, but if it is done it needs to be for everyone. Afterall the value of a Sunday is the same weather one is a 9-5 M-F worker, someone dong 24×7 shift or those that work on weekends to cater for those that are ‘lucky enough’ to have the weekend off. And whilst these arrangements have their origins in history and religion the way society has moved means these days are just as important, but for different reasons.

vintage123 said :

The more I think about it, Dept of Defence has had it correct the whole time, nil overtime and nil penalty rates with a 24/7 work roster. Yeah let’s just follow their lead.

I used to work for Defence and got quite good penalty rates. I was a civilian of course.

Though in the case of the ADF thye do get quite substantial compensation for the 24×7 lifestyle and if they need to go and do what they are there for get even more again. Not saying that is a bad or wrong thing however.

simsim said :

It’s commonly understood in our society that the weekend is a time for people to socialise, to catch up with friends, family and to recharge their batteries. Food services are one of the great beneficiaries of this social standard – try going to a suburban cafe on Monday to Friday and see how easy it is to get a table for breakfast, versus trying to brave the hordes on a Saturday or Sunday. Yet there’s this continuing reluctance to understand that with this great benefit of additional custom comes the requirement to compensate your workers for making them work, literally, unsocialble hours (hours that impinge on the ability of the staff to socialise).

+1. I spent quite a few years working in hospitality on the side. The majority of my shifts fell on Wednesday through Sunday, and always at times when my mates were getting together or going out. These were also the times when things were at their busiest and we were getting as much money in the till as possible. Ironically, it was also the time when business owners/managers were most likely to be at home relaxing. Those weekend penalty rates mean an awful lot to the staff who work hard for them. And why shouldn’t a penalty rate apply? Afterall, the working week for the average Joe is supposed to be 08:30 to 17:00 Monday to Friday. Shouldn’t *ALL* people who work outside of normal ‘business’ hours be compensated accordingly?

If weekend penalty rates mean the difference between a business thriving or sinking, then let it sink. The business was not doing well in the first place. It might help to thin out the oversupply of coffee shops and nail salons.

Ill be interested to see if this goes through whether cafes and restaurants actually do drop the “surcharges” that apply on Sundays and public holidays.

It’s commonly understood in our society that the weekend is a time for people to socialise, to catch up with friends, family and to recharge their batteries. Food services are one of the great beneficiaries of this social standard – try going to a suburban cafe on Monday to Friday and see how easy it is to get a table for breakfast, versus trying to brave the hordes on a Saturday or Sunday. Yet there’s this continuing reluctance to understand that with this great benefit of additional custom comes the requirement to compensate your workers for making them work, literally, unsocialble hours (hours that impinge on the ability of the staff to socialise).

Now, there is a different talk to have about why Saturday and Sunday are treated differently, and these are indeed fair conversations to have. But let’s not pretend that weekends are identical to weekdays.

The run down ex Clouston Hall 185 sq m shopfront in dying Garema Place is currently being offered at $120,000/year.

Add repairs and fitouts ($300k-$500k depending on quality, possibly double that for a quality restaurant) and you can see where most of the money goes for a retail/dining business.

If we look at the problem with both eyes, not just the right, businesses should be asking why, given the high vacancy rates in the City, property managers are allowing sites to remain vacant with rents set at such ludicrously unsustainable levels?

Why have the property managers allowed so much low grade unimproved commercial space to dominate Canberra?

If anyone should take a haircut they should. They have let property rot for decades. Squeezing out every dollar in the good times with only minimal maintenance and improvements.

I know from trying to lease an ordinary shopfront for a business in humble Weston, that appeared to have been vacant for a while, rent is a far greater burden on doing business than the comparatively piddling extra for the times when you are getting the maximum return on your employees.

When rent in Sydney reaches $11,560 per sq m per year and in Melbourne $8,700, what the heck difference do staff penalty rates matter?

But business and their apologists figure staff are an easy target.

BTW. Yes that hour does earn much more than 1.5 times the ordinary hour, which is why businesses chase the weekend and late hours which are so lucrative. The hours all the shoppers and dinners demand they get served and fed and so fill the shops and restaurants.

Does the employer say why should I pay more rent for the square metre in the shopping mall than the square metre outside the shopping mall and demand the government give them a free ride?

No, because they may be arch-hypocrites but they are not totally stupid.

curmudgery said :

It’s not the employer’s fault that child care is expensive or that public transport is poor or that someone wanting an income is also trying to juggle family life, social life and a thesis on the inner workings of the criminal mind. It’s not the employer’s making or responsibility.

An hour’s work is an hour’s work; nothing more – and margins are tight. If that hour costs 1.5 times that of the previous hour, does it generate 1.5 times the income? No? Then the numbers don’t work. You’re running at a loss to keep someone in a job! Close up and go home. It’s simply not worth it.

Good luck with your future.

The employee pays if they have to work long hours, broken shifts, dangerous or health threatening hours.

Is the employer sharing their profits or the proceeds of selling the business? Why should the employee always subsidise the lifestyle of the employer? Mostly the employer is by the pool, or home in bed, when the shift workers are working odd hours making them money.

Most employers are not doing it tough. If they can’t manage their business after paying the employees sufficiently to cover their costs, let them do the work. The “market will sort it out” if the employers don’t get up to their usual efforts to twist the market and regulations to their advantage. The trouble is greed has no bounds and many can only enjoy their money if they take someone else’s.

America’s working poor exist because of market distortions, not despite them. There is a reason the government has to use taxpayer’s moneys to feed and sustain people who should be earning enough to support themselves. It is also the principle reason why the USA has such a dearth of quality cafés and restaurants and instead factory feeds the masses with nutrient poor factory produced junk food.

The working poor are desperate to eek out an existence on what little they get. NY has $1 pizza slices, churned out en mass in hole in the wall operations, which have a smear of tomato sauce on the minimal dough and the usual bad US cheese on top. I watched as the people who are attempting to live off this awful diet, buy a slice then shake as much cheese on top as they can manage, to get the maximum artery choking calories for their buck.

If you want a USA lifestyle, move there and take the rough with the smooth. They are always looking for cheaper labour, let it be you. They are also looking for moving targets, and inmates for their huge privately run taxpayer funded prison system when you almost inevitably cross over the line from poverty to lawbreaker by accident or in sheer desperation.

curmudgery said :

It’s not the employer’s fault that child care is expensive or that public transport is poor or that someone wanting an income is also trying to juggle family life, social life and a thesis on the inner workings of the criminal mind. It’s not the employer’s making or responsibility.

An hour’s work is an hour’s work; nothing more – and margins are tight. If that hour costs 1.5 times that of the previous hour, does it generate 1.5 times the income? No? Then the numbers don’t work. You’re running at a loss to keep someone in a job! Close up and go home. It’s simply not worth it.

Good luck with your future.

If things are that tight in your business mate, your doing something wrong. Actually your doing a lot wrong!!!!! Anyone who says penalty rates are the cause of a business going broke are not telling the truth.

rubaiyat said :

Maya123 said :

Christia said :

I work every weekend (Saturday’s and Sunday’s and I do all PH in retail) and I rely on these penalty rates. It’s hard enough finding staff members willing to commit to doing weekend shifts as it is, I think cutting penalty rates won’t help small businesses find or keep reliable staff members.

If what you say turns out to be true, then market forces will make the business pay more.

Or manipulate the system so you force certain people to do work that you won’t do, at rates that you won’t tolerate if it it is you having to do the work.

I think we can safely leave it to the small minded and selfish to shoot themselves in the foot, or demand that the government then pay for their middle class welfare “entitlements”.

My last job was child care at $20 an hour. You are mouthing rubbish.

It’s not the employer’s fault that child care is expensive or that public transport is poor or that someone wanting an income is also trying to juggle family life, social life and a thesis on the inner workings of the criminal mind. It’s not the employer’s making or responsibility.

An hour’s work is an hour’s work; nothing more – and margins are tight. If that hour costs 1.5 times that of the previous hour, does it generate 1.5 times the income? No? Then the numbers don’t work. You’re running at a loss to keep someone in a job! Close up and go home. It’s simply not worth it.

Good luck with your future.

Maya123 said :

Christia said :

I work every weekend (Saturday’s and Sunday’s and I do all PH in retail) and I rely on these penalty rates. It’s hard enough finding staff members willing to commit to doing weekend shifts as it is, I think cutting penalty rates won’t help small businesses find or keep reliable staff members.

If what you say turns out to be true, then market forces will make the business pay more.

Or manipulate the system so you force certain people to do work that you won’t do, at rates that you won’t tolerate if it it is you having to do the work.

I think we can safely leave it to the small minded and selfish to shoot themselves in the foot, or demand that the government then pay for their middle class welfare “entitlements”.

It’s got me thinking that if this is successful and we treat Saturday and Sunday like any other day, does it then mean that their is an expectation for school to provide a seven day service under this re-normalised week. If you can drop kids at school on the weekend then that will work. Teachers wouldn’t get penalty rates though cause faIrs-fair. Also does it mean all of the weekend surcharges are scrapped. And do we change all the parking signs from M-F to M-M.

The more I think about it, Dept of Defence has had it correct the whole time, nil overtime and nil penalty rates with a 24/7 work roster. Yeah let’s just follow their lead.

Christia said :

I work every weekend (Saturday’s and Sunday’s and I do all PH in retail) and I rely on these penalty rates. It’s hard enough finding staff members willing to commit to doing weekend shifts as it is, I think cutting penalty rates won’t help small businesses find or keep reliable staff members.

If what you say turns out to be true, then market forces will make the business pay more.

I work every weekend (Saturday’s and Sunday’s and I do all PH in retail) and I rely on these penalty rates. It’s hard enough finding staff members willing to commit to doing weekend shifts as it is, I think cutting penalty rates won’t help small businesses find or keep reliable staff members.

If I’m an employer, I wanna abolish penalty rates so I can make more money by trading weekends.
If I’m an employee, I decide whether I want the extra $ for weekend work, or recreate/leisure with friends and family.

Garf’s correct in saying these laws were structured when the Sabbath was Church day. We’ve mostly moved on from this, though I was recently in Perth CBD and almost everything was closed on Sunday – and I liked that…But I am a churchy who detests working Sundays as part of my shift cycle…

rubaiyat said :

Maya123 said :

rubaiyat said :

Maya123 said :

rubaiyat said :

What is truly unsustainable is having rich people and international corporations demanding all the profits, benefits and protection of this country but refusing to pay for it.

They want the benefit of their employees working long, unreasonable or anti-social hours to maximise their profits for which they will avoid paying tax.

I have yet to meet anyone who thinks that the low wages paid to people in hospitality and others in part time work are excessive, who is willing to submit to the conditions and pay themselves.

That wonderful advice is for “Them”, not “Us”.

What is antisocial about working Sunday? It’s an old hang-up about that being the day to go to church. These days attendance has dropped to about 7%. Sunday is a day like all the rest. As long as everyone gets a couple of days off a week, what does it matter what days? In fact, if parents could manage two different days off each week each, think how much money would be saved on child care. Or even just one different day each, so the family could enjoy the other day together. I’m retired now, but when I worked I would have preferred to work weekends and get my days off in the middle of the week, because then I would be more likely to find shops etc open, plus, as long as not too many other people also did this, going away for a couple of days would be cheaper. (Mid week rates.)

So you admit it is all theory for you. You never actually did it.

Well I have. When contracting it wasn’t uncommon for me to work through the weekend and often through the night to meet “important” deadlines that mostly got cancelled or switched on the Monday morning “tea and coffee social”, sorry staff meeting, by the permanent staff who never seemed to get anything done.

Except be at their children’ soccer matches, Birthday Parties or Weddings on the Saturday or Sunday.

Or sit half drunk and full of advice as they enjoyed their meal and night out whilst being served by people who don’t get any of the common nights out off, ever. Who only ever get to meet or socialise with other people who have to work the odd hours, often not full time or all in a row because they have to be on call. And are mostly so exhausted after work that all they can do is try to desperately sleep in the day with the traffic noise, light and interruptions.

My son is a Chef on salary working long unsociable hours from early to late, frequently injuring himself because that is part of the job. You want him to take a pay cut, which like most jobs in his industry is not well paid in the first place, so that you, who probably have much more can enjoy more of your ample and regular free time.

I get both where this is coming from, and heading to!

I said nothing about working long hours, or late hours, as you no doubt know. All I said was that working Sunday was no different to working other days. The days don’t matter, as long as one gets a couple of days off each week. I do believe in extra pay, but not for working a normal set of hours, regardless of whether this is Monday to Friday, or Wednesday to Sunday. The 7% who go to church can go another day (my mother goes on Thursdays) or pick a job to suit their lifestyle. Many people make compromises in their choice of job(s) to suit their lifestyle. I did. I do believe people working at night should be paid extra, as there are proven health risks. Also, after the standard hours are worked the hourly pay rate should go up, with this level increasing with length of time worked, to the point that the employer would find it cheaper to take on extra staff rather than pay time and a half, then double pay, then etc.
By the way, the hours in my first job were 10am to 9pm, Monday to Saturday, with Sunday off. Every second Saturday only was off, so one and a half days off a week, not two. Working so many hours though, even though hourly junior rates were low, it meant for an eighteen year old the take home pay was good. I only stayed a few weeks, finding a Monday to Friday job in Canberra, but I took a pay cut doing this, as it was only standard hours.

How strange!

Why would you take a pay cut when you had it so good? And just a few weeks as well! Was that so you could tell us all about how you lived on the edge, all these years later?

People who are working these hours do not get to pick and choose, and it certainly isn’t “Just Sundays”.

If only our children also kept the same hours and all our friends, families and anyone else we might like to spend time with, THEN “Sunday would be no different to working other days”.

Why don’t you simply dine out, entertain yourself or enjoy yourself say Tuesday night late, instead of leaving the restaurants empty? It’s just another day of the week after all!

I left the job, working in a country cafe/delicatessen/fruit shop/greasy joes/milk bar (it was all these) to get a job with a better future. My choice and I have never complained about my first job, as that’s all it was, a first job. I went to a lower paid job, but paid lower only because of fewer hours worked. The hourly rate was a bit better, with the chance of promotion.

“btw My son and many people like him are already on salary and do not get extra for anything, so really you are just demanding a pay cut for people who are servicing your “needs”.”

You are getting ridiculous. Society is intertwined and in a way we all service each other’s needs. I actually went to work in a department, which was considered a service area, but I didn’t get all high and mighty as you are. I had a job to do, and I like to think I did it well. The people I worked for seemed very appreciative and made comments to back this up. We didn’t always work nine to five either because of the nature of our work, but they were the core hours. Occasionally evenings and weekends. Sometimes we got overtime for this, but because of money constraints, not always, more often getting time off in lieu of pay.
As for restaurants, I rarely eat out, as I find it to expensive. I am old enough and also come from a background (country towns mainly) where restaurants were rare and only for special occasions, and then you might have to drive fifty kms to find a so-so one. I didn’t grow up with visiting them and I guess that has stayed with me. I cook most of my own food.

btw My son and many people like him are already on salary and do not get extra for anything, so really you are just demanding a pay cut for people who are servicing your “needs”.

There is a reason you can not get doctors, dentists, teachers, public servants, mechanics, nurses, accountants, solicitors, etc after hours as much as you might like to and as much as you are saying “Sundays are just another day”.

Maya123 said :

rubaiyat said :

Maya123 said :

rubaiyat said :

What is truly unsustainable is having rich people and international corporations demanding all the profits, benefits and protection of this country but refusing to pay for it.

They want the benefit of their employees working long, unreasonable or anti-social hours to maximise their profits for which they will avoid paying tax.

I have yet to meet anyone who thinks that the low wages paid to people in hospitality and others in part time work are excessive, who is willing to submit to the conditions and pay themselves.

That wonderful advice is for “Them”, not “Us”.

What is antisocial about working Sunday? It’s an old hang-up about that being the day to go to church. These days attendance has dropped to about 7%. Sunday is a day like all the rest. As long as everyone gets a couple of days off a week, what does it matter what days? In fact, if parents could manage two different days off each week each, think how much money would be saved on child care. Or even just one different day each, so the family could enjoy the other day together. I’m retired now, but when I worked I would have preferred to work weekends and get my days off in the middle of the week, because then I would be more likely to find shops etc open, plus, as long as not too many other people also did this, going away for a couple of days would be cheaper. (Mid week rates.)

So you admit it is all theory for you. You never actually did it.

Well I have. When contracting it wasn’t uncommon for me to work through the weekend and often through the night to meet “important” deadlines that mostly got cancelled or switched on the Monday morning “tea and coffee social”, sorry staff meeting, by the permanent staff who never seemed to get anything done.

Except be at their children’ soccer matches, Birthday Parties or Weddings on the Saturday or Sunday.

Or sit half drunk and full of advice as they enjoyed their meal and night out whilst being served by people who don’t get any of the common nights out off, ever. Who only ever get to meet or socialise with other people who have to work the odd hours, often not full time or all in a row because they have to be on call. And are mostly so exhausted after work that all they can do is try to desperately sleep in the day with the traffic noise, light and interruptions.

My son is a Chef on salary working long unsociable hours from early to late, frequently injuring himself because that is part of the job. You want him to take a pay cut, which like most jobs in his industry is not well paid in the first place, so that you, who probably have much more can enjoy more of your ample and regular free time.

I get both where this is coming from, and heading to!

I said nothing about working long hours, or late hours, as you no doubt know. All I said was that working Sunday was no different to working other days. The days don’t matter, as long as one gets a couple of days off each week. I do believe in extra pay, but not for working a normal set of hours, regardless of whether this is Monday to Friday, or Wednesday to Sunday. The 7% who go to church can go another day (my mother goes on Thursdays) or pick a job to suit their lifestyle. Many people make compromises in their choice of job(s) to suit their lifestyle. I did. I do believe people working at night should be paid extra, as there are proven health risks. Also, after the standard hours are worked the hourly pay rate should go up, with this level increasing with length of time worked, to the point that the employer would find it cheaper to take on extra staff rather than pay time and a half, then double pay, then etc.
By the way, the hours in my first job were 10am to 9pm, Monday to Saturday, with Sunday off. Every second Saturday only was off, so one and a half days off a week, not two. Working so many hours though, even though hourly junior rates were low, it meant for an eighteen year old the take home pay was good. I only stayed a few weeks, finding a Monday to Friday job in Canberra, but I took a pay cut doing this, as it was only standard hours.

How strange!

Why would you take a pay cut when you had it so good? And just a few weeks as well! Was that so you could tell us all about how you lived on the edge, all these years later?

People who are working these hours do not get to pick and choose, and it certainly isn’t “Just Sundays”.

If only our children also kept the same hours and all our friends, families and anyone else we might like to spend time with, THEN “Sunday would be no different to working other days”.

Why don’t you simply dine out, entertain yourself or enjoy yourself say Tuesday night late, instead of leaving the restaurants empty? It’s just another day of the week after all!

rubaiyat said :

Maya123 said :

rubaiyat said :

What is truly unsustainable is having rich people and international corporations demanding all the profits, benefits and protection of this country but refusing to pay for it.

They want the benefit of their employees working long, unreasonable or anti-social hours to maximise their profits for which they will avoid paying tax.

I have yet to meet anyone who thinks that the low wages paid to people in hospitality and others in part time work are excessive, who is willing to submit to the conditions and pay themselves.

That wonderful advice is for “Them”, not “Us”.

What is antisocial about working Sunday? It’s an old hang-up about that being the day to go to church. These days attendance has dropped to about 7%. Sunday is a day like all the rest. As long as everyone gets a couple of days off a week, what does it matter what days? In fact, if parents could manage two different days off each week each, think how much money would be saved on child care. Or even just one different day each, so the family could enjoy the other day together. I’m retired now, but when I worked I would have preferred to work weekends and get my days off in the middle of the week, because then I would be more likely to find shops etc open, plus, as long as not too many other people also did this, going away for a couple of days would be cheaper. (Mid week rates.)

So you admit it is all theory for you. You never actually did it.

Well I have. When contracting it wasn’t uncommon for me to work through the weekend and often through the night to meet “important” deadlines that mostly got cancelled or switched on the Monday morning “tea and coffee social”, sorry staff meeting, by the permanent staff who never seemed to get anything done.

Except be at their children’ soccer matches, Birthday Parties or Weddings on the Saturday or Sunday.

Or sit half drunk and full of advice as they enjoyed their meal and night out whilst being served by people who don’t get any of the common nights out off, ever. Who only ever get to meet or socialise with other people who have to work the odd hours, often not full time or all in a row because they have to be on call. And are mostly so exhausted after work that all they can do is try to desperately sleep in the day with the traffic noise, light and interruptions.

My son is a Chef on salary working long unsociable hours from early to late, frequently injuring himself because that is part of the job. You want him to take a pay cut, which like most jobs in his industry is not well paid in the first place, so that you, who probably have much more can enjoy more of your ample and regular free time.

I get both where this is coming from, and heading to!

I said nothing about working long hours, or late hours, as you no doubt know. All I said was that working Sunday was no different to working other days. The days don’t matter, as long as one gets a couple of days off each week. I do believe in extra pay, but not for working a normal set of hours, regardless of whether this is Monday to Friday, or Wednesday to Sunday. The 7% who go to church can go another day (my mother goes on Thursdays) or pick a job to suit their lifestyle. Many people make compromises in their choice of job(s) to suit their lifestyle. I did. I do believe people working at night should be paid extra, as there are proven health risks. Also, after the standard hours are worked the hourly pay rate should go up, with this level increasing with length of time worked, to the point that the employer would find it cheaper to take on extra staff rather than pay time and a half, then double pay, then etc.
By the way, the hours in my first job were 10am to 9pm, Monday to Saturday, with Sunday off. Every second Saturday only was off, so one and a half days off a week, not two. Working so many hours though, even though hourly junior rates were low, it meant for an eighteen year old the take home pay was good. I only stayed a few weeks, finding a Monday to Friday job in Canberra, but I took a pay cut doing this, as it was only standard hours.

There is absolutely nothing stopping any of you who strongly believe that staff should be paid lower wages for unsociable, long and inconvenient hours, in taking their jobs, negotiating your own low rates and driving down the cost of wages to the level of the working poor in America.

Go for it. Don’t just be a café latte swilling blowhard on the sidelines!

Maya123 said :

rubaiyat said :

What is truly unsustainable is having rich people and international corporations demanding all the profits, benefits and protection of this country but refusing to pay for it.

They want the benefit of their employees working long, unreasonable or anti-social hours to maximise their profits for which they will avoid paying tax.

I have yet to meet anyone who thinks that the low wages paid to people in hospitality and others in part time work are excessive, who is willing to submit to the conditions and pay themselves.

That wonderful advice is for “Them”, not “Us”.

What is antisocial about working Sunday? It’s an old hang-up about that being the day to go to church. These days attendance has dropped to about 7%. Sunday is a day like all the rest. As long as everyone gets a couple of days off a week, what does it matter what days? In fact, if parents could manage two different days off each week each, think how much money would be saved on child care. Or even just one different day each, so the family could enjoy the other day together. I’m retired now, but when I worked I would have preferred to work weekends and get my days off in the middle of the week, because then I would be more likely to find shops etc open, plus, as long as not too many other people also did this, going away for a couple of days would be cheaper. (Mid week rates.)

So you admit it is all theory for you. You never actually did it.

Well I have. When contracting it wasn’t uncommon for me to work through the weekend and often through the night to meet “important” deadlines that mostly got cancelled or switched on the Monday morning “tea and coffee social”, sorry staff meeting, by the permanent staff who never seemed to get anything done.

Except be at their children’ soccer matches, Birthday Parties or Weddings on the Saturday or Sunday.

Or sit half drunk and full of advice as they enjoyed their meal and night out whilst being served by people who don’t get any of the common nights out off, ever. Who only ever get to meet or socialise with other people who have to work the odd hours, often not full time or all in a row because they have to be on call. And are mostly so exhausted after work that all they can do is try to desperately sleep in the day with the traffic noise, light and interruptions.

My son is a Chef on salary working long unsociable hours from early to late, frequently injuring himself because that is part of the job. You want him to take a pay cut, which like most jobs in his industry is not well paid in the first place, so that you, who probably have much more can enjoy more of your ample and regular free time.

I get both where this is coming from, and heading to!

Maya123 said :

In fact, if parents could manage two different days off each week each, think how much money would be saved on child care. Or even just one different day each, so the family could enjoy the other day together. I’m retired now, but when I worked I would have preferred to work weekends and get my days off in the middle of the week, because then I would be more likely to find shops etc open, plus, as long as not too many other people also did this, going away for a couple of days would be cheaper. (Mid week rates.)

Yeah, can’t imagine why anyone would want to spend the whole weekend with their kids and participate as a family in weekend activities or go away overnight somewhere.

A wage is the base rate you are paid to perform your job, usually reflective of the skills required. Penalty rates are an allowance to compensate you for inconvenience outside the norm of your work. Penalty rates were created back when Monday to Friday 9am to 5pm was the standard work day for everyone, and shops stayed open only for a few hours on a Saturday, and closed on a Sunday as people went to church. This is now definitely not the world we live in now.

Working on the weekend or to closing time at night shouldn’t be paid any more than at any other time if it is the standard operating requirements for the business or industry. Penalties should only apply if it is non-standard time, overnight or an excessive amount hours worked. There is otherwise little inconvenience caused by working on the weekend now – workers still have at least 2 days off during the week, standard working days are still 7 hoursish long. Whether you do your work Mon-Fri 9-5 or Weds to Sun 2-10pm matters little these days.

Something has to give anyway, particularly if people want to buy Australian goods or go out at night. The prices of everything will continue to skyrocket as the base wages increase. the manufacturers of goods will go out of business as the price of their item is too high to cover penalty rates compared to the cost of cheap Chinese goods. The waiter serving you coffee at $50/hr will charge you $7-$8 for the small coffee. Otherwise, the shop will be closed outside standard hours and these workers will be paid nothing.

Reducing penalty rates progressively over time would be a good idea to allow people to prepare themselves if they are relying on allowances.

rubaiyat said :

John Moulis said :

Grail said :

How are penalty rates “unsustainable”?

Since the Abbott government adopted the word “unsustainable” to describe everything they don’t like. The welfare system is “unsustainable”. Medicare is “unsustainable”. Now penalty rates are “unsustainable”. It just shows the lack of original ideas and positive, beneficial policies of this government when all they can do is pinch words and phrases from the left and the environmental movement.

What is truly unsustainable is having rich people and international corporations demanding all the profits, benefits and protection of this country but refusing to pay for it.

They want the benefit of their employees working long, unreasonable or anti-social hours to maximise their profits for which they will avoid paying tax.

I have yet to meet anyone who thinks that the low wages paid to people in hospitality and others in part time work are excessive, who is willing to submit to the conditions and pay themselves.

That wonderful advice is for “Them”, not “Us”.

What is antisocial about working Sunday? It’s an old hang-up about that being the day to go to church. These days attendance has dropped to about 7%. Sunday is a day like all the rest. As long as everyone gets a couple of days off a week, what does it matter what days? In fact, if parents could manage two different days off each week each, think how much money would be saved on child care. Or even just one different day each, so the family could enjoy the other day together. I’m retired now, but when I worked I would have preferred to work weekends and get my days off in the middle of the week, because then I would be more likely to find shops etc open, plus, as long as not too many other people also did this, going away for a couple of days would be cheaper. (Mid week rates.)

I think it’s hilarious that skeezy rich old farts think their weekend is so important that they should be able to deprive others of a weekend while not paying them for the benefit.

I hope you like poor levels of customer service from 16 year old staff members, because skilled workers will not stand for this. You know what those workers would rather be doing on the weekend? Spending time with their friends and family.

John Moulis said :

Grail said :

How are penalty rates “unsustainable”?

Since the Abbott government adopted the word “unsustainable” to describe everything they don’t like. The welfare system is “unsustainable”. Medicare is “unsustainable”. Now penalty rates are “unsustainable”. It just shows the lack of original ideas and positive, beneficial policies of this government when all they can do is pinch words and phrases from the left and the environmental movement.

Sensible policies are unsustainable, clearly.

“there is a big difference between a nurse administering treatment and a fashion store worker selling a shirt”

Oh yeah, because only one of the above is a human being that needs to pay the bills and put food on the table. People who work in retail are losers who deserve to be down-trodden and treated like $#@%.

Sheesh.

John Moulis said :

Grail said :

How are penalty rates “unsustainable”?

Since the Abbott government adopted the word “unsustainable” to describe everything they don’t like. The welfare system is “unsustainable”. Medicare is “unsustainable”. Now penalty rates are “unsustainable”. It just shows the lack of original ideas and positive, beneficial policies of this government when all they can do is pinch words and phrases from the left and the environmental movement.

What is truly unsustainable is having rich people and international corporations demanding all the profits, benefits and protection of this country but refusing to pay for it.

They want the benefit of their employees working long, unreasonable or anti-social hours to maximise their profits for which they will avoid paying tax.

I have yet to meet anyone who thinks that the low wages paid to people in hospitality and others in part time work are excessive, who is willing to submit to the conditions and pay themselves.

That wonderful advice is for “Them”, not “Us”.

Rollersk8r said :

I agree there should be a distinction between the nurse who makes the lifestyle choice (and sacrifice) to work night shifts – and the teenage barista on Sunday double time.

Sitting somewhere between essential services and small business is big businesses (supermarkets, Bunnings, fast food chains, petrol stations) that can reliably trade 16 hours+ per day.

The whole issue boils down to whether cafes and restaurants can afford to open on the weekend…

It takes more than nurses to provide healthcare, although I have seen nurses quoted a few times in relation to this proposal. To keep a hospital open you need doctors, nurses, cleaners, orderlies, allied health staff of various types, ward clerks, pathology staff (specimen reception, scientists, data entry staff etc etc), radiology staff, engineers, cooks and much more than that. And then you’ve got ambulance staff, paramedics, police, fire fighters and the list seems endless.

Good luck for the nurses and my wife is one of them, but we have to think about more than nurses. And if we think about all of the health staff then where do we draw the line? Or if we eliminate their penalty rates then they won’t want to work on weekends and miss out on family gatherings, seeing their family (me) and all the other adverse consequences that working on a Sunday entails. And that wouldn’t be good if you fall sick or have an accident on a Sunday.

A penalty rate is a rate. So this BS about a nurse should get it and not hospitality workers is a massive furphy to begin with. If a nurse shoudl get more a Sunday then the should get more on a Monday too.

My family had a shop and I had to go in on a Sunday and work. All these precious small business owners have to work a Sunday! Never say! Tell you what, if your business was more profitable then you could open on Sunday and pay the proper penalties.

Why should a shop be open on a Saturday or Sunday? What’s the worse thing? The shop owner isn’t making more money? What’s the attraction of opening on the weekend, of because everyone ELSE has the weekend off and therefore free time to shop. Let’s move the weekend for eveyone else to Wednesday and Thursday, that way everyone else can shop and store owners don’t have to pay penalty rates. You’ll have to work Saturdays and Sunday but we don’t want to hang out with family or go to church so who cares which day they our days off.

Grail said :

How are penalty rates “unsustainable”?

Since the Abbott government adopted the word “unsustainable” to describe everything they don’t like. The welfare system is “unsustainable”. Medicare is “unsustainable”. Now penalty rates are “unsustainable”. It just shows the lack of original ideas and positive, beneficial policies of this government when all they can do is pinch words and phrases from the left and the environmental movement.

rommeldog56 said :

I also can not see what the difference nowdays is between working on Saturdays & Sundays. It seems to me to be a hang over from decades long past about Sundays being a day of worship ?

Anyway, it is very unlikely that if Sunday rates were reduced, that prices would drop. More likely it will help ensure the sustainability of jobs.

But in relation to the sustainability of jobs, its not just wage rates.

What about the rapidly rising Commercial Annual Rates (10% avg pa for 20+ yeaes !), the artificially higer electricity prices caused by the ACT Govt’s green engergy policy, the cost of parking increaseing by 6% pa forever, the paid parking being applicable in Civic untill much later at night, etc, all of which are ACT Government charges that affect the viability of small businesses and so, the number of staff they employ. Encouraging a sustainable employment base is not all about wage rates & asking workers to forego wages/conditions to reduce employers costs.

And then broaden the GST base and hike it to 15%, resulting in the goods proportion forcing the price of items sky high whilst those who serve it, their, wages down by 50%, it’s all bad. Smells like the beginning of class warfare to me. “Make sure those coffee shops are open for my latte and dining out meals on weekends, don’t you know how busy I am during the week, I don’t care how much you get paid, just wait on me hand and foot”. Meanwhile the poor staffer is running around for 10 hrs on a Sunday at $9 an hour whilst their partner is doing the same in another store, as their kids are in $80 an hour nanny care (cause it’s sunday), smells like class warfare to me.

Zed said :

Penalty rates make up part of the negotiated conditions for employees.

I can see a benefit to employers if penalty rates are lessened. This is countered with a disadvantage to workers.

I cant understand why an employee should have their conditions eroded to benefit employers without any linked benefit in return. There hasn’t been any talk of increasing wage rates to compensate for loss of earnings.

Its easy to see this as what it is- another attack on work conditions that will effect lower paid workers. Once again, poor quality leadership presenting an option that benefits business at a cost that will be borne mainly by youth.

Z

+1

Garfield said :

Once upon a time housewives weren’t part of the workforce and were able to do the grocery shopping Monday – Friday. Saturdays were for family and Sundays were for God. This is the time period when penalty rates for weekend work were conceived. In today’s world many mothers work and we live in an extended hours 7 day a week world. The only differences I can see between weekends and weekdays are that public transport is substandard and so it can be more costly getting to work. If I was designing a penalty rate regime now I think it would be like this:

Casual loading would stay because casuals don’t get paid leave.
Overtime rates would go, but employees can’t be scheduled for more than 76 hrs pf, with any hours beyond that voluntary, and overtime pay would attract super support where it doesn’t now.
Weekend shifts would be paid at standard rates but attract a fixed allowance per shift – maybe $25 to cover public transport deficiencies.
Late night shifts would attract penalty rates as shift work has been shown to have health consequences that can be quite significant.

With this structure, if a business has difficulty getting staff to work weekends, evenings or overtime, they will offer more pay than the minimum. With lower weekend staffing costs it gives businesses a chance to expand their services or lower prices, both of which benefit the customers.

Exactly.

I think we should get rid of penalty rates for weekends and simply raise standard rates by the appropriate amount to offset the reduction in pay for workers, so it’s not simply a benefit to employers.

If businesses are having trouble getting staff on the weekend or for overtime, then they will simply have to pay more to attract staff but they shouldn’t be forced to pay 1.5 or 2 times the normal rate simply because it’s a Saturday or Sunday which has no real basis in our modern world and life.

I also can not see what the difference nowdays is between working on Saturdays & Sundays. It seems to me to be a hang over from decades long past about Sundays being a day of worship ?

Anyway, it is very unlikely that if Sunday rates were reduced, that prices would drop. More likely it will help ensure the sustainability of jobs.

But in relation to the sustainability of jobs, its not just wage rates.

What about the rapidly rising Commercial Annual Rates (10% avg pa for 20+ yeaes !), the artificially higer electricity prices caused by the ACT Govt’s green engergy policy, the cost of parking increaseing by 6% pa forever, the paid parking being applicable in Civic untill much later at night, etc, all of which are ACT Government charges that affect the viability of small businesses and so, the number of staff they employ. Encouraging a sustainable employment base is not all about wage rates & asking workers to forego wages/conditions to reduce employers costs.

watto23 said :

I think penalty rates shouldn’t just apply because its a Sunday. If someone has already worked say 40 hours then I have no issues with penalty rates applying then or on public holidays.

Any award should also recognise that you shouldn’t schedule someone for shifts every day of the week unless they are on a four on/two off style contract like mine workers.

Awards should not be negotiable between employee and employer without a union or advocate being involved. There is simply too much room for employers to take advantage of insecure, gullible or ill-informed employees (I know toumhave kids to care for, but if you can’t work 12 hour shifts Monday through Thursday there just is no future for you here.).

How are penalty rates “unsustainable”?

Penalty rates make up part of the negotiated conditions for employees.

I can see a benefit to employers if penalty rates are lessened. This is countered with a disadvantage to workers.

I cant understand why an employee should have their conditions eroded to benefit employers without any linked benefit in return. There hasn’t been any talk of increasing wage rates to compensate for loss of earnings.

Its easy to see this as what it is- another attack on work conditions that will effect lower paid workers. Once again, poor quality leadership presenting an option that benefits business at a cost that will be borne mainly by youth.

Z

Garfield said :

Once upon a time housewives weren’t part of the workforce and were able to do the grocery shopping Monday – Friday. Saturdays were for family and Sundays were for God. This is the time period when penalty rates for weekend work were conceived. In today’s world many mothers work and we live in an extended hours 7 day a week world. The only differences I can see between weekends and weekdays are that public transport is substandard and so it can be more costly getting to work. If I was designing a penalty rate regime now I think it would be like this:

Casual loading would stay because casuals don’t get paid leave.
Overtime rates would go, but employees can’t be scheduled for more than 76 hrs pf, with any hours beyond that voluntary, and overtime pay would attract super support where it doesn’t now.
Weekend shifts would be paid at standard rates but attract a fixed allowance per shift – maybe $25 to cover public transport deficiencies.
Late night shifts would attract penalty rates as shift work has been shown to have health consequences that can be quite significant.

With this structure, if a business has difficulty getting staff to work weekends, evenings or overtime, they will offer more pay than the minimum. With lower weekend staffing costs it gives businesses a chance to expand their services or lower prices, both of which benefit the customers.

In canberra “double time” for Sunday’s was floated on 25th of Jan 1949. It was for tramway workers and gas employees.

I think anyway you skin it, you need to apply this test to it;
How would it impact a family of four, two parents, two young children. Parents work in hospitality or retail on the low award wage, whereby they could both be called into weekend work and family assistance or childcare is not readily available. Difficult to assume this scenario in canberra, however it is quite normal in the rest of the country.

I agree there should be a distinction between the nurse who makes the lifestyle choice (and sacrifice) to work night shifts – and the teenage barista on Sunday double time.

Sitting somewhere between essential services and small business is big businesses (supermarkets, Bunnings, fast food chains, petrol stations) that can reliably trade 16 hours+ per day.

The whole issue boils down to whether cafes and restaurants can afford to open on the weekend…

Once upon a time housewives weren’t part of the workforce and were able to do the grocery shopping Monday – Friday. Saturdays were for family and Sundays were for God. This is the time period when penalty rates for weekend work were conceived. In today’s world many mothers work and we live in an extended hours 7 day a week world. The only differences I can see between weekends and weekdays are that public transport is substandard and so it can be more costly getting to work. If I was designing a penalty rate regime now I think it would be like this:

Casual loading would stay because casuals don’t get paid leave.
Overtime rates would go, but employees can’t be scheduled for more than 76 hrs pf, with any hours beyond that voluntary, and overtime pay would attract super support where it doesn’t now.
Weekend shifts would be paid at standard rates but attract a fixed allowance per shift – maybe $25 to cover public transport deficiencies.
Late night shifts would attract penalty rates as shift work has been shown to have health consequences that can be quite significant.

With this structure, if a business has difficulty getting staff to work weekends, evenings or overtime, they will offer more pay than the minimum. With lower weekend staffing costs it gives businesses a chance to expand their services or lower prices, both of which benefit the customers.

Alexandra Craig said :

Heavs said :

I’m curious as to why Sunday should be treated any differently from Saturday at all.

Maya123 said :

What is different about Sunday? How is it different to Saturday? Why should someone be paid more to work Sunday, than someone to work Saturday? That’s discriminatory.

Not sure if this is the case across all industries, but when I worked in retail as a kid we got the usual time and a half on Sundays, and on Saturdays we got our usual wage plus Saturday loading which worked out to be pretty much the same (maybe $1 an hour less) as Sunday time and a half.

It really depends on which state you are in, which industry you work for and what formal arrangement is in place as per the industry award wages system. Give or take a few hours, more often than not, the basic arrangements are 38 hr weeks, time and a half Saturday, time and a half Sunday for the first three hours then double time. Give or take. Some states such as Victoria have specific agreements which some workers agree to that alters the rates for Sunday’s. So at best the rules are a bit murky, and then consider some employers do not know or follow the rules, and then change things state to state and industry to industry and it all becomes a bit of a nightmare for all involved really.

Heavs said :

I’m curious as to why Sunday should be treated any differently from Saturday at all.

Maya123 said :

What is different about Sunday? How is it different to Saturday? Why should someone be paid more to work Sunday, than someone to work Saturday? That’s discriminatory.

Not sure if this is the case across all industries, but when I worked in retail as a kid we got the usual time and a half on Sundays, and on Saturdays we got our usual wage plus Saturday loading which worked out to be pretty much the same (maybe $1 an hour less) as Sunday time and a half.

I think penalty rates shouldn’t just apply because its a Sunday. If someone has already worked say 40 hours then I have no issues with penalty rates applying then or on public holidays.

What is different about Sunday? How is it different to Saturday? Why should someone be paid more to work Sunday, than someone to work Saturday? That’s discriminatory.

I’m curious as to why Sunday should be treated any differently from Saturday at all.