Penalty rates cut to hurt 33,000 South Australians, but figures not reliable
UP to 33,000 South Australians could be affected by penalty rate cuts — but it turns out all the figures being used as ammunition in the fiery political debate are rubbery.
- Caleb Bond: Cutting penalty rates is sensible and has a small impact
- Political fight over Sunday penalty rates cut
- PM urged to intervene in penalty rates decision
UP to 33,000 South Australians could be affected by penalty rate cuts — but it turns out all the figures being used as ammunition in the fiery political debate are rubbery.
The Fair Work Commission on Thursday said they had no reliable figures on how many people would be hit if reductions in Sunday and public holiday rates go through.
Based on Employment Department figures obtained by The Advertiser that show between 286,000 and 457,000 people are in line for a reduction, the numbers in South Australia would range between about 21,000 and 33,000.
Penalty rates dominated Parliament on Thursday, both in Question Time and in Senate estimates.
After a long investigation, the commission decided to reduce Sunday penalties — not scrap them — in some hospitality and retail positions.
Both the Coalition and Labor had originally said they would support the decision of the “independent umpire”, but Labor will now move to block the change.
As the political heat was turned up on Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, he suggested there might be a very gentle transition period as wages rise naturally, so workers would not technically see a pay reduction.
“There are a number of ways of ensuring — as is the objective of modern awards that when awards are changed the workers’ take-home pay is not reduced,” he said.
It was an “appropriate objective”, he said.
“And we certainly welcome transition arrangements that mitigate as far as possible, or offset, the impact on the take-home pay packet.”
Anyone supporting any changes to penalty rates has been attacked by the unions, and Opposition Leader Bill Shorten has been leading a political attack.
He is implying that the change to a small number of awards could eventually affect a much broader group of workers.
“I made it clear to (apprentices) that at this stage, construction penalty rates are not in the gun, but they’ve heard from other young people, their friends, about proposed cutting of Sunday and public holiday rates,” he said, pinning the blame for the commission’s decision on Mr Turnbull.
He also said it was a “dumb idea” to talk about transition periods.
“What we need to do is just protect people’s take-home pay, full stop,” he said.
As it stands, the changes will come into effect on July 1.
Conservative backbencher Eric Abetz proposed the changes be “grandfathered”, meaning they’d apply only to new employees.
Mr Turnbull said the Commission felt that option was “impractical”.
Commission general manager Bernadette O’Neill said any transitional arrangements would have an enormous effect on how many people were involved, and said the numbers being tossed around were “contentious”.
“The decision itself notes that the numbers are contentious,” she said.