Take a pay rise, but at what cost.

The recent wage case for low-income earners may well be the ‘straw that breaks the camels back’

With big business confidence at it’s lowest, coupled with recent slumps in retail sales and increased interest rates, business may well view this as a reason to pull back and cut staff rather than continue to suffer while trying to save jobs.

Jobs are often created through the success of business branching out and or expanding or taking on additional work that often involves the borrowing of large sums in order to accommodate demands.

A large part of planning for such an expansion is costs, both fixed (interest on borrowings) and employee expenses.

You see interest rates for business is often higher than residential and, with millions at stake these rate increases can chop 100’s of thousands off the bottom line. A wage rise now may well be something that triggers a change of direction from an already struggling sector.

So I urge the powers to be to consider the possible ‘re-action’ to their ‘actions’ if they approve such an increase.

The employees may not like the possible consequences.

continued
Most of you by now are aware that I am an employer and I can assure you that I have no employees who are on the 'minimum wage' for 'low paid workers. They all receive industry award rates, or higher.

I remain neutral.

Interesting, proof however you and I do not for a second think alike.
Those who get the minimum wage are not trade unionists, very few in fact can afford union fees on those pay rates.
The ACTU has fought for minimum standards of income for a very long time.
These people are not share holders maybe not home owners ,surely not well of minimum wages is not the comfort zone.
Can it be you say the already poor should shoulder the load of the Rich's debts?
That inflation because some are earning and spending bigger salary's than ever before is evidence we should hurt the poor?
It is true that a wage surge would increase inflation, rise interest rates and damage this country.
I a proud trade unionist think we can take this chance to increase minimum wages and control inflation.
My preference is for bigger superannuation payments , for other workers as part of wage increases.
That can and will in time fund internal loans not imported debt as those funds continue to grow.
I have never been a tax the rich person but with true respect rehctub I do not think you have thought this out.
It hurts the low paid to reward the better of.

Belly, some interesting points. On the one hand you say the poor can’t afford union fees yet you defend the poor. I thought the union movement was all about supporting its members.

Can it be you say the already poor should shoulder the load of the Rich's debts?

Now this can be turned around to say that the rich subsidise the poor with subsidies for housing, health ,medical bills and family assistance. The rich pay higher taxes and levies often for the betterment of the poor. You see the rich make maximum contributions through taxes, levies and such while at times not receiving a single cent in support. They have children to you know!

It is true that a wage surge would increase inflation, rise interest rates and damage this country.
Scary stuff hey, but do you really think it is worth the gamble. Why not increase taxes on grog, tobacco and gambling as a deterrent, still will have the same effect, more money to spend on essentials. It is a well-documented fact that there is often a link between the poor and these life style choices. A high percentage of welfare goes down the proverbial toilet! Improved spending habits would lead to improved living standards!

It hurts the low paid to reward the better of.
Just to clear the air, I am not in favour of any tax cuts for anybody. Put the money into better infrastructure. Water, roads, public transport to name just a few.

Interesting you mention superannuation levies.

You see I am in favour of increasing the super contribution to say 12%. BUT, on a dollar for dollar basis against what the employee contributes. I don’t even mind if they set a safety net of say 5%.

You see many people have a false sense of security that 9% of their income will provide financial independence at retirement. Not even close unless you are 16 and work continuously till the age of 65. Even then you may struggle!

Good talking to you, I appreciate posters that don’t have to use personal attacks to get noticed.

I think its fair to say we have seen enough already of how The government intend to balance the books.

So far Rudds crew have wanted to get rid of the people who care for the ill elderly and disabled by removing the person who cares for them the four cents and hour allowed which is a total discrace.

Then they came up with the idea to force neighbours to spy on others in their streets who were on a pension.
What a discusting lot of people behind this lovely country.

However the best one of all is by there intention to not only give a baby bounus which encourages girls as young as forteen fifteen to have kids but hes going to increase it.

I am just wondering how anybody could think we wont see far more hikes in interest rates.

The fact is unless the Government act the banks will have to to try and at least hold back the depression that these country is heading for in the long term.

I think the people might wake up quicly and vote this Government out next term but If they dont then all I can say is God Help this country in ten years time.

You voted for them now you have them - hopeles

Gday rehctub I like talking to you too for the same reasons, my post was in print while you posted your second one.
So I missed your disclaimer, unions? well I can only speak for myself but hold forever these views.
A handful not every union person, understand the roots of the movement in harder times than today came from a commitment to fairness for workers.
No self praise but true I grew up hungry, one of 16 Fed by a dads single income.
Would you if your income was take home under $500 a week pay near one weeks pay a year to be in a union? could you?
Superannuation, yes but not 12% I pay a third more than my boss , and 15% should be law.
Why should those who can afford it not provide for their own retirement?
If however the low income earners do not get an increase , my wish is $20, we will still have inflation.
Those who are unionist will still get pay rises via EBA or whatever is in place.
Increase employer contribution to super to 12% and in future wage rises pay employee contributions instead of high wage rises.
Some fell behind under workchoices so why not in the next round an extra part of that rise go to both employer and employee superannuation?
And bloke do not tell me about how much we already help the poor if we are giving the right help why are we failing to make progress?
A job education and accountability are the best help, some will not help them selves but that is another story.

Belly
Would you if your income was take home under $500 a week pay near one weeks pay a year to be in a union? could you? My answer No!

Interesting point out of this is that it was the Howard government, the one that most seem to have hated, that gave these low income earners 'A CHOICE'. Joint the union, or DON'T.

Prior to this it was compusory in many work places I thought. Right or wrong?

I was a Howard supporter who felt he should have retired well before the election. In fact, my local member, who had done a wonderfull job was a victim of 'the protest vote' and that's a shame.

As for kids being paid to have kids. What a joke. This is one of Howard's gremlins that should have been berried along with work choices. But hey, at least now while they laze about at home they have a decent couch to lie on while watching their 'plasma TV'.

You and I rehctub could probably have a beer or coffee without hurting either of us but you need some updating mate.
It has not been you must be in the union or else for 20 years.
OH yes some try it on, some unions some mugs but it is against the law.
Take it from me unions while an inclusive word hides real differences one to another.
I too think Howard waited too long to go, he should have done so just after his win in 2004.
Till then even I found his reading of voters thoughts good, he is not going to be forgiven by history or his party trust me he is not.
In industrial relations it is easy to claim wage restraint will help defeat inflation.
A worker sells his/her effort and time, if we asked you to limit your price increases would you think it was fair?
say transport price rises drove your profits down and you could not fix it?
wages are as fairly earned as profit.

If this board were talking about the situation at Japanese companies where the CEO recieves a wage that is a low multiple of the wages on the factory floor then I would be more sympathetic to the argument.

However business, especially in Anglo Saxon nations, is more easily characterised by men sailing in luxury yachts while his employees get minimum wage.

If you're the owner of a small business then I feel your pain. Not enough is done to assist small and medium sized enterprises (SME) in Australia. This is par for the course unfortunately.

Firing employees, or not taking on new employees to meet increased demand should be your last option. Most CEOs say they're running a tight ship but when the CSIRO initiatives on energy saving and resource efficiency are undertaken in most companies the results are big savings.

Therefore my opinion on this matter is that you should do your job. Provide leadership and vision else what are you getting paid for?

The thread however is not about leaders.
It is about the current debate in Australia on how much we raise wages for those on minimum wages, or if we do raise that at all.
Far from leaders these folk are often in jobs that require them to leave their brains in the bucket by the door.
The thought that low income earners should shoulder the pain for others spending, to reduce inflation is both wrong and would not work in any case.
Falling house prices , share prices and credit availability will bring inflation under control and some to their knees all to soon.

Belly
Interesting to note that Easter Saturday has been deemed a 'public holiday'. Why ? No idea!

Just a few headaches caused by this ruling;
1. What was normally a day where one was paid at 1.25 time the normal rate now turns into 7.6 hrs for pub hol, then on top of this time and a half for the first 2 hours then double time there after.

So all in all almost triple time for this days trading.

2. Because shopping centers charge for extended hours trade, including pub hols we will most likely get a bill for what would normally be included within our weekly rent.

So you sit there as an employer and wonder if it is worth while opening given the fact that your staff will be the only ones getting paid.

I am not opposed to public holidays but where is the trade off.

As a unionist I would like your view on this.

Cheers

I'm for raising the minimum wage. I'm fed up to the back teeth with employees having management's sword of Chinese Damocles hanging over their head. It is so often a case of do as I say not as I do.

When I read a boss hinting at the dire consequences should the government have the temerity to raise the minimum wage I can only conclude that this is a boss who sees employees as the first cost reduction possibilities available.

I do not agree that my previous response was not relevant to the thread. The thread title itself is clearly an overt management threat, and what else is management but leadership? My point is that if, as the thread title suggests, managers/business owners see downsizing as a knee jerk reaction to rising labor costs then that is a leadership issue; indeed a leadership deficit.

rehctub I will try, Saturday a public holiday, easter is a chance to get the family in the car and head for the coast.
4 days away from work 5 if like most you bank, not take a rostered day of till this weekend.
Aussie tradition for many years, mum and dad may both work and only see one another in passing.
If Saturday is a public holiday? both can go north together.
If not? one or both come home early to work that day.
long weekends can be the only family time , some work 70 hours even more a week.
Pay rates? in every industry I know, but not all I am sure, Saturday rates are 2 at time and a half rest double time.
Now public holidays? most are 8 hours holiday pay, 7.6 at time and one half, rest double time.
Now some will not agree, my members question it every time but that is how double time and one half is made up most times.
If workers and the boss have an EBA enterprise bargaining agreement in place it may change conditions if it mentions them.
If not award conditions stay in place.
construction sites pre workchoices saw this weekend a lock down one no work.
Workers working even more than 6 12 hour days need such a rest.
Workchoices see,s some contractors leaving the wife and kids 100,s of klms away to return to work this Saturday.
not fair mate in no way fair.
I want you to understand massive amounts of overtime are worked in this country and travel time to and from 12 hour shifts can bring travel deaths as up to 3 hours can be involved.
Rest is the best cure for weariness.

rehctub I need to expand on wages, we must not be blinkered workers are not always nine to fiver's or always in factory's.
Some work no over time some work more than double ordinary hours every week of the year.
A small but growing number of bosses and workers are exploring what is the future for most of us, annualized salary's.
That is putting average hours worked over say the last 5 years along side average incomes.
then setting normal hours at the actual average worked in that period.
Averaging out the wages earned will give an all in annual salary divided by 52 gives pays each week known income known hours worked.
one pay rate all hours.
except!
If the average hours per annum is 70 per week, but at years end it is 72 hours the extra 2 hours brings extra rewards.
Say extra annual leave or pay.
Some work so little it overtime no need for change exists but some benefit and it is the future for many.
And worth a thought.
hope you find it here I see no point in answering your question in both threads

Well Tokyo and Belly, I see niether of you have answered my question.

Why not? Don't you understand it, or, as I suspect, are niether of you able to provide a factual answer.

I ask again. Where is the trade off between the government allocating an additional public holiday and the employer being compensated?

I to agree that ALL BUSINESSES should be closed for the whole four days however it has been the push by the majors, along with poor management from our 'toothless tiger' government departments that have created this situation.

When I was a kid our trading hours were 8 till 5 Mon to Fri then 8 till 11 Sat. No exceptions.

Why then did they allow the extended trading hours because life back then was simple and we all coped.

Now let's turn the tide and say, how would you feel if we as employers were given (1) day per year where we could work our employees for zero pay?

How many would refuse to turn up?

Do you think this would be fair to the employer given that they have to pay a penalty for an additional PH

It is all well and good to say 'you can close if you like', but if we choose to close for maintinance we still have to pay wages. Where is the balance?

I have a good mate who has several shops and buys the very best of equipment for the sole purpose of minimising staff. Why? Because he gets rewarded for buying the best 'IMPORTED' equipment and gets penilised for emplying staff. Now 'Aint that a shame!

Let's take a look.

Staff = normal time, time and a hlf, double time, compo, sickies, super.

Equipment = Tax deduction + tax deduction + tax dedection !
Any wonder hey!

Getting off topic but i'm sure you get my point.

Rehctub this is the first time I have ever seen you debate like this remember you are not the only small business man in Australia.
Believe it or not I once employed 5 workers all got above award wages.
Now why should the government give you a trade of for extended trading hours?
Isn't it true most shop owners wanted them?
And equally true profits rise with those extra hours?
You have it in your hands to sit down and work out wages times worked a host of things you can put into an agreement with your workers if you try.
If I had a 38 hour week,I wish, I may well take Monday and Tuesday of instead of the weekend but you have the option of closing your shop.
Seen the weekend surcharges in say restaurants have we?
I think my explanation of holiday Saturday and true overtime worked was on target , how about you look at post two?
Say ok you work 45 hours a week to a worker give an inflated pay rate all hours then by negotiation work out how many Saturdays are to be worked per year?
Flexibility is the future but not without the right pay rates.
Bitterness old mate is not going to change a thing.

rehctub please do not think I am putting the boot into you it is not my intention.
I have to admit some find things in my posts I did not intend them to say or mean.
And we often miss understand another's intent as the written word is not the same as spoken, but mate!
RE read your last two posts.
I can not find the question you asked in your last one.
I came back because you put your case well in debate and I was concerned that I had not addressed a question you asked until my last post.
NOT guilty it was not asked.
I do read every post in threads I get into , some do not and trip over their own feet, it is wrong to speak but not listen, to post but not read.
While you and I debate from opposite sides we should remember truth may be in other directions we may both be wrong.

rehctub,

Again thank you but- you can see its hopeless trying to explain it to these people.

They just simply haven’t got a clue.
Don’t understand the slightest tinniest bit about Government or anything trades economy or anything else for that matter.

This is typical of the attitudes of these people.

You got one person saying; oh take the risk and something about super.
What they don’t get is if the country goes belly up which its going to with much more of this type of leadership) there just wont be any super for anyone.
That’s right. You heard me. All these people that voted for those total; fools are supporting their wage rise by taking off the sick elderly and turning Australia into the old Russia.

So far this new mongrel Government has tried to take the few lousy dollars the Howard Government gave to people who care for the sick elderly and disenabled

.Can you believe it. Labor may have been a battlers party once but they are now like the mafia imop only with less brains. At least the others can handle figures and understand what’s a clever investment and move.

Oh my God how low can they go? These poor bastards get 4 cents and hour and save the Government billions of dollars each year.

Then this Government FORCED Neighbors to spy on people in the street that are on pensions.

What an outrageous dangerous low thing to do. Sending neighbors to neighbours houses wired up to take conversations.

Perhaps they should CEASE spending that money on private investigators.
So your pay rise belly and the other person WILL tip the country and WILL be taken from the poorest of people but the bottom line is you don’t care.
It will also CLOSE many business and we have seen MOST go off shore so Der! It’s not an idle threat.
It’s a privilege to work and you should look after your boss and thank him not hold the attitude why should he own a business and me not.

rehctub we will meet again in other threads and debate in a rational manner as we always do.
Sometimes it is best not to react to some posts
A friendly but honestly believed warning,be careful of the written arm over your shoulder, it is just a tool to insult others
regards

Belly
You always run when someone posts the truth about your darling ALP.
Even now when you must be able to see rudd and his crew are not backing the poorer class you are still claiming victory.
Thats ok you can vote for whom you wish but really most of your arguments dont stand up.

I get it your from the old school and your faithful but Rudd not andnor are his team.
I just hope the people wake up in time to get get rid of a bunch who have tried to take the sick and dying and disablied carers off them and sent next door neighbours etc wired for sound to spy on pensioners.
Its outragous and its discusting and these are your leaders you worship?

I honestly thought you were better than that.
We cant afford pay rises and it will push us over the board.
We will be in huge trouble.
You will put small biz out of biz.
Its really that simply.

Belly
Here is my original question. Perhaps I should have included a ? mark hey!

Belly
Interesting to note that Easter Saturday has been deemed a 'public holiday'. Why ? No idea!

I am not opposed to public holidays but where is the trade off.

As a unionist I would like your view on this.

As for your last post, I have no idea what you are referring to so an explanation may help.

With regards to extended trading hours. (Sunday trading)
Very few small business owners wanted extended hours. Peter Beetie commisioned another study into this and the commision found that it was not warrented. He, who was not happy with this result then chose to override the commisions decision and grant Sunday trading.

So much for caring about workers and their families. Family life for many was then thrown into termoil.

So just remember when you go shopping on Sunday just how many families are suffering for the benifits of the greedy shoppers. Then place yourself in their shoes.

Belly
Just re-read your post.

How can you say extra trading hours result in extra profits.

You people just don't get it do you!

People go to work, earn money and they spend it.

The only way extra profits can be made is if extra dollars are spent. Because there are no extra dollars and more time to spend their regular dollars, profits actually go down due to businesses having to trade longer due to extended hours while only taking the same dollars.

Back to the original question, where did the 11th public holiday come from and where is the trade off for businesses?

Can anyone answer this?