I see the unions have won their battle to lower the adult wage, from 21 to 20.

Now of cause, to them, that's just the beginning, as they want that lowered even more to 18, a move that will see the collapse of so many industry youth jobs, who either rely on older juniors, or hire the likes of school based apprentices.

As if we don't already have a rising youth unemployment problem, these union dills simply try to put out a fire by adding petrol.

Oh what fools they are.

Dear Rehctub,

Do you really believe that when the price of labour
goes up employers hire less?

Also I wasn't sure that this case was finalised yet.

Anyway, if an 18 year old is doing the same work
why shouldn't that be reflected in the wages?

18 year olds can after all -

1) Vote.
2) Enter into legal contracts.
3) get married without parental consent.

Why should they get paid any less for doing the same work.

Foxy my sweet, Employees are only worth a percentage of what they can earn an employer. With all the overheads in business, they need earn their keep. Unfortunately most juniors earn far less than they cost.

You know yourself, if you think about it, the value of a junior library assistant. Would a good one be worth a tenth of an experienced librarian? I really doubt it, but the very best just may.

Does this mean they should be paid less than a tenth that of a librarian? Of course it does, but they are paid much more than that.

If your library was a business, the owner would have to earn much more from his experienced staff to be able to cover the cost of the unproductive juniors he was training. He trains people in the hope that they will become productive in time.

Even experienced people are often unproductive in a new job. In the last company I ran, I used to put new office staff through at least 2 months of assembly & stores work. Without this most unproductive time, they never became conversant with product codes, & how they worked. Without this knowledge they were never competent employees.

I reckoned it took 12 months minimum for a new employee to start to contribute to the bottom line, & many never did, the reason that unfair dismissal laws are such a hindrance to growing businesses & hiring people. They make it too hard to get rid of the dead heads, those who never lived up to their potential, or your hopes for them.

Foxy, I have no problem with a younger worker being paid a full wage, but, forcing this upon the employer is where the problem lies.

Also, you take a kid who starts work for an employer at say 17. In a few years, that same person needs to be paid a full wage and, if the boss decides to let them go, then the boss has at the very least a please explain, or worse, an unfair dismissal case on their hands.

Now I have no real issue with the lowering of the limit from 21 to 20, as is the case, but, this is just the beginning as the unions will keep pushing now, and I can assure you that the result will not be pretty because like it or not, bosses go in to business to make money and, any potential conflicts that may arise, often means they will just avoid the issue.

Another problem is lack of experience, as a person at 25 usually has more experience than one of 18, but, if an employer has to choose between both, they will often take the older of the two, as there is a better chance they wont be so dedicated to Facebook and they cost the same.

Finally, many young guys start to mature at 25 and begin their quest to become a father themselves and, along with this change in attitude, also comes commitment, something that most 18 year olds lack, and that's a simple fact. So lowering that age limit will see less 18 year olds getting that crucial start.

Having been an employer most of my life, this is one topic I do know a lot about ad, as is usually the case, I hope I can be proven wrong, but I doubt it.

18 year olds can after all -

1) Vote.
2) Enter into legal contracts.
3) get married without parental consent.

Foxy,
Trust you to latch onto a immense wrongs such as these to support an argument.
Of course there will be many more unemployed now. This is nothing but an undermining of the Coalition's efforts to reduce the youth unemployment rate by the ALP foul heads Department.

Hasbeen has implied that a librarian deserves a higher
salary than a library assistant. Yet, I've found (and
numerous studies have shown) that there is little or
no relationship between educational achievement and
job performance or productivity. For example, good
grades in a graduate school of medicine or education,
are poor predictors of whether someone will become a
good doctor or teacher (or even librarian).

The fact is that the skills required to get an A grade or
higher in a college course on anatomy or educational
philosophy or library management are not the same as the
skills needed to deal with a medical emergency, or an
unruly junior high school class, or managing a library.
Most people pick up the necessary skiils on the job,
not in the classroom and the characteristics that make
for a successful career (such as initiative, leadership,
drive, negotiating ability, willingness to take risks,
and persuasiveness) are not even taught in
the colleges. It seems that colleges produce graduates with
any number of educational credentials but few specifically
job-related skills.

In fact, millions of people never put the specific content
of their college education to direct use in their jobs,
and nearly half of the country's college graduates
actually work in fields they consider unrelated to their
major subjects.

Of course on the whole, however, a higher credential has
meant higher earnings, simply because of the value the job
markets places on it.

From my own experience - I've had a colleague
(librarian) take over for
me several times - in running a few of my Storytime Sessions
for pre-schoolers. I've also asked a young library-assistant
to do some of the sessions on a few occassions. I found
that the young library-assistant was far more capable,
personable, and did the job much better. She inter-acted with
the children in ways that were imaginative and fun. The
librarian was ok. But given a choice I would have given the
job to the younger library-assistant, who did it far better.

Butch the difference in hourly rate for a 20 yo against a 21 yo is .37 cents / hour.

a higher credential has
meant higher earnings, simply because of the value the job
markets places on it.
Foxy,
That's precisely what made the wheel wobble. The Job Market did not put these values up, the academic component within the ALP governing Unions did that. Unrealistic demands which have killed off australian industry. To think that they haven't leant a thing about economics after so much mayhem & suffering in the blue collar industry & now they're giving the unemployed yet another kick in the guts is simply beyond all sense. I suppose as long as the academic bureaucrats get their undeserved share all is well with people like you. I'd be too ashamed to display such arrogance & selfishness.

The 'Usual Suspects' at it again, the end of civilization as we know it, all brought on by those greedy workers! These are the same conservatives who always oppose any and every improvement in wages and conditions. Be it the eight hour day, sick pay, paid holidays etc, you name it, they opposed it. In my life time these are the same conservatives who supported 20 year old's being conscripted and packed off to fight and die in Vietnam for "them". Where were you then, dock side with a brass band waving goodbye?
You would think with all the, wringing of hands and gnashing of teeth, from the conservatives, the boss in Australia was about to shut up shop, and go out of business if he pays an extra 37c'hr to a few. What will they say if there is a general pay rise of 50c.hr. The truth is, the employer does very well in Australia, a great country in which to turn a profit.

Paul1405,
No need to be dock side to wave them off, the likes of me were putting money towards the cause that made it possible for the likes of you to maggot through life. I dearly wish I could wind back the clock. Greedy workers ? Where did I say that ? I made reference to greedy & irresponsible unions yes but not workers. Stop lying & twisting words you're no good at it.
Goaf did away with discipline & introduced moggotism 4 decades ago & we're still reeling from that & will do so for a long time yet if we don't start breeding sense again.

Foxy, while I agree that on the job training is where skills are developed, Pre work education is where the knowledge is often gained in order to hone those skills.

I will give you a small example. As a butcher, I did my apprenticeship when there were still blocks of college and, from that education I learned breads of cattle, their yields, I learned about disease and what causes certain unsightly changes to meat and, whether or not that change effects the wholesomeness of the meat, all those skills are no longer taught. The knowledge is still there, but the trainees must go looking.

The end result, is that MOST butchers completing their time don't have a full knowledge of the industry, only what happens within the four walls of the shop.

579, this thread is not about 37c per hour, it's about the unions agenda to force employers to pay 18 year olds an adult wage.

That WILL increase youth unemployment.

Paul, nice union rant, as usual. Be careful relying on 579 for your inspiration because he/she can only see the 37c per hour, not the real picture, that being the unions agenda.

You have to remember, this is the same person who thought Gillard was doing a splendid job and now blames Abbott for the mess she left behind.

The who point is people, once the unions get their way, you will see 15 to 17 year olds working after school jobs, then nothing, unless they are able to impress the hell out of a boss, which will be hard to do in a 12 hour week.

This whole area of when you are an adult need to be cleaned up. When exactly are you an adult? 12 to go to the movies & get on a plane. 16 to engage in sex or get married. 17 to drive a car. 18 to vote, drink, or sent to a combat area to fight, sigh a Legal document. Then 21 to get paid as an adult. This whole area just doesn't make sense.

The 21 year old thing is a Legal left over from the 19th century. It needs to be changed. If a 16 year old is doing the same work & has the same output as a 21 year old on a production line then they should get the same pay. On top of that I believe in equal pay for women as well, another Legal left over.

In fact the whole "adult age" thing needs to be cleaned up.

Indi,

Touchy, touchy, who's referring to you or your opinions! As for "maggot through life" I take it to mean some kind of "bludging on society". I will hold my 45 year work record up against yours any day, Still pushing your screwball idea of a "Boot Camp" for 20 year old's, or big drainage ditches the size of the Mississippi River for floods mitigation in Queensland. These half baked ideas shows a complete lack of understanding on your part. Are you not from the Deep North, it could have something to do with that hot Sun up there. Other than for a laugh, I don't take a great deal of notice of what you post.
p/s did you use the words "greedy anything"?

hold my 45 year work record up against yours any day.
Paul1405,
With a mentality such as you display towards some discipline I think your work record is quite suspect as to integrity.
For what it's worth I am in my 46th year of work. And no, it's got nothing to do with the sun up here, it's all in your indoctrinated, blinkered & sterile circles that the problem lies in.

Indi,

Unlike you I never referred to your working habits or its longevity. In fact, I never referred to you at all. You seen fit to likened me to the larvae of a blowfly in relation to work. In the Brave New World of tomorrow I'm sure there will be a position for a "Thought Nazi" and judging by your conceited posts you would be the ideal candidate. Then you could deal with all those of "Suspect Thought" in your own time and manner.

Have a nice day;
Paul1405.

The lower minimum wages for those below 21 were created as an incentive for employers to hire those with little to no job experience to enable them to get a foot in the door, and to make it worthwhile to hire youngsters that were less likely to be productive.

Unions are solely focused on protecting their members and couldn't care less for those trying to start out.

Unions are solely focused on protecting their members and couldn't care less for those trying to start out.
Shadow Minister,
Yep, some 40 yers ago I had a union rep by the name of Ludwig behave like mongrel pig because he wanted three of us to join the union but as we had no money we asked if we could wait for a couple pays. You should have heard the slob, he put us all off unions in less than 3 minutes.

Well, I will go n record now as saying if the adult wage limit is lowered to 28 or less, it will cost youth jobs.

Now yo can disagree, and that's your given right, just watch this space.

I am going on record to say unless children are put back down the mines at fourpence halfpenny a day, Gina Rhinoceros is in danger of losing money, and no fair dinkum, dinky di, true blue, Vegemite eating Aussie would want that! Gina losing money, that is, not the children in the mines. Its enough to drive a bloke to throw away his Rolf Harris record collection! and how un-Australian would that be.

Paul, it's a shame you see this as an amusing subject, but, as a unionist yourself, you just don't see both sides of the story, do you.

In fact, if your mates do ge there way, the ones who will loose out will be our youth. As if youth unemployment isn't a problem already.

Paul 1405,
You obviously haven't a clue about running an enterprise so that you can make sufficient profits to pay an employee. It's so easy for leftie public servants to down the private sector in such an ignorant fashion. The private sector has to perform. If you're still out of your depth then google the word perfom. It means pulling your weight, be of benefit to others, produce something of value etc.
The private sector earns their money unlike the excessively handsome donations our bureaucrats receive.

"Well, I will go n record now as saying if the adult wage limit is lowered to 28 or less, it will cost youth jobs."

Butch, my flippancy was in response to your above. "28" that must be a typo! I thought, which you never corrected, but then judging by your posts on workers and your open hostility to a paltry 37c/hr pay increase for some of the poorest paid. I thought you may now be angling for NO FULL PAY unless you have 10 years adult experience.

Paul1405,
I work with people who are nearing retiring age & they have never pulled their weight yet they get full very good wages. I know young people who wouldn't earn a sandwich's worth a day if pays were performance based. I know others who are consciencous enough to deserve more than what they get.
This idiotic notion of set high wages is what's bringing the economy of this country to its knees. You mention the poorest paid. I ask why do we have poorly paid in the first place ?
Again because of the idiotic structure we have. Those who work get the least & those who maggot & manipulate extract the most to the point of criminal.
If people want more they need to perform more not just automatically "be there". There must be a reward for effort otherwise there's no point don't you think ? Reward for just being there is harming everything to do with society as we will see if this Lunacy continues.

Indi,

Obviously, you are in another country The Deep North, because none of what you say applies to Australia. Firstly the Australian economy is not on its knees, far from it, it is on of the best performing economies in the world.
Without directly saying so, it would seem you support some kind of totally unrestricted labour market, where there is no place for worker collectives like unions, no controls through arbitration or conciliation no place for collective agreements such as awards etc. In this world of yours, you invoke the notions of the nineteenth century 'Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism' by Max Weber. You latch on to the simplistic noble belief that left to its own devices, without restriction, the market will miraculously create an environment where there is total reward for effort. I suppose in a utopian ideal world that would happen, but unfortunately we do not live in such a world. In the real world things are somewhat different and we have a need in the labour market for forced controls, and unions play a very important part in obtaining reasonable outcomes for one section of the market, their membership and by default all workers.

Paul1405,
put your money where your mouth is & pay the rates your ruinions want us to pay.

It seems that nothing less than a return to serfdom or slavery will satisfy employers.

Despite the never-ending claim, cutting wage costs does NOT result in job creation - only increased profits.
The same could be achieved by increasing sales, but cutting costs is much easier.

However it is ultimately the spending power of their own customers they are cutting back on.

The post-WW2 productivity boom was the result of workers being paid fair rates of pay and driving the economy with their spending.

Now insatiable corporate greed is putting pressure on wages and their paid political sponsors are very eager to carry out their demands.

When exploitation and conditions fall to an intolerable level, bad things happen to societies, as history has shown many times before.

Without any data to back them up, hysterical claims of the sky falling because of 37cents/hour are a bit excessive, considering that wages have fallen far behind inflation for several years.

Rache,

That's not true, how else do think the Egyptians got a 100,000 slaves to build the pyramids, award wages? Besides its a fact the 'Usual Suspects' have heaps of unfilled positions right at this moment, butlers, footmen, scullery maids, washer women, lots more like jobs. However I must warn you, only the "top" people will be getting that elusive five bucks a day, and 20 year old's need not apply! What do you think these people are, Mother Teresa? LOL.

....considering that wages have fallen far behind inflation for several years

Rache, you're not serious are you. With wage increases usually every year and a least 3%, if not more. So if wage increases are below inflation, it would be a case of you splitting hairs.

Paul, firstly I didn't bother correcting my typo, because I thought anyone with half a brain would have known what I meant. Perhaps I over estimated you.

The whole problem in this country is workers all too often get paid for how long a job takes, not how many jobs they get done in a day. The result often being that the poorest worker sets the bar, and strong workers back off, because they adopt the attitude of, why bother. What a great attitude you and your unions mates have instilled in this country, you should be ashamed of yourselves.

America is, or should I say, was, a prime example, before Obama raised the min wage by some 40% or so.

Now of cause you come from the 'we dont want to be like America side' while where I come from is just how well GOOD workers are paid in America, because they earn it.

The poor worker gets exactly what they deserve in the US the bare minimum.

As for your 'we are in great shape crap', what shape were we in before your beloved K Rudd, Gillard and the greens go hold of the cheque book.

You need to take your head out of the sand Paul, so you can realize just what a fine mess you helped to create with your unconditional support of the worst government in modern history.

We are staing down the barrel of an economic train wreck, but you just can't see it can you.

Paul,

Posts like that cement the reputation of the Greens as Canberra's village idiots.

School leavers presently and historically make up a disproportionate number of the unemployed. Employers always look for work experience and references, which youngsters cannot get without employment. The lower minimum wages for a couple of years is an incentive for the employer to take the risk.

The difference between what an 18yr old and a 21 year old earns is small, and for permanent positions is usually zero, and for most not having a family makes getting a foot in the door far more important than a couple of dollars.

If you are going to get your knickers in a twist, you should focus your faux concern on organisations that offer 6 month to 1 year unpaid internships, such as media organisations.

If there is any economic train wreck to happen Abbott will be the instigator. None of the former policies have changed, Abbott and co are happy, and so is everybody else. It's the wingers that are penny pinching, and all of this started with .37 cents / hour.
Abbott's red tape scam, is destined to do nothing. Red tape is rules and regulation, without that the place would be a shambles.

579, this has nothing to do with 37 cents per hour, as you keep referring to, rather, it has to do with unions agenda to have the adult wage limit lowered as low as 17 if they get their way. Because if they get their way, youth unemployment will be at systemic proportions.

But, given you have obviously not been a risk taking employer, you are forgiven for being ignorant of the topic.

As for the train wreck being Abbotts fault,, oh how typical, first you offer your unconditional support to our worst economic vandals EVER, then, you lay blame on the incoming government, this despite the billions you assisted to waste.

If you want any advice to offer your labor puppets, just tell them they can only spend money once and, once wasted, it's gone.

There is no train wreck, i said if there was to be. Our economy is doing well considering low expectations for most of the world. It,s not good that we are facing a 60,000 planned unemployment in our most productive state. Your 37 cents is not going to count, no matter what you see as excessive. A 20 yo is well and truly old enough to handle 650 / wk.
Abbott massaging job creation figures is not helpful.
The noalition have now stacked on 65 billion $ in six months, where has that gone and what is to show for it.

What I really dislike is Percentage wage rises.

Someone earning $35000 gets a 2.8% pay rise & receives an extra $1064 per year.

A clerk in the office beside him earning $85000 gets $2380 a year extra. Over double, yet they both have the same cost of living to contend with.

Percentage rises have always annoyed me. The guy on the lowest wage is falling behind every time he gets a rise.

Jayb, the answer to your problem is called education and skills, as better skills generally lead to better paying jobs.

If we followed your suggested set increase method, a lawyer would be earning about a hundred bucks per week more than a check out chick.

While that may sound good to you, what incentives do you suggest we provide, so potential lawyer, become lawyers, and don't become check out chicks, many of which are trainee lawyers in fact. Wages must be increased as a percentage in order to retain the additional employment incentives. No disrespect to check out chicks either by the way, as I am simply using them as an example.

579, do you honestly believe we are in great shape.

Within the next three years, we will have no car industries and our mining sector may be a fraction of what it is today. Believe me, there is a train wreck headed our way.

As for 20 year olds, again, that's not the issue.

The gap broadens and that has been going on for years. Some types of business have had their run and are destined to fade away. Nothing new in that, those that do not conform their business to reflect the current day. will demise. Some business are over represented, and needs rationalising. There is nothing new in that.

We are in great shape, some sections of business are in transition but on the whole our GDP is rising, which means we have growth, some countries can't manage a growth at all. If mining demised all together it would not put us in recession. It is better mining is held at a stable rate rather than boom and bust. Some mining needs to be scaled back, as it is. The concentration needs to be on non mining industries.
There is no get rich scheam, someone's fortune robs other industries of their workforce, as seen in recent years with no gain in GDP.
So your mining boom is a failure

& what makes you think some lying, cheating, overcharging Lawyer or Accountant is worth more than a checkout chick.

The argument you make has long been made but it's crap.

I am dealing with a Bankruptcy Firm at the moment. The two head people are giving themselves over $1500 & hour the next 4 or 5 people range down to $450 Their bill so far is higher than what the Firm was worth. How much to you think I'll get. My claim is only for $480.

With a percentage rise the wage disparity is exponential in a downward direction very fast for the lowest paid. At least with a set Sum raise the Difference you talk about is much slower & could be made up every, say ten rises. At least it would be fairer.

The 12 months to get up to scratch argument is also crap. You might get away with that in an office setting but not on a shop floor.

My wife was a "Dragon Lady" (Front End Supervisor) for Woolworths for many years. Training was one week or 3 days, then on to the Checkout. No 12 months to get up to scratch there. Nor in a dress shop, 3 months probation as a Trainee in a Chemist Shop. 2 weeks in a News Paper Shop.

$1500 An hour!

Seriously Jayb, please tell me you're not gullible enough to think a person on $1500 per hour is subjected to annul 2.8% pay rise.

Best you leave these types of discussions to people who have half an idea of how the wheels turn hey!

Sorry, can't help myself, I just have to educate you.

A person who is capable of earning that much is not on any type of award wage, as they would be paid on a performance basis with their pay being a reflection of what fees they manage to write for the company they are engaged by, that's right, ENGAGED as these types of people are not your average PAYG tax payers.

BTW, that's what fee the firm charges, not what this guy earns.

I'm still amazed that you can try to use this as an example to fuel your argument.

rehctub: A person who is capable of earning that much is not on any type of award wage, as they would be paid on a performance basis with their pay being a reflection of what fees they manage to write for the company they are engaged by, that's right, ENGAGED as these types of people are not your average PAYG tax payers.

I know that. You are right that's the Fee/hour the two Managers charge to do the work. I wonder if the $1500/hour is what the Managers pocket. I doubt that the employees get the $450/hour in their pay checks though. But it sure shows why there isn't any money left to pay the people that are owed money.

I still think a percentage based wage increase is a rip off of the lower paid workers though. I've been through the mill from the lowest to the highest. As a labourer to Tradesman to Manager, so I do have some idea.

Butch gets somewhat excited at times. Pushing your own barrow will do nothing. A lousy .37 cents and butch says there is a bigger picture.
Any employer who cannot deflect .37 cents / hr needs not be in business.
This country would still be asking for food just like oliver twist if it was not for the union movement. Remember the members are the union, they tell their elected heads what they can and can't do.
To alter the union movement outside of the members consent would be very brave, and probably political suicide.

I really don't see the value of Bank CEO getting paid millions plus Millions in add ons either. People like the woman for Wespac & the Quantas bloke. No- on, & I say again, no-one is worth that amount of money. Then their is the Board Members who do or do not turn up at meetings read the last minutes & close the Meeting. They get paid hundreds of thousands plus Bonuses & knighthoods & they complain if the worker gets 37c/hr increase.

Something is seriously wrong about how it all works.

I see the Politicians in Queensland have awarded themselves a pay rise of about $70000/year on top of what they already get. That's increase is twice what most wage earners get, seeing the "average" wage is $68700/year & most labourers are only on about $34000/year.

Widening the Gap once again.

The lunacy gets deeper, some people forget where they emerged from. .37 cents is of concern, and this is supposed to be a democratic society. Lord help us get past this era and become a more caring society, where wealth is shared and not in the pockets of a few. Mining should be done as a means of sourcing material to be used for our own benefit, and not as a means of making some other person mega rich, and doing nothing for our GDP.

We really should have a moron tax in Australia, it'd fill the coffers in no time.

....Any employer who cannot deflect .37 cents / hr needs not be in business.

579, let's say the unions get their way and lower the age to 17, that's a $40 per week pay rise.

So, what does the 30 year old want, because with his/her years of experience, surely they are worth more, don't you think, so there in lies the problem as it's not just aout the 37c /hr, it's also about the flow on effects and this is where you lot are missing the point.

...Remember the members are the union, they tell their elected heads what they can and can't do.

What a load of crap! A few delegates decide to go on strike. Meanwhile, those who DO NOT want to strike have no choice and are sent home WITHOUT PAY, while the union delegates and bosses continue to get paid, sometimes at higher rates. Furthermore, those who don't wish to strike, but have to, are nit allowed on site unless they join the union, exposing even more union thuggery and stand over tactics.

History shows that during the Howard era the country boomed and, anyone who wanted a job, had one. More so, anyone who did a good job, and was regarded as a valued worker, was well rewarded, either that, or they simply went elsewhere, as there were more jobs than workers.

Once Gillard took an axe to IR and gave the union thugs their powers back, productivity took a dive, and nobody can dispute that.

It's a scam, always has been.

Then this one takes the cake....and doing nothing for our GDP.

You must be on drugs!

Indi....We really should have a moron tax in Australia, it'd fill the coffers in no time.

Yes, but please remember, it's the morons who set the bar.

You are talking about things that are not going to happen any time soon.
soon is talking about 17 y/olds. The members make the decisions non members don't get a vote but they collect the winnings.
What has mining added to our GDP we are currently running at 1.56 billion equal to where it was during the so called mining boom. All the mining boom done was rob employers of labour, so one compensated for the other. Lord hockey would love to see our GDP dropping, but it is continuing to rise. You will be happy about all of that red tape disappearing, does that mean there will be no more legislation.

.....I really don't see the value of Bank CEO getting paid millions plus Millions in add ons either

Jayb, I often use this example when people talk of outrageous CEO packages, so I compare them to movie or sporting stars.

Let's take Allan Joyce, he is in charge of a very large company, and is answerable to shareholders. Love him or hate him, His stress levels must be extreme at times. I believe he earns a few million per year.

Then there's the likes of Andrew Bogut, the Aussie basket baller, who, apart from having no staff, no share holders and A MANAGER earns as much as THIRTY SEVEN MILLION EACH YEAR. Then there's the likes of Hugh Jackman, , who can earn upwards to 50 million PER MOVIE again, no staff.

So why do people only pick on the CEO's?

As for your percentage increase, If a lawyer receives 2.5 times that of an unskilled workers wage, then that must remain unless market forces dictate otherwise, as it has with many trades, otherwise we would in time have a shortage of the likes of lawyers.

In fact, butchers are suffering a similar fait, as their wages have not kept up with tradies wages, so many skilled butchers, like myself, are seeking employment elsewhere.

Ironically, I now pay more tax in one week than I would earn as a trade butcher.

The lunacy here belongs to the lord Abbott clan. What a joke. A fortnight of blunders has capped off one of the most lopsided speakers in history. Should have been retired to the stables long ago. 65 billion has been added to the deficit since the noalition lied their way to power. If you can believe Hockey he does not know where donated money comes from in his own dept;.

Labor does have a problem with strong women.

I see bartering is now gaining strength in the workplace.

A new system of battering some of ones hours, in lue of board and lodging is gaining momentum, whereby one has to work say twenty hours of their week in return for full board and lodging in shared accommodation.

The ATO hates it but, apparently it has been tested and withstood the challenge and has been classed as ligit.

Of cause the person applying for the job can refuse tha arrangement, but, because the pendulum has shifted on the supply V demand scale, the employer just finds another out of work, or under employed person seeking employment. I will try to find a link.

What a pitty it had to come to this, but, as I always say, for every action, there is a reaction. So Gillard, the unions and fair work Australia should take a bow, because after all, before they took an axe to IR, none of this was nessesarry.

I just hope they enjoyed their six odd years of chaos and I doubt there will be any turning back because the system is gaining legs in the likes of farming, hospitality and tourism, which, funny enough are the sectors hit hard with the rediculous penalty rates imposed on them by Gillard and Co.

Your a bit behind the times there butch, that has been going on for at least 20 years. It doesn't affect the ATO because the employee still has to be paid the full amount. The word barter does not replace the required wage. That started off with employees from the 457 visas. They had no option but to stay on the property. Where exploitation took place was the landholder was charging taxi fees to take the workers into town on a friday night. Mostly fruit pickers and the less english they knew the better.

It does effect the ATO because they don't get the tax from those 20hours of income.

It's also much cheaper for the employer as well.

incorrect, the cost of board has to be stated and that is added to the persons wage, there is no free lunch. I reckon bartering came about in the 1980's. When it started it was fraught with exploitation so rules and regs were imposed to guard against rogue employers. What the employers got was they didn't have to register their accommodation as a rental. They had to be classed as paying guests. Because of the legalities of housing people without insurance.

Yes, I would have to agree with you there as their board would be included in their wages. I stand corrected.

But it's a big saving for the employer, as they are paying with value added goods, rather than net cash. Perhaps it's a rare win win, and hopefully it will relive some of the preasure from business.

Union lunacy?
Of all the right wing nonsense sprouted on this site, this takes the cake.
Unions have been eviscerated in this country. What kind of strike is it if you have to get legal approval? So there are one or two unions left who aren't entirely proper!

Well, there are 100s of big business who break all sorts of laws, avoid paying tax, operate cartels, rob the public purse, obtain corrupt political privilege, survive entirely on corruption ....

But don't you worry about them apples. What does the CEO of Telstra, NAB, Commbank get paid again? Moreover what did those CEOs do? Did they build a business? Did they grow a business? If you ever meet one of them, you will find that anything resembling a personality is absent. Modern day don Quixote's tilting at windmills. It is embarrassing to witness adolescent state of retardation which pervades the ranks of senior executives.

I can't remember any public enquiry into the nocturnal travel expenses of senior executives of public companies. I can assure you, absent the patronage of these senior executives most of our cities would lack the variety of nightlife they currently offer.

The barter system works best for house builders and the likes, they trade plumbing for building work. Everything has to be recorded and lodged with your BAS. If one records it and the other does not someone is in trouble. You have to be a registered Barter trader for a start.

Unionism is a necessary evil. We have 1 in 7 persons living in poverty now. Where would we be without unions. Traders rely on the public having the disposable income so they can sell items. Have you ever heard of employers giving voluntary pay rises. The ambos; have been negotiating for months and still nothing. Nothing really happens until drastic measures are taken, all the employee has to offer is their services.

The damage that Williams clown did to the union movement will be felt for years. What a hide, to be on half a million a year and still steel members funds.

I am the first to admit that we need unions, however, the problems occur when they go too far, same goes for employers of cause.

By wanting to lower the adult wage to 17,which is what this thread is about, the unions, if they get their way, will decimate youth employment, but they just can't see it.

Few would care about the limit being lowered from 21 to 20, as it's the unions agenda that is of concern, not the recent 37c/ hour as several here keep referring to.

NOBODY is going to give a kid a chance if that means paying the higher wages from the get go, so, how do kids gain experience if they can't even get a start, because it's hard enough for them now.

The only way equal pay for ages will work is if the industry pays for productivity, and that's illegal in most industries now, thanks again to unions I might add.

People just have to come to the realization that no matter what the wage rates are, THEY MUST be affordable to business, as after all, that's the bottom line.

Twenty years ago the minimum wage was 60% of the adult wage now it is 43%. So it certainly needs a boost along. We don't want working poor like in the US.
What needs looking at is rationisation of supply. Just because someone starts a business should not necessarily be the same type of business that is already in operation. There needs to be a demand for such business. Without population increases demand can not happen. How many coffee shops can one town support.

579, it could also be suggested that 20 years ago there were less skilled, highly educated people than there are today,(as a percentage) which is perhaps the driving force behind the wage gap. That, plus the fact that welfare now makes up a large portion of that gap for many.

As for coffee shops, that appears to be a survival of the fittest industry.

The bit that puzzles me is how so many people willingly hand over money fir what is a hugely marked up item, such as a coffee, yet they complain if rump steak hits $26 per kilo, yet have little trouble paying upwards of $45 per kilo for what is essentially, milk.

Now while coffee sales are increasing, profits are not.

In fact, a cappuccino should be around $7.00 plus GST if prices had kept up with inflation. And we must remember, that $400 odd we pay for a coffee, includes GST. so that industry, despite increasing it's turnover, is doing it tough as well. It also relies very heavily on disposable income, which is in fear of drying up.

579 must be really pleased with Howard, as under Howard the real wages of the lowest paid workers increased more than under any equivalent period in history and even more than the 16 previous years under Labor.

Howard was a good leader until he went off the rails, and the people noticed that and the rest is history.
Young peoples wages have got to move along like everyone else's. Even if that creates change. You can't have a working poor as the great US enjoys.
AU is for sale Joe has got the shingle out. Discounts galore, make an offer.
Schools, water, power, public transport, hospitals, medicare, Roads, Bridges, Tin Roofs It's all there and it's all for sale.

579, young people's wages do move with the rest, as wage rises are usually across the board. The idea of reducing the adult wage to below 20 will be the move that does most damage to youth workers, just wait and see if you don't believe me.
Oronicly the policy that killed Howard was work choices, a policy that effected the lazy and unskilled mostly, yet lead to the hundreds of billions in debt we now have, all because people felt sorry for the laziest or lowest skilled worker. What a huge gamble that turned out to be, a gamble that failed.

As for everything for sale, what other options do you see to repay the huge debt your mates left behind. Now that debt wouldn't be such a problem had they left something to show for it. But they left nothing, other than some unfunded dreams or under funded shockers like the NBN.

The fire-sale money is going to stay with the states and not to pay down debt. Hockey is happy with the level of debt.
Whereever you got the idea that the adult wage was going to 17 will not be in your lifetime. That is a normal tactic to get the ball rolling on negotiations. The noalitions brand of NBN is laughable, it will take a change of govt; to rectify it.
You come out with over the top statements that mean nothing.

All asset sales will go into a pool, and the size of the pool won't be made public until the may budget. He doesn't know what is or what is not for sale but it will be made public in may. They are a bunch of comedians.