While im the first to agree the likes of service industries should always retain penalty rates, the likes of retail and hospitality, where goods are bought and sold, excessive rates are no longer justifiable.

To put it in plain and simple language, why should a worker be paid twice as much to make and/or sell something on a Sunday, when the employer, the one taking all the risks gets paid less than on a normal trading day.

In this day and age a 25% loading for a Sunday is a reasonable amount and I am confident the FWC will come to the same conclusion.

How did I know when I saw. the thread title, it would be from the hand of 'Ten Bucks an Hour' Butch. Do I have ESP or something. Every week you run this one by us, and every week I tell you, stop barking up the wrong tree! Get onto those tax dodging, cash in hand, small and large business shonks, ripping off the workers!

The 'Fair Work' Commission has awarded Australia's lowest paid workers an increase of 41.5c/hour. Butch, what is that in your game, about half a sausage?

Paul1405,
You hit the nail on the head.
Cash businesses...and they wont pay the workers higher wages.
Everywhere you go today there signs "CASH ONLY".
No EFPOS equals no bank records of the till take.
Add to that the 'take home' company paid for food and the tax deduction for home use
as 'Office' as well as the company car and wow, why wouldn't you be a foreign owned fast food operator.

If these business are so profitable, would you blokes explain why very few owners are still running the things after 3 years.

Could it be the workload for owners is just too high? Could it be that once they realise they will earn more take home pay working in one as an employee, than they do as an owner, & work less hours, or do they just go broke?

Ever noticed how many public servants, particularly teachers, go into their own business, only to scuttle back onto the taxpayer's teat very quickly?

A contributing factor to high costs for employers is the rental costs for shop, restaurant or business premises.

In some centers as well as rent they have to give a percentage of the profit.

Go to Highpoint West get the hem of a pair of pant taken up about a 5 minute job will cost around $15 to $20.

Does your shop open on Sunday butch?

When schools, parliament, gov offices, courts, etc are open all weekend and when sport, church, nightclubs, concerts etc happen all week.
Then we can talk.

Back to basics:

Given there are two people who want to have a private deal between them:
'A' will do some work for 'B' and 'B' will give 'A' some money.

Given both 'A' and 'B' are happy and nobody else is hurt by their deal.

How dare anyone else interfere and tell them that if they proceed with their deal then they will be violently grabbed and placed in a cage?

There lies evil, discussing the details is a distraction.

Yuyutsu - In theory in a perfect world with all honest people you would be right but with some they would interview with the intention of getting the person who will accept the lowest salary.

You could also run the risk of people going into companies and saying they will work for x% less than someone else in a job.

I would also say party A may say they are happy when in fact they are not but to admit they are not leaves them on the dole.

You people don't have a clue about the real world do you? You must be bureaucrats, academics or union officials.

In the early 80s I was in the Whitsundays. In the off season I took a break to do some work on my yacht.

The owner of an island resort I'd done some work for heard I was free, asked me to come over, do a day or 2 a week skippering island boats, & another day or 2 helping with a couple of projects. The rest I could use the island workshop to do my own work for the yacht. Great.

It didn't quite work out that way. I did 28 days straight, had a day off, then 32 days straight, then a day off before another 26 days straight, & quit, I had to get my yacht done.

A typical day was from 7.00 AM on a boat for the morning mainland run, getting off it at about 6.30 PM after the afternoon run. All staff worked a similar 6 day week for about $125 plus keep a week. This was I believe about the award for 38 hours labouring.

It was a great life style, but could get a bit tiring. One day for example, during the off, [cyclone] season when we had only 8 guests I was Island manager, ferry skipper & general roustabout, my wife was kitchen hand, waitress, house maid, boat hostess & office girl. My deck hand was also barman for the day, & the only other person on duty was the cook.

My lady talked all the guests into an island cruise, so everyone, even the cook went cruising all day. It must have been frustrating trying to phone the island that day.

We all knew none of us were working any harder than the owner, & that he was probably earning less than we were. Some lasted just a couple of days, but many had been there for years, & felt part of the place.

Money is not everything.

Dear Philip,

Well at least SOME people are honest: do you wish to punish them because others are dishonest?

If someone went into a company and agreed to work for x% less (and the company actually accepted their offer, after all they may not be as good), then that poor fellow will actually have to WORK for x% less and sweat it out while his friend which he relieved will be able to live on the dole without working!

To facilitate this, the dole should provide a true and unconditional safety-net and not be shameful or disastrous: it should allow one to live frugally but with dignity. This by itself will create the necessary competition that will raise the market value of work.

But I notice that you mentioned companies while I was referring to individuals:

Well in an ideal world there wouldn't be any companies!

So in that case I agree: while individual freedom is sacrosanct, companies are not sentient beings and I find no compelling moral need to allow them similar freedoms. While it is outright immoral to impose conditions on what individuals may freely agree between them, given that it is never compulsory to incorporate, it should be OK to impose IR laws as one of the conditions for incorporation. Is it actually wise to do so? well I am no economist, I am only concerned with the moral side of things.

---

Thank you, Hasbeen - nice post!

Just talk to Richard Dinner Tally of the greens.

If someone is prepared to accept cash wages well below the minimum rate then it is OK.

Shadow, how is your mate from the Liberal Party, Chris Nelson going. A part time chiropractor, and full time raciest! What does he charge per hour to racially vilify good people on Facebook? Does he throw in a free back rub at the same time?

Do you know Chris Nelson personally?

Phillip, all things fluctuate going up in good time, then bad in bad times, or even not such good times. For some reason wages seem to be the exception.

If a person is in need of work, and there is a downturn in the economy, point in case, right now, why cant they negotiate a deal that suits them. As well as, when there are more jobs than workers, workers get to demand much better deals, the mines are a prime and very recent example, whereby many have had to take a huge pay cut, some from $150K back to $85 K just to stay employed. Whats wrong with this?

Paul, I knew when I started this thread that I would catch you as well, but I was prepared for this. So Paul, how is it fair that a worker gets paid double on a Sunday (hospitality as an example) while the employer actually makes less, if not a loss?

This is why cash is paid.

Now someone mentioned turnover rent. This is not what it seems as turnover rent only kicks in after a certain level of sales is reached although most centres do charge out of hours trading fees as they typically have a clause that refers to 'core trading hours' and any hours outside of these costs extra.

The whole point is that fairness should work both ways, but it clearly does not in this case and this is why the FWC is looking at it and rightly so because society has demanded a seven day society but refuse to pay the price expecting the employers to ware the costs.

Paul,

How's your mate Karel Solomon from the greens? Do you know him personally? I believe he does great back rubs too, but perhaps you are not his type.

Why is it OK for greens and labor to rip off workers and not others?

I don't know Shadow, I believe good old Karl, got a job as an au pair boy looking after the kiddies down at Dicks farm!
Now tell me what you know about Chris (Racists) Nelson. What's his rate to do a nasty on someone on Facebook

So Karel is down at Richard (Dick's) Dinner Tally's farm? I thought Brown eyed Bob would be more his gender.

I have no idea who Chris Nelson is, but can you comment on Disease Rhiannon's racist pamphlets?

Well it appears Bill may have finally revealed his grubby intentions if and when he wins the election.

I guess there is some merit in coming clean prior to the election.

BTW, still waiting for your answer Paul, as to how you consider Sunday rates fair on the risk taker?

It's a toughie hey!

If and When Aunty Lee produces a racists pamphlet, I will comment on it, and you will be the first to know Shadow.

What's this, you don't know who Chris (Racists) Nelson is! No relation to Bredan as far as I know. He is a brother in arms, just like you a Liberal Party member. Surely you get a cut rate on those back rubs of his. When I read the article, my first thought was "Oh no! Shadows gone!" but it looks like you are still here.

Butch, Sunday is the Lords day, a day of rest, a day to attend the Godly house, or face the wrath of the Almighty. Surly you would agree double time is small recompense for spending eternity burning in Hell! Maybe the workers should asking for triple time, and fire extinguishers.

This might interest you Butch, Coles and their lackey union the SDA has been ordered by 'Fair Work' to renegotiate their agreement after Duncan Hart, a part time Coles employee took them to court over their cozy work place arrangement. I say good on ya Duncan!

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-31/part-time-coles-worker-wins-fair-case-against-supermarket-giant/7463132

If you are talking about the Carbon price butch, Abbott abolished it not the voters of Australia, which led to the raising of power rates. All that crap about bringing power prices down ,once the carbon tax was gone that was it never to be mentioned again. What a thieving mongrel that man was.

Bill won't do anything the voters don't want done, he is not like Abbott with relentless lies.

A conglomerate like Coles underpaying staff, what a measly pack of ar soles.

579, is this the same back stabbing ex union thug we are talking about, the one that brought not just one, but two leaders down. Yea right, a very trustworthy bloke indeed.

As for you and Paul's rant about Coles, there is obviously more to that story as the last time I looked they were a publicly listed company and would not deliberately break the rules.

Meanwhile, I suggest you and your new found friend Duncan may want to 'watch this space' so as to say to see the fallout of this young guys actions.

While i'm not suggesting he has done anything wrong, people have to understand that for every action there is a reaction, and this one could hurt many a young one.

BTW Paul, how many of those Sunday shoppers do you think would be church goers.

Surely they are the real sinners Paul, with their typical double standards. But what would I know, I don't follow some mythical being or get sucked in to supporting a mega buck money making machine fleecing millions in tax free dollars out of the faithful. All in the name of charity, or so they often claim. Another joke for another discussion.

So Paul, should I leave the light on while waiting for your answer to my very direct and relevant question, or should I just accept you are a typical one who has double standards.

Waiting, waiting, waiting.

Paul,

Aunty Disease Rhiannon regularly produces anti semetic propaganda.

How was Karel Solomon's back rub?

I have a grandaughter who goes to highschool and works weekends at Woolworths Department store, to earn her own money.

Her pay isnt that much, I wouldnt like to see her have a reduction in her take home pay because of a reduction in penality rates.

However I can see that when opening a cafe On a Sunday, penality rates may mean its
not profitable to open at all.
Maybe there could be some criteria based on profitability, as to if penality rates are required to be paid at what percentage

I had no idea about the whole thing and I am so surprised! How is this even possible?!

CHERFUL

Your granddaughters penalty rates have already been traded away by the Shoppies union in exchange for a large payment to the union from Woolies, which occurred under the watch of Shorten.

Shadow Minister

Havent heard about that, interesting.

Cheerful, there is a proliferation of coffee shops in most parts of Sydney. Nearly all trade on a Sunday, for the simple reason it is second only to Saturday as the most profitable day of the week. No one operates their business on a weekend, week in week out, knowing they are losing money.
The whole Sunday penalty rate thing is a blind to allow retailers to boosts profits. Realistically, going om the numbers of operators, coffee shops must be extremely profitable, or there is an over supply in the market. There is no evidence of over supply as most continue to trade and show no signs of going out of business.
Some years back Thursday night trading was introduced in Sydney, and most shops on the main street strip opened, and business was good. With time the popularity of Thursday night shopping has lost its gloss, and profits, now the majority of shops on the strip close on a Thursday night.

Interesting Shadow, your wild claim about the SDA, not my favorite union, but can you offer any evidence for your claim.
"in exchange for a large payment to the union from Woolies, which occurred under the watch of Shorten."
Even if it was true, you lie because Shorten was head of the AWU and not the SDA which covers Woolies employees. Woolworths also make sizable donations to the Liberal Party, what influence does that have with industrial laws, could Turnbull favor a Howard like 'Work Choices' which would be to the advantage of a company like Woolworths. Remember public companies have a responsibility to share holder to invest money with the expectation of it returning a profit.

Bu Pl, how many of those small coffee shop owners pay half cash, half on the books on Sundays?

You have still not answered my question as to why the business owner should get paid less on a Sunday, while staff receive double.

In a world you want fairness, has is this fair?

rehctub,

"You have still not answered my question as to why the business owner should get paid less on a Sunday, while staff receive double"

Tell us why the business owner in question decided to invest in a business knowing full well that he'd be up for penalty rates if he operated on the weekend?

Butch, given my own observations that Sunday is a high volume day for coffee sales. I'm not convinced that Sunday is the terrible day for profit as you claim. Is your profit uniform over 7 days? Do you make $10,000 net (in you kick) on a Saturday, but have to get by with a lousy $5,000 take home on Mondays. I fully sympathies with that unsatisfactory situation you are in. I don't know why you bother getting out of bed on a Monday, I wouldn't for chicken feed! And to think your man servant (aka employee) Miguel is taking home 50 bucks, and a half keg of snags to feed the wife and his 10 kids, and the dog, every Monday and not working hard out! I agree, it's a disgrace, your too generous!

Do you think there are too many coffee establishments, competing for the same buck?

Paul,

You managed to cock it up again.

The SDA agreement with Woolies, that stripped workers of penalty rates in return for lucrative payments from Woolies, was signed in 2012 when Bill was Minister for industrial relations.

Penalty Bill, might not have been directly responsible for this corruption, but was directly involved in the stripping of penalty rates from Cleanevent workers, and from those working in a mushroom company, all for kick backs to the union.

Of course left whingers would prefer to pretend that none of this happened and that the CFMEU was not corrupt as they bankroll the greens and labor.

P,

The point is that many people either go bankrupt or don't start a business. Either that they use family members or only trade at peak times.

For shops that depend on passing trade, not working on Sundays is not an option, for others they close.

Shadow, I would go one step further in suggesting that coffee shops that are branded are the ones hurting the most as they usually have their registers locked in to head office, whereas the little guys usually pay cash. Sadly, it is the only way they survive.

However, the real issue is not so much the coffee shop, as their cost of goods is extremely low, its the restaurants that are feeling the pinch most as they not only have higher food costs, but also wait tables and have more crockery and cutlery to clean, all at double time rates on a Sunday.

So Poirot, to answer your question, cash is king and always will be as long as big brother keeps sticking his nose in where it doesn't belong.

Good for the worker because many retain some of their welfare payments.

Good for the owner because they get paid normal rates, but bad for the tax payer but hey, as I have always said, for every action there is a reaction, and cash wages is one such reaction.

Now for the benefit of you and Paul. Go to your local coffee shop on a Sunday and ask the owner about penalty rates and whether they affect his/her business.

You guys bang on about business confidence, look no further than labor for your answer because even if the FWC decides to reduce Sunday rates, labor wont ware it.

".....as long as big brother keeps sticking his nose in where it doesn't belong."

rehctub,...aren't you the one who applauds Big Brother "sticking his nose in" and making legislation so that you can negatively gear?

But you're not so keen of big brother enacting legislation to pay the workers more on weekends.

"Now for the benefit of you and Paul. Go to your local coffee shop on a Sunday and ask the owner about penalty rates and whether they affect his/her business."

Yes, and to SM also...my point still stands. If you decide to invest in the sort of business that attracts penalty rates, wouldn't you at least have done your homework and factored that in?

If you were any way competent, you would know what you're up for after diligently researching all aspects of your potential investment.

Just thinking, SM and rehctub,

We've lived in our small coastal city for over 30 years.

I've been trying to think of a cafe in the city centre which has closed...there maybe one or two, but all the main ones have continued to trade for that thirty years...and I'd say there's been a three-fold increase in both cafes and restaurants in our city since Oz society began to look at weekend trade as the norm.

And we're not a particularly "touristy" city - more a major market town and port.

Of all business that I note, cafes and restaurants tend to be the most resilient around my district.

Why is that?

Too right Poirot, and perhaps if we ever see the day that cash in outlawed, this may change, but until then, if one can see more goods on a Sunday, and pay cash wages so the owners cut is the same % as usual, then they would still be a sound investment, for the owner, not the tax payer as a whole.

BTW, your comparison over my big brother statement is pretty poor, because we are talking about laws (NG) that have been in since the 80's, and Julia Gillards decision to increase penalty rates for Sundays in the hospitality and tourism industries, this despite the fact that many who worked these shifts actually enjoyed them and had hours that better suited their family and recreational habits. But big brother decided that these two consenting adults were incapable of making their own decisions. The rest is history.

I had to laugh at Bill Shortens NON ANSWER on the topic when challenged by the sky presenter about supporting the FWC outcome. He said it was a hypothetical question. What a spineless wimp.

So guys, if you want whats fair for the tax payer, I suggest you support the removal of these ridiculous Sunday rates, otherwise you need to accept that your much hated cash will remain king.

butcher,

"I had to laugh at Bill Shortens NON ANSWER on the topic when challenged by the sky presenter about supporting the FWC outcome. He said it was a hypothetical question. What a spineless wimp."

That's rich!

Note that last night Magnificent Mal shrank from appearing at a people's forum, hosted by Sky News, with Bill - opting instead to have a waffle with Leigh Sales on the 7.30 Report...(which, hilariously, didn't go as well as he'd hoped)

5 minutes into Turnbull 7.30 interview, he said "Jobs"14 times..."Growth" 11 times...and "Jobs and growth" 3 times.

Pathetic...

"BTW, your comparison over my big brother statement is pretty poor, because we are talking about laws (NG) that have been in since the 80's..."

Well "Wackydoo!...however, I'm talking about "principle" here. Why do you want big brother to interfere in the one case, but criticise its interference in another?

"A penalty rate for Sunday work was first implemented in Australia for working “unsocial” hours in 1919. The 1947 “Weekend Penalty Rates Case” expanded penalty rates to Saturdays, while Sundays were set at a rate of double time...."

"Myth 1: Given extended trading hours, it’s no longer abnormal for people to work weekends.

Most employees still do not work unsocial hours. According to the Australian Work and Life Index, 38% of workers work unsocial hours; only 32.2% of workers work weekends and 18.9% of workers work evenings after 9pm regularly. These figures include the 13.1% of workers who work both evenings and weekends regularly."

http://theconversation.com/myths-about-penalty-rates-and-those-who-rely-on-them-49947

(and for the hundredth time, could you at least check your woeful spelling, at least for thread headers, before you press "submit". Here we have a thread header containing this: "Rediculous Penilty"...obviously Graham doesn't care - and it's embarrassing in headers)

Poirot, I have never claimed to be a good speller, however I also believe that if the message gets through, then whats the big deal.

On the topic, Sunday rates for these sectors were increased to double time back in early 2008. So I dismiss your argument about 1919.

The other point you wont accept is that anti social hours are no longer the plausible argument as it is the trend of the people who have created these hours, not the shop owners as prior to the likes of Maccas (wrong spelling but you know who I mean) none of these businesses traded on Sundays.

Society has demanded a seven day society, and have to pay for the privilege. It truly is that simple.

BTW, I think Malcom Turnbull is not the right person to lead our nation, however neither is Bill Shorten, a though that is backed up by the apparent shifting of votes away from the majors.

Having said that, I do feel Malcom is the better of the two on offer. Besides, how can anyone trust labor on economics.

Poirot, please do not give old Butch a thumping, because he wants to discuss the 'Rhinoceros Poultry Rats' every poly worth his salt is onto it. Even 'Fairy Wonks Albania' is trying to make a incision on that very subject. Even working O/T on Sundays at triple time and a half to solve the problem of unfair penalty rates!

Sorry Butch we know what you mean.

rechtub,

"Society has demanded a seven day society, and have to pay for the privilege. It truly is that simple."

What is "simple" is that 67.8% of workers do not work on weekends - and 32.2% do - how can that be defined as "demanding a seven day society"?

If the figures were about face, your argument would be stronger.

Regarding Malcolm - can you tell me anything he's said that truly holds some substance...apart from his tax cuts to big business for a 0.6% growth trajectory over twenty years. He valiantly tried to explain that last night to Leigh, in all its incremental glory...and waffled on ad nauseam.

He's such a trooper!

"... Besides, how can anyone trust labor on economics."

Lol!....debt way up, wages down, private business investment down, business confidence down, spending up - all under the Abbott/Turnbull govts.

You were saying?

Poirot, are you a politician by any chance?

As for the 68% who don't work, this is just a hint Poirot, perhaps they are the ones out there demanding the cafes be open on Sundays so they, in their leisure time, can grab a coffee and a feed.

Lets face it, if the numbers were the other way there would be no customers because they would all be working. Tell me you're taking the piss will you.

As for Malcom, I've already told you he's a dud. In fact, no doubt you saw my thread titled Mr Waffle well before the press go holed of him. It's just that Bill is a bigger dud. A union thug that says one thing but means another.

Here he is offering all these gifts, with no plan on how to fund them, yet some of the plebs actually believe him. More fools are they, although some also thought Tony Abbott would get his hair brained parental leave scheme off the ground as well. The truth is you just cant help some people as they will get sucked in time and time again.

So my tip is the FWC will suggest PR for Sundays be set at Saturday rates, which is still a 25% increase, and which also proves employers are willing to compromise. Its a pity Bill and his union thug mates won't, because as long as they take their current stace, the only looser will be the tax payer because cafes will open, and cash will be paid. t's a given

Poirot,

The whole point of reviewing penalty rates is to bring them in line with life as it is today. The rates for Saturday are 1.5x and the rates for Sunday are 2x originally made so because of religious observance. As only about 6% of modern Aussies attend Church, this is outdated, and the consequences is that many shops are closed on a Sunday, where there are many people that would be quite happy to work at 1.5x on Sundays and Saturdays. This would create more employment, boost the economy and taxes and enable to government to deliver more services.

Try and argue with the points made by SM Poirot. Although I do suspect the rate will be 1.25 not 1.5, which is still a large boost for working what you class as 'unsociable hours' in a society that has demanded businesses be open those hours.

Pre 7 day or mid week late night trading, hundreds of families enjoyed diner together and would normally spend Sundays as a family.

Society demanded the change, knowing full well it would impact on certain within the workforce. Big business welcomed the changes with open arms as they knew it would effect small operators.

Some small operators are making a comeback due to the greed displayed by big business as they, big business, have ripped off the farmers, ripped off the suppliers and transport companies, and the only ones left are the shareholders and they speak with their dollars.

BUT, and this is a huge but, the small operators don't miss out, just the tax payer as SM rightly points to.

Paul, please try something new, you becoming very boring. There have been a few posters over my ten years on OLO who I just move past, please don't become one of those. You're much better than that.

rehctub,

"As for the 68% who don't work, this is just a hint Poirot, perhaps they are the ones out there demanding the cafes be open on Sundays so they, in their leisure time, can grab a coffee and a feed.

You are the one who said we have a 7 day week. Obviously with nearly 69% not working on weekends, we're somewhere in transition - and not even at a half-way mark.

"Lets face it, if the numbers were the other way there would be no customers because they would all be working. Tell me you're taking the piss will you."

How is that true?

Are you saying that from Monday to Friday that cafes have hardly any customers because the majority of the working population are...er..."working"?

If that were the case, they'd only open on the weekends.

This is getting a little like quantum physics - is it a wave or particle?...Lol!

Butch. I wasn't have a go at you, just joking, I make as many typos if not more than you do, you being one of the posters from the dark side I like to engaged with.

Now moving on. This claim that "Society demanded the change, knowing full well it would impact on certain within the workforce. Big business welcomed the changes with open arms as they knew it would effect small operators."

Party correct, I don't think there was any mass movement by shoppers to demand Sunday trading. More like Large shopping centers such as Westfields, and big retailers Coles and Woolworth lead the charge, looking to increase sales, pushed for not only Sunday trading, but extended hours in general, It has mostly been at the expense of the small convenience retailer. With car availability (have you ever noticed that the biggest part of a Westfields is the car park), and improved public transport, regional shopping centers have flourished and replaced local main street shops as peoples focal point for shopping. In my area the local strip has lost many retailers, small clothing stores, shoe shops. some butchers and F&V's banks, supermarkets etc. However they have been replaced with food outlets and coffee shops, people have more money to spend on these luxury items, $5 sandwich and $4 coffee.

I don't support the argument to cut Sunday penalty rates, as the businesses that have filled the void created by those that have fallen by the wayside, are in general doing well working within the present system of not having to compete (as yet) with the big volume retailers.
What is your take on the outrageous rents and charges imposed by big shopping centers on small tenants. up to 10 times per m sq than what they charge the big operators.

Paul, i'm not suggesting small coffee shops are suffering on Sundays, as many pay cash, or at least cash top ups, but it's the tax payer that is loosing out simply because few can see what the problem is.

How can any system be deemed fair when owners are making less, having taken all the risks, while staff are paid double.

As for rents, this is why so many centres today have more and more mini majors, because their rents are in the middle.

However, retail suffers from consumerism as few continue to buy a cabbage once it reaches the $7 mark.

rehctub,

"....but it's the tax payer that is loosing out simply because few can see what the problem is."

I ask again....why are you happy for the average taxpayer to "lose out" in order for some to utilise negative gearing" - if you're so concerned about the "tax payer"?

"How can any system be deemed fair when owners are making less, having taken all the risks, while staff are paid double"

One assumes that owners of cafes open on weekends because it's worth their while.

You appear to be saying that it should be worth more to them at the expense of the people they employ to make the profit in the first place.

What's all this about "risk taking"?

Is that worth more than the labour that makes it all possible?

Butch, the reason so many business operate "cash only" in food courts of large shopping centers and else where, is so they can fly under the radar, running an all cash business as far as income and expenditure is concerned, paying little if any, in the way of tax. These business are often run by absentee owners who are rarely on the premises, if ever, sometimes owning a chain of similar business. These owners rely on other family members, or a trusted friend to manage the business. They pay cash wages 7 days a week, Sunday is no different, and any change to penalty rates will have no effect on them. They operate cash only, not for the reason of survival, but to maximize profits through tax avoidance. Nothing at all to do with penalty rates. Conservative estimates put GST avoidance at $7 billion per year on its own.

Paul, i'm not referring to 'cash only' business, i'm referring to pretty much any small café/restaurant that is a stand alone brand, as most pay cash, or a combination of cash/ on the books on Sundays, and who can blame them. I recon I would if my award stated double time for Sundays.

Now this brings me to another question, why is it that retail has time and a half on Sundays, yet hospitality has double? Doesn't make sense to me.

AS for all the risks, the staff have their jobs at risk, not their homes and there in lies the fundamental difference.

Poirot, the last time I checked coffee shops and the likes did not provide affordable housing. But by all means keep presenting your arguments but may I suggest you compare apples with apples.

Labor has pretty much ruled out accepting the FWC's recommendation, which pretty much suggests they wont get too many in these sectors voting for them.

Butch "I recon I would (break the law) if my award stated double time for Sundays." Would you also condone customers stealing your meat if they considered your prices too high?
I see no difference.

If my prices were much higher on Sundays, you may have a point Paul, but they are not.

The whole point of the matter is there is no justifiable reason as to why, in this day and age of our seven day society, why a toasted sandwich, a steak/fish/chicken meal, or even a coffee should cost twice as much to make on a Sunday as it does on a weekday.

The next time you go out for a meal on Sunday, try not to use too many plates etc, because they cost almost $40 per hour to wash just because it's a Sunday.

The only reason the FWC is considering these rates is because times have changed. It's just that labor and its union thugs can't accept that we have moved on.

What you say could be justified if time off for all was staggered. and a true 7 day a week work regime for everyone was the norm (why I don't know). That would have to include schools, banks, government services. You make no reference to police officers, Ambo's firemen, public transport workers etc, professions which when entering are known to be 24/7 operations.
What this is all about is not just penalty rates for low paid hospitality workers, but the thin end of the wedge in attacking penalty rates and other worker conditions in general.

Paul, may I suggest you read my opening post, as I clearly addressed just what you are saying as I am talking about very specific sectors, ones that through time have evolved into busy family days.

For an example, if a Tuesday was twice as busy as a Sunday, the employer would have twice the funding for additional staffing, however, it is exactly the opposite, and there in lies the crux of the problem. It is also the main driver behind senior, highly experienced staff often being replaced with facebook addicts, most of whom don't even drink coffee, so don't really care what it tastes like. Mcdonalds is a very good example as the coffee varies so much.

As an example of how bad these laws are, I have a bother with a restaurant, he actually had three up until 2011, but the Sunday wages just killed him. He took six grand on a Sunday and lost about one himself, so he closed that one, it was in far north QLD.

So, all those who had a Sunday shift, lost their shift and the loss of turnover made it no longer worth it so everyone lost their entire jobs simply because Julia decided what was working well was not fair. Not fair to who?

I remember him calling me Jan 1 2008 if I recall to say his new Sunday rates just took 1230 grand off the overall bottom line.

As for the staggered week, great idea but the unions just would not have it.

He had a chef employed, 45 hrs one week, 55 the next, set pay.

When he was fired he went for UFD and my brother was made to make up the shortfall for the long weeks, but could not claim back for the overpayments for the 45 hr weeks. Go figure!

Continued.

Continued
Now someone, perhaps my sparing mate Piorot, mentioned "why do people go into business when they know the conditions".

One very very simple four letter word, CASH!

Furthermore, most small businesses are a long term venture, typically with a five year least, with a five year option. The first three years usually pays down the debt, then the remainder makes the profit.

Nowadays, as many centres will not give an option, and demand huge refit costs there is little profits to be made as most go into the pocket in the form of cash, and who can blame them.

You simply can not have your cake and eat it because the risk takers are going to get their money what ever it takes, although many these days do fail.