Page 1212 - Week 04 - Wednesday, 6 April 2016
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
I note that our second largest business sector after government is universities, and with that comes a high student population. Changes to penalty rates could see tens of thousands of these residents lose an important source of income. Students, who are notoriously short of money, would find it much more difficult to supplement their income and get by while studying, perhaps with no other option than to work constantly irregular hours.
We should not forget that the people who rely on penalty rates are often some of the lowest paid workers in our city, and in some cases rely on penalty rates in order to pay for basic staples like rent, mortgages, bills and other life necessities.
There is a practical impact and a very real cost to working unusual hours. At times when penalty rates apply, there are often significantly fewer public transport options available to workers. It is entirely foreseeable that workers may have to resort to using Uber or taxis on weekends and in the evenings and paying significant amounts of money to get to and from work. Again it is fair to increase compensation to an appropriate amount for the costs incurred.
Without penalty rates students, hospitality workers, single parents and people without personal transport would see themselves spending extra money on commercial transport whilst expecting to be paid less for work outside standard business hours. This, in effect, is a pay cut. This is just one of the equity issues that penalty rates alleviate.
Students use weekends and evenings to catch up on study and complete assignments. This time is crucial for furthering their education and pursuing their career goals. Parents use weekends to do washing, make lunches and prepare themselves and their families for the week ahead. If that time is free for people who are not working, how is it fair that individuals who are working these unusual hours would not receive extra compensation for being unable to perform these household tasks?
Irregular work hours also have a disproportionate impact on women. Despite important shifts in our culture towards sharing parenting arrangements more evenly, it is still true, I think, that women and single parents often undertake the majority of household and parenting duties, and that changes to penalty rates would mean less compensation for working hours, which makes supervision of children particularly difficult.
Regardless of gender, penalty rates compensate parents for the disruption to their family lives. We on this side of the Assembly understand that working hours outside business and school hours is difficult to balance with finding childcare arrangements. The fact is that it is nearly impossible to find child care that is available outside standard working hours. This means that when working odd hours parents, particularly single parents, must find babysitters or put pressure on extended family or unqualified friends to cover for them while at work. This is another practical cost that penalty rates address.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video