Laura Smyth (La Trobe, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I am very pleased to be able to speak in this quite timely debate on the importance of penalty rates in our society, particularly for low paid workers. It gives all members of the House an opportunity to acknowledge the importance of penalty rates for workers, particularly those who often work unsocial hours, on public holidays and on weekends and who rely on penalty rates in many ways to make ends meet. I am thinking particularly of women working part-time, women working shifts and women working on weekends or in the evening. I am also thinking particularly of young people who are studying or people who are trying to supplement their income so that they can go on to study in order to improve themselves and ultimately to succeed and get careers.

It is a timely discussion for debate in this place since Fair Work Australia is currently reviewing public holiday and penalty rate provisions in a number of modern awards as part of its two-year review of modern awards. It is also timely because the matter has been raised in a different context in the other place. And then it is timely because there are some within the opposition who are still looking back to Work Choices and all of the things that that brought to Australian workers. I note that former Prime Minister John Howard has entered the fray in recent times on this issue. While those opposite will, by and large, remain relatively quiet these days on the question of penalty rates, there are certainly those, including, for instance, the member for Moncrieff, who have looked back at some of the provisions of Work Choices most favourably in recent times.

While those opposite will, by and large, as I said, not comment on penalty rates, not comment on the importance of penalty rates for low paid workers and keep the details of what is to be their industrial relations platform fairly quiet for the time being, we certainly know that the Leader of the Opposition and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition and others within the opposition ranks have remarked on these things unfavourably in the past.

I look back as recently as February of 2010, when we had the Leader of the Opposition saying:

When you think of the long-term impact of Labor's new system and the re-emphasis on penalty rates, the weekend as we have known it will no longer exist.

That is another example of the fear mongering perpetuated by the Leader of the Opposition, this time directed towards penalty rates. At the same time, we had the Deputy Leader of the Opposition saying:

The fact is that there are workers now who are suffering under the new awards system. Because it is bringing back penalty rates on weekends …

While people from the opposition benches will no doubt go fairly quiet on the issues of modification of penalty rates—they will describe it as something like flexibility; there is a lot of discussion of flexibility—unfortunately we are all too aware of the views which are more secretly held by those opposite, of the views which were articulated not terribly long ago—only in the last couple of years—about penalty rates. We understand what their real motivations are around penalty rates. It is for those reasons that this debate is timely. It is for those reasons that it is important that members have the opportunity to put on record their support for penalty rates for low paid workers, in particular.

We know that around 65 per cent of agreements entered into under WorkChoices saw penalty rates cut. It was often the case that there was no compensation in return. At the same time, we saw things like reductions in the shift rates of workers, and a reduction in their take home pay. Yet we certainly have seen, in recent times, the former Prime Minister, John Howard, talking about WorkChoices and saying things to the effect that the election loss of the current opposition in 2007 was attributable to a range of things, not just WorkChoices. People are starting to have a bit of a review of WorkChoices, and there is at least one member of the Liberal Party who is remembering it fondly. It is important that through this resolution we recognise that many families and many individuals across our community rely on penalty rates as a key component of their income. That is particularly the case for some of our lowest paid workers. Penalty rates often compensate workers for time that they might otherwise spend with family or friends, and additional pay gives some acknowledgement that work-life balance is important to workers, their family life and their health and well-being.

I refer members to some of the submissions that were made in the Senate Standing Committee on Education, Employment and Workplace Relations inquiry into the Fair Work Amendment (Small Business—Penalty Rates Exemption) Bill 2012 recently. In particular, paragraph 22 of the submission made by the Australian Catholic Council for Employment Relations quite rightly says:

Penalty rates compensate for working in unsocial hours. Work on evenings, nights, weekends and public holidays is unsocial because of its impact on a wide range of individual and family arrangements. Rest, recreation and family time are valued and work in unsocial hours precludes workers from these opportunities. The loss of these opportunities is no less important for people who work in activities that are by their nature seven day a week operations.

We have heard much in the debate about penalty rates and how, increasingly, industries are finding themselves having longer hours of operation. Notwithstanding all of that, many of us—certainly organisations such as the Australian Catholic Council for Employment Relations—also recognise that there is still an important premium to be placed on family time, on time spent engaging in activities with your family and loved ones. There is an important premium that attaches to public holidays. For those reasons, it is appropriate that wages represent that people are taking on work in what might be regarded as unsocial hours.

Penalty rates are included in industrial awards to ensure that employees who have limited capacity to bargain will not be compelled to work weekends or on public holidays. Ensuring that workers are paid appropriately—particularly low-paid workers—means that they are more likely to spend and contribute to retail spending, to contribute to hospitality spending, and to contribute to our economy as a whole. The false view that somehow this has solely a detrimental impact on our economy, is just that—a false view.

Those who are paid penalty rates, those who have additional money in their pockets, particularly people who are amongst our lowest paid workers, are more likely to spend in the retail sector, in hospitality and in other areas and thereby assist our economy.

It is interesting to reflect on community sentiments in relation to penalty rates. A Galaxy poll conducted in August this year found that 87 per cent of those polled considered that workers should be paid a higher rate of pay for working on weekends. Perhaps, unsurprisingly, the rate was 95 per cent amongst those in the under 24 age group, who presumably would be more likely to rely on casual work or who might work weekends. During my time as a student I certainly worked on weekends and in the evenings and was reliant, as many students today would continue to be, on penalty rates to make ends meet and to support myself. Many students and young people continue to do this today.

Australia has paid penalty rates for work on weekends and unsocial hours for almost 100 years. Many of those workers who rely on penalty rates are known to be not generally well paid. We know that certain times of the day and certain days of the year are especially important, and to work at those times means working unsocial hours. Although industries do increasingly operate around the clock, that does not lessen the impact of working unsocial hours. Most members, for instance, would acknowledge that time not able to be spent with their children is time they cannot get back. Most members would be interested to know that working night shifts can have detrimental health impacts, such as an increased risk of cardiovascular disease, in comparison with those who work day shifts. Things like poor nutritional intake are also more likely to go with that kind of shift work. We also know that studies have demonstrated that employees who work at weekends have reported significantly higher rates of job stress and emotional exhaustion than employees who do not take on weekend work. That is why this resolution is important. That is why the government recognises that adequate compensation for unsocial hours is reasonable, that penalty rates are important and that we continue to support them as a government.

We know that in 2011 around 400,000 employees covered by collective agreements approved in that year actually had agreements that specified ordinary hours of work between Monday and Friday and provided for penalty rates if work was performed outside these hours. I would hope that we can continue to support those employees who benefit from penalty rates, particularly the lowest paid workers. (Time expired)

See this speech in context