How this café introduced a weekend surcharge to cover penalty rates without upsetting customers

Tuesday, March 1 2016
Smart Company

A café owner in north east Victoria has decided to apply a 20% surcharge to customers’ bills in order to open on public holidays after its weekend surcharge to cover penalty rates was well received by customers.   :)

Eric Bittner, the owner of Café Derailleur in Wangaratta, introduced a 10% surcharge on customers’ weekend bills last year.

Yesterday, the small business owner took to Facebook to say he will be opening on public holidays and applying a surcharge of 20% to ensure he won’t lose money by trading on those days.



Café Derailleur employees around 13 people and has been operating for nearly five-and-a-half years.

As for how Bittner initially introduced the surcharge without creating a backlash from customers, the small business owner told SmartCompany it’s all about being as transparent as possible.



As a result, Bittner says the response from the community has been fantastic, with many people saying they are happy to pay a little extra in order to support a local business.   :)

“It comes down to being able to manage my expenses and revenue at the same time,” Bittner says.

“I try and maintain a dialogue with my customers to talk about what the issues are that they have and to try and make sure there’s an understanding about what my issues are in the business. It’s about making sure I’m running as sustainably as possible.”









Bittner says too many hospitality businesses close their doors after a year or two because they are unable to put money away for tough times and are just trying to stay afloat by managing costs, including penalty rates.

“That’s typical for a lot of businesses, they have a debt to the tax office and that’s what causes them to go under,” he says.

The small business owner acknowledges penalty rates are a “really contentious issue” but  says he hopes he has found a way to move beyond simplistic and divisive arguments.

“If my customers go, ‘Eric, we’re not going to come on a public holiday because you’re charging the surcharge’, that’s fine,” he says.

“I’ll respond accordingly and look at what other ways I can look at staying open on a public holiday. That’s up to me as a hospitality professional to explore what other options I’ve got.”

I can remember paying more on Sunday years ago... it was the norm....anyone would think this was a new idea....it makes sense to me...

This has been around for ages. 

This is where Crook tells everyone how evil it is to charge more for the same service on different days while supporting workers right to do exactly the same.

mariacostel wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 8:12am:

This is where Crook tells everyone how evil it is to charge more for the same service on different days while supporting workers right to do exactly the same.

I think you'll find he supports the idea.

As do I.

Makes a lot more sense than shafting your already underpaid workers. Unfortunately rightards aren't known for common sense.

cods wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 7:51am:

I can remember paying more on Sunday years ago... it was the norm....anyone would think this was a new idea....it makes sense to me...

:o :o

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 8:18am:

mariacostel wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 8:12am: This is where Crook tells everyone how evil it is to charge more for the same service on different days while supporting workers right to do exactly the same. I think you'll find he supports the idea. As do I.

.....so do I....as long as competing cafes are not 'forced' to do the same....

Mind you Crook doesn't like it when petrol prices go up at Easter time? (Hint----> Same thing)

Swagman wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 3:13pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 8:18am: mariacostel wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 8:12am: This is where Crook tells everyone how evil it is to charge more for the same service on different days while supporting workers right to do exactly the same. I think you'll find he supports the idea. As do I. .....so do I....as long as competing cafes are not 'forced' to do the same....

Why would they be?

Nobody has mentioned anything like that.

Swagman wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 3:13pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 8:18am: mariacostel wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 8:12am: This is where Crook tells everyone how evil it is to charge more for the same service on different days while supporting workers right to do exactly the same. I think you'll find he supports the idea. As do I. .....so do I....as long as competing cafes are not 'forced' to do the same.... Mind you Crook doesn't like it when petrol prices go up at Easter time? (Hint----> Same thing)

Hint---------> like wtf?  :o :o

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 8:18am:

mariacostel wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 8:12am: This is where Crook tells everyone how evil it is to charge more for the same service on different days while supporting workers right to do exactly the same. I think you'll find he supports the idea. As do I.

AS long as the places YOU go to dont do the same.

mariacostel wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 6:24pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 8:18am: mariacostel wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 8:12am: This is where Crook tells everyone how evil it is to charge more for the same service on different days while supporting workers right to do exactly the same. I think you'll find he supports the idea. As do I. AS long as the places YOU go to dont do the same.

Not true.

I have no problem with the surcharge.

I've paid it on many occasions.

I'm not sure why you think anyone would have a problem with this.

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 6:25pm:

mariacostel wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 6:24pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 8:18am: mariacostel wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 8:12am: This is where Crook tells everyone how evil it is to charge more for the same service on different days while supporting workers right to do exactly the same. I think you'll find he supports the idea. As do I. AS long as the places YOU go to dont do the same. Not true. I have no problem with the surcharge. I've paid it on many occasions. I'm not sure why you think anyone would have a problem with this.

But surely it is a horrible offence to ask someone to be forced to pay more for the same service?

Do you realise you are making the opposite argument you normally make because the show is on the other foot?

mariacostel wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 6:31pm:

But surely it is a horrible offence to ask someone to be forced to pay more for the same service?

Not at all.

I'm a paying customer, not an employee.

Do I need to explain the difference to you.

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 6:39pm:

mariacostel wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 6:31pm: But surely it is a horrible offence to ask someone to be forced to pay more for the same service? Not at all. I'm a paying customer, not an employee. Do I need to explain the difference to you.

Actually, the comparison is between paying customer and paying EMPLOYER.

Do try and get your hypocrisy correct. Your pedantry should have picked that up for you!

mariacostel wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 6:44pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 6:39pm: mariacostel wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 6:31pm: But surely it is a horrible offence to ask someone to be forced to pay more for the same service? Not at all. I'm a paying customer, not an employee. Do I need to explain the difference to you. Actually, the comparison is between paying customer and paying EMPLOYER. Do try and get your hypocrisy correct. Your pedantry should have picked that up for you!

I'm a paying customer, not an employer.

Do I need to explain the difference to you?

I have absolutely no problem with the surcharge that some restaurants apply on Sundays and Public Holidays.

Why would I?

And, what hypocrisy?  Seriously?

Longy, you haven't explained the "hypocrisy" allegation against me.

I'm all for the employee being compensated for working on weekends, and I'm all for the employers being able to apply a surcharge for opening on weekends.

So, where exactly is the hypocrisy?

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 6:25pm:

mariacostel wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 6:24pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 8:18am: mariacostel wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 8:12am: This is where Crook tells everyone how evil it is to charge more for the same service on different days while supporting workers right to do exactly the same. I think you'll find he supports the idea. As do I. AS long as the places YOU go to dont do the same. Not true. I have no problem with the surcharge. I've paid it on many occasions. I'm not sure why you think anyone would have a problem with this.

So if there were 2 cafes side by side, and they both had equal quality coffee, and one charged $4 a cup and the other $8 a cup.  You'd buy the $8 version?  :-?

Swagman wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 7:04pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 6:25pm: mariacostel wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 6:24pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 8:18am: mariacostel wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 8:12am: This is where Crook tells everyone how evil it is to charge more for the same service on different days while supporting workers right to do exactly the same. I think you'll find he supports the idea. As do I. AS long as the places YOU go to dont do the same. Not true. I have no problem with the surcharge. I've paid it on many occasions. I'm not sure why you think anyone would have a problem with this. So if there were 2 cafes side by side, and they both had equal quality coffee, and one charged $4 a cup and the other $8 a cup.  You'd buy the $8 version?  :-?

Where do you come up with this stuff?

Seriously?

mariacostel wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 6:44pm:

Do try and get your hypocrisy correct.

Longy, you haven't explained this "hypocrisy" allegation against me.

I'm all for the employee being compensated for working on weekends, and I'm all for the employers being able to apply a surcharge for opening on weekends.

So, where exactly is the hypocrisy?

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 7:07pm:

Swagman wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 7:04pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 6:25pm: mariacostel wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 6:24pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 8:18am: mariacostel wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 8:12am: This is where Crook tells everyone how evil it is to charge more for the same service on different days while supporting workers right to do exactly the same. I think you'll find he supports the idea. As do I. AS long as the places YOU go to dont do the same. Not true. I have no problem with the surcharge. I've paid it on many occasions. I'm not sure why you think anyone would have a problem with this. So if there were 2 cafes side by side, and they both had equal quality coffee, and one charged $4 a cup and the other $8 a cup.  You'd buy the $8 version?  :-? Where do you come up with this stuff? Seriously?

It's just a question Pecker?

Swagman wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 7:14pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 7:07pm: Swagman wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 7:04pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 6:25pm: mariacostel wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 6:24pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 8:18am: mariacostel wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 8:12am: This is where Crook tells everyone how evil it is to charge more for the same service on different days while supporting workers right to do exactly the same. I think you'll find he supports the idea. As do I. AS long as the places YOU go to dont do the same. Not true. I have no problem with the surcharge. I've paid it on many occasions. I'm not sure why you think anyone would have a problem with this. So if there were 2 cafes side by side, and they both had equal quality coffee, and one charged $4 a cup and the other $8 a cup.  You'd buy the $8 version?  :-? Where do you come up with this stuff? Seriously? It's just a question Pecker?

It's an irrelevant question.

I'm all for the employee being compensated for working on weekends, and I'm all for the employers being able to apply a surcharge for opening on weekends.

So, where 's the problem?

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 7:17pm:

It's an irrelevant question. I'm all for the employee being compensated for working on weekends, and I'm all for the employers being able to apply a surcharge for opening on weekends. So, where 's the problem

I'm not at all surprised that you would find it irrelevant and refuse to answer it. A good example of a trade unionist with their head in the sand.

The surcharge is subject to the market..... most people would buy their coffees at the shop selling coffee for $4 and the other shop would have far less sales due to it being non competitive......and maybe close on Sundays and so its Sunday staff lose 8 hours work.  So instead of a day's pay they get effall.


 

Swag and others just want the right to pay less. 

stunspore wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 7:43pm:

Swag and others just want the right to pay less.

...Lefties drink coffee too (mainly lattes though).........too scabby to pay $5 to see a GP but will pay $8 for a latte  :D ::)

They charge more than enough during the week to cover penalty rates on weekends , i am dead against any surcharge that makes it harder for those who are stretching the budget already enjoying a family night out .

Its time wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 8:02pm:

They charge more than enough during the week to cover penalty rates on weekends , i am dead against any surcharge that makes it harder for those who are stretching the budget already enjoying a family night out .

...so you'd buy the cheaper one too?

Swagman wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 7:49pm:

stunspore wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 7:43pm: Swag and others just want the right to pay less.  ...Lefties drink coffee too (mainly lattes though).........too scabby to pay $5 to see a GP but will pay $8 for a latte  :D ::)

The business owner has already factored in penalty rates in to his pricing structure , lets not even try and even bs each other .

Swagman wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 8:07pm:

Its time wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 8:02pm: They charge more than enough during the week to cover penalty rates on weekends , i am dead against any surcharge that makes it harder for those who are stretching the budget already enjoying a family night out . ...so you'd buy the cheaper one too?

I dont even drink coffee , i do however try different resturants around the town i live in and base my dining experience on the quality of product first and foremost .

Its time wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 8:11pm:

Swagman wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 8:07pm: Its time wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 8:02pm: They charge more than enough during the week to cover penalty rates on weekends , i am dead against any surcharge that makes it harder for those who are stretching the budget already enjoying a family night out . ...so you'd buy the cheaper one too? I dont even drink coffee , i do however try different resturants around the town i live in and base my dining experience on the quality of product first and foremost .

.....Maccas and Hungry Jacks?

Swagman wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 7:34pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 7:17pm: It's an irrelevant question. I'm all for the employee being compensated for working on weekends, and I'm all for the employers being able to apply a surcharge for opening on weekends. So, where 's the problem I'm not at all surprised that you would find it irrelevant and refuse to answer it. A good example of a trade unionist with their head in the sand. The surcharge is subject to the market..... most people would buy their coffees at the shop selling coffee for $4 and the other shop would have far less sales due to it being non competitive......and maybe close on Sundays and so its Sunday staff lose 8 hours work.  So instead of a day's pay they get effall.

I'm all for the employee being compensated for working on weekends, and I'm all for the employers being able to apply a surcharge for opening on weekends.

So, where 's the problem?

Swagman wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 9:00pm:

Its time wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 8:11pm: Swagman wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 8:07pm: Its time wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 8:02pm: They charge more than enough during the week to cover penalty rates on weekends , i am dead against any surcharge that makes it harder for those who are stretching the budget already enjoying a family night out . ...so you'd buy the cheaper one too? I dont even drink coffee , i do however try different resturants around the town i live in and base my dining experience on the quality of product first and foremost . .....Maccas and Hungry Jacks?

:-?

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 9:16pm:

Swagman wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 7:34pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 7:17pm: It's an irrelevant question. I'm all for the employee being compensated for working on weekends, and I'm all for the employers being able to apply a surcharge for opening on weekends. So, where 's the problem I'm not at all surprised that you would find it irrelevant and refuse to answer it. A good example of a trade unionist with their head in the sand. The surcharge is subject to the market..... most people would buy their coffees at the shop selling coffee for $4 and the other shop would have far less sales due to it being non competitive......and maybe close on Sundays and so its Sunday staff lose 8 hours work.  So instead of a day's pay they get effall.   I'm all for the employee being compensated for working on weekends, and I'm all for the employers being able to apply a surcharge for opening on weekends. So, where 's the problem?

It's already factored in , there is no need for a surcharge .

Its time wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 9:33pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 9:16pm: Swagman wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 7:34pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 7:17pm: It's an irrelevant question. I'm all for the employee being compensated for working on weekends, and I'm all for the employers being able to apply a surcharge for opening on weekends. So, where 's the problem I'm not at all surprised that you would find it irrelevant and refuse to answer it. A good example of a trade unionist with their head in the sand. The surcharge is subject to the market..... most people would buy their coffees at the shop selling coffee for $4 and the other shop would have far less sales due to it being non competitive......and maybe close on Sundays and so its Sunday staff lose 8 hours work.  So instead of a day's pay they get effall.   I'm all for the employee being compensated for working on weekends, and I'm all for the employers being able to apply a surcharge for opening on weekends. So, where 's the problem? It's already factored in , there is no need for a surcharge .

Yes, you're 100% correct.

However, I have no problem with them applying a surcharge anyway.

What I want to know is, why Longy thinks I'm a hypocrite.

When I asked him, he ran away.

Funny, that.

.

More silence from the rightards who condone child abuse.

What a surprise.

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 10:52pm:

More silence from the rightards who condone child abuse. What a surprise.

....W T F are you on about?  :-?

This surcharge happened to me today at my local eatery ,  I was quite surprised and asked them if they would be lowering their rate that already encompasses penalty rates that they charge during the week, I got the impression it won't be working both ways .

Its time wrote on Mar 7^th, 2016 at 1:13pm:

This surcharge happened to me today at my local eatery ,  I was quite surprised and asked them if they would be lowering their rate that already encompasses penalty rates that they charge during the week, I got the impression it won't be working both ways .

...did they give you a cold pie?

Swagman wrote on Mar 7^th, 2016 at 1:16pm:

Its time wrote on Mar 7th, 2016 at 1:13pm: This surcharge happened to me today at my local eatery ,  I was quite surprised and asked them if they would be lowering their rate that already encompasses penalty rates that they charge during the week, I got the impression it won't be working both ways . ...did they give you a cold pie?

No I didn't want the special sauce from some business owner who knew I was on to his double dipping, so I waited until I had finished the meal first.

Swagman wrote on Mar 7^th, 2016 at 1:16pm:

Its time wrote on Mar 7th, 2016 at 1:13pm: This surcharge happened to me today at my local eatery ,  I was quite surprised and asked them if they would be lowering their rate that already encompasses penalty rates that they charge during the week, I got the impression it won't be working both ways . ...did they give you a cold pie?

Or maybe flinched at an abusive pollie demanding pizza for him and his family and friends?

Seriously, as one poster stated some time ago, most of us have become used to the 10 or 15 percent loading that most places put on for public holidays etc, and has been happening since Noah was a boy.  Where does that "extra" money go if not to make up in some way for penalty rates?

stunspore wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 8:11am:

This has been around for ages.

As long as most of us can remember I would think.  At least 50 years as far as I can recall.  I'm surprised that anyone considers it newsworthy.

Its time wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 9:32pm:

Swagman wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 9:00pm: Its time wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 8:11pm: Swagman wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 8:07pm: Its time wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 8:02pm: They charge more than enough during the week to cover penalty rates on weekends , i am dead against any surcharge that makes it harder for those who are stretching the budget already enjoying a family night out . ...so you'd buy the cheaper one too? I dont even drink coffee , i do however try different resturants around the town i live in and base my dining experience on the quality of product first and foremost . .....Maccas and Hungry Jacks? :-?

Don't look so sad ... Swags from Dapto, an area where Maccas and Hungry Jacks are considered to be a 'fine dining' experience

"Labour is not just an ordinary input. There are ethical and community norms about the way in which a country treats its employees." - From the productivity commission.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-07/verrender-why-we-should-be-worried-about-wages/7225178

Just to add to this:
"Lower wages income results in less spending. That means reduced profits for corporations. And that flows through to crimped tax receipts - both income and company - with the potential to form a spiralling impact on the government's ability to deliver services."

"Labour is not just an ordinary input. There are ethical and community norms about the way in which a country treats its employees." - From the productivity commission.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-07/verrender-why-we-should-be-worried-about-wages/7225178

Just to add to this:
"Lower wages income results in less spending. That means reduced profits for corporations. And that flows through to crimped tax receipts - both income and company - with the potential to form a spiralling impact on the government's ability to deliver services."

Swagman wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 7:04pm:

So if there were 2 cafes side by side, and they both had equal quality coffee, and one charged $4 a cup and the other $8 a cup.  You'd buy the $8 version?  :-?

Hypothetical nonsense based on a falsehood.

Penalty rate surcharges are in the order of 20% and not the 100% that you're falsely implying here. Either that, or you're implying that labour costs are 100% of a business's operating costs which as you should know is not true.

Now show us a real world example where this is actually happening and stop making up crap.

I am dead against any surcharge , penalty rates and public holidays have been around for decades , the business owner has already factored this in to cost to the goods we as the customers purchase . Greedy aholes just want to double dip .

Swag is mostly nonsense.  Having spewed out some stuff from Productivity Commission, I've given some back. 

Penalty rates ensure quality of life remains quality.

Its time wrote on Mar 7^th, 2016 at 4:54pm:

I am dead against any surcharge , penalty rates and public holidays have been around for decades

So have surcharges, particularly on Sundays and Public Holidays.

Wolseley wrote on Mar 7^th, 2016 at 6:59pm:

Its time wrote on Mar 7th, 2016 at 4:54pm: I am dead against any surcharge , penalty rates and public holidays have been around for decades So have surcharges, particularly on Sundays and Public Holidays.

Already factored in to the price you pay from Mon - Fri.

Wolseley wrote on Mar 7^th, 2016 at 6:59pm:

Its time wrote on Mar 7th, 2016 at 4:54pm: I am dead against any surcharge , penalty rates and public holidays have been around for decades So have surcharges, particularly on Sundays and Public Holidays.

...not for the people they make and keep unemployed

Bam wrote on Mar 7^th, 2016 at 3:52pm:

Swagman wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 7:04pm: So if there were 2 cafes side by side, and they both had equal quality coffee, and one charged $4 a cup and the other $8 a cup.  You'd buy the $8 version?  :-? Hypothetical nonsense based on a falsehood. Penalty rate surcharges are in the order of 20% and not the 100% that you're falsely implying here. Either that, or you're implying that labour costs are 100% of a business's operating costs which as you should know is not true. Now show us a real world example where this is actually happening and stop making up crap.

My example is simply hyperbole to better illustrate a point.

However if you consider a 20% surcharge to be closer to reality then it still makes the coffee price in the example $5 compared to $4.  If the quality is the same then the result would be equally the same as in my hyperbolized example.... :D

Swagman wrote on Mar 7^th, 2016 at 8:10pm:

Bam wrote on Mar 7th, 2016 at 3:52pm: Swagman wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 7:04pm: So if there were 2 cafes side by side, and they both had equal quality coffee, and one charged $4 a cup and the other $8 a cup.  You'd buy the $8 version?  :-? Hypothetical nonsense based on a falsehood. Penalty rate surcharges are in the order of 20% and not the 100% that you're falsely implying here. Either that, or you're implying that labour costs are 100% of a business's operating costs which as you should know is not true. Now show us a real world example where this is actually happening and stop making up crap. My example is simply hyperbole to better illustrate a point. However if you consider a 20% surcharge to be closer to reality then it still makes the coffee price in the example $5 compared to $4.  If the quality is the same then the result would be equally the same as in my hyperbolized example.... :D

How many people do you think depend on penalty rates to make ends meet?

Its time wrote on Mar 7^th, 2016 at 8:16pm:

How many people do you think depend on penalty rates to make ends meet?

...how many people don't?

Yep Swag can keep on spewing nonsense.  No response to the other productivity commission statements?

Lets keep trying to overturn each other statements.  Penalty rates don't cause unemployment. 

Swagman wrote on Mar 7^th, 2016 at 8:23pm:

Its time wrote on Mar 7th, 2016 at 8:16pm: How many people do you think depend on penalty rates to make ends meet? ...how many people don't?

So its a class war with you?

stunspore wrote on Mar 7^th, 2016 at 8:29pm:

.  Penalty rates don't cause unemployment.

Outside the market compulsory ones do.

Swagman wrote on Mar 7^th, 2016 at 8:31pm:

stunspore wrote on Mar 7th, 2016 at 8:29pm: .  Penalty rates don't cause unemployment.  Outside the market compulsory ones do.

It's factored in to the Mon-Fri price Swag, don't pretend it isn't .

Its time wrote on Mar 7^th, 2016 at 8:30pm:

Swagman wrote on Mar 7th, 2016 at 8:23pm: Its time wrote on Mar 7th, 2016 at 8:16pm: How many people do you think depend on penalty rates to make ends meet? ...how many people don't? So its a class war with you?

...there are no classes....just ideologies

Its time wrote on Mar 7^th, 2016 at 8:34pm:

Swagman wrote on Mar 7th, 2016 at 8:31pm: stunspore wrote on Mar 7th, 2016 at 8:29pm: .  Penalty rates don't cause unemployment.  Outside the market compulsory ones do. It's factored in to the Mon-Fri price Swag, don't pretend it isn't .

...depends on the business.  They are all different.  That variety, fickle trading conditions, variable purchasing power, availability of working capital is why penalty rates shouldn't be compulsory. 

Swagman wrote on Mar 7^th, 2016 at 8:47pm:

Its time wrote on Mar 7th, 2016 at 8:34pm: Swagman wrote on Mar 7th, 2016 at 8:31pm: stunspore wrote on Mar 7th, 2016 at 8:29pm: .  Penalty rates don't cause unemployment.  Outside the market compulsory ones do. It's factored in to the Mon-Fri price Swag, don't pretend it isn't . ...depends on the business.  They are all different.  That variety, fickle trading conditions, variable purchasing power, availability of working capital is why penalty rates shouldn't be compulsory.

What good is all that if the very thing that keeps your doors open no longer has the spending power they once did.

Swagman wrote on Mar 7^th, 2016 at 8:31pm:

stunspore wrote on Mar 7th, 2016 at 8:29pm: .  Penalty rates don't cause unemployment.  Outside the market compulsory ones do.

No they dont.

stunspore wrote on Mar 7^th, 2016 at 10:15pm:

Swagman wrote on Mar 7th, 2016 at 8:31pm: stunspore wrote on Mar 7th, 2016 at 8:29pm: .  Penalty rates don't cause unemployment.  Outside the market compulsory ones do. No they dont.

Uncompetitive businesses fail.  Business failures cause unemployemnt. Outside the market compulsory penalty rates make businesses uncompetitive.  They either fail or don't even get off the ground at all.  If they fail, it causes unemployment, if they don't get off the ground or stay closed then lots of potential jobs are foregone.

Australia's manufacturing industry is a good example.  It has declined 50% over the last 40 years due to it's inability to be viable (uncompetitiveness)  :(

http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b76/timbo2530/AUST%20MANUFACTURING.jpg 

So business moves to China. So raise tariff rates which have been lowered too much.

Swagman wrote on Mar 8^th, 2016 at 8:39am:

Australia's manufacturing industry is a good example.  It has declined 50% over the last 40 years due to it's inability to be viable (uncompetitiveness)

But what does this have to do with cafes charging a surcharge on weekends?

Unless a cafe have teleport powers to teleport staff in amd out of australia they all play in the same market with the same rules including penalty rates.  International or otherwise. Same rulea means not out of the market but in the market.

Again i know how pointless swag tries to persuade. He wont with hia hypertheticals.

Wolseley wrote on Mar 8^th, 2016 at 9:11am:

Swagman wrote on Mar 8th, 2016 at 8:39am: Australia's manufacturing industry is a good example.  It has declined 50% over the last 40 years due to it's inability to be viable (uncompetitiveness) But what does this have to do with cafes charging a surcharge on weekends?

nothing ... but that won't stop Swag. He has blinkers on when it comes to penalty rates.

Apparently they caused the famine in Ethiopia too! :D :D :D

Apparently there was a change to the legislation in 2009 requiring prices of all components of the charge to be displayed, which rendered a 10% surcharge illegal unless the menus gave both the normal and the Sunday/Public Holiday prices for each item.  This was amended in mid-2013 to allowed cafe and restaurant owners to simply make a statement on the menu saying that there was a 10% surcharge (or whatever other percentage it might be) thus restoring the decades old practice of charging the surcharge as a percentage of the final bill.


Quote:

Certainty finally delivered on menu surcharge laws 2 July, 2013 Rosemary Ryan The foodservice industry can finally return to safely adding surcharges to their menus following the passing of  a bill in Federal Parliament. Under previous legislation restaurants and cafes were not allowed to just state that a surcharge would apply on days such as weekends or public holidays. Instead they were required to provide a separate menu for those days with the prices including the extra charge factored in. The bill passed last week exempts restaurants and cafés from the single pricing requirement in Australian Consumer Law. Assistant Treasurer David Bradbury said in a statement that the move was an important win for small business. "Restaurants and cafes are a valuable part of the Australian economy, so it is important that these businesses are not subject to any unnecessary regulatory burden," he said. "These amendments will cut red tape for small business, enabling many venues that are open on weekends and public holidays to go about their business without fear of accidentally falling foul of the law."

http://www.hospitalitymagazine.com.au/food/news/certainty-finally-delivered-on-menu-surcharge-laws[/quote]

Wolseley wrote on Mar 8^th, 2016 at 9:11am:

Swagman wrote on Mar 8th, 2016 at 8:39am: Australia's manufacturing industry is a good example.  It has declined 50% over the last 40 years due to it's inability to be viable (uncompetitiveness) But what does this have to do with cafes charging a surcharge on weekends?

....the discussion just developed that way.  The surcharge is subject to the market.  The cafe may lose business to a competitor that is not charging a surcharge.  Whilst the penalty rate is an imposition.

If the cafe with the surcharge starts losing business it will drop the surcharge.  It can't do that with penalty rates?  They are compulsory.  A millstone around its neck.

Wolseley wrote on Mar 8^th, 2016 at 9:57am:

Apparently there was a change to the legislation in 2009 requiring prices of all components of the charge to be displayed, which rendered a 10% surcharge illegal unless the menus gave both the normal and the Sunday/Public Holiday prices for each item.  This was amended in mid-2013 to allowed cafe and restaurant owners to simply make a statement on the menu saying that there was a 10% surcharge (or whatever other percentage it might be) thus restoring the decades old practice of charging the surcharge as a percentage of the final bill. Quote: Certainty finally delivered on menu surcharge laws 2 July, 2013 Rosemary Ryan The foodservice industry can finally return to safely adding surcharges to their menus following the passing of  a bill in Federal Parliament. Under previous legislation restaurants and cafes were not allowed to just state that a surcharge would apply on days such as weekends or public holidays. Instead they were required to provide a separate menu for those days with the prices including the extra charge factored in. The bill passed last week exempts restaurants and cafés from the single pricing requirement in Australian Consumer Law. Assistant Treasurer David Bradbury said in a statement that the move was an important win for small business. "Restaurants and cafes are a valuable part of the Australian economy, so it is important that these businesses are not subject to any unnecessary regulatory burden," he said. "These amendments will cut red tape for small business, enabling many venues that are open on weekends and public holidays to go about their business without fear of accidentally falling foul of the law." http://www.hospitalitymagazine.com.au/food/news/certainty-finally-delivered-on-menu-surcharge-laws

[/quote]


Well there you go!   I never knew that!   

If you are a Cafe owner who cannot afford the wages to open on a Sunday/public holiday... then don't open.

If your business isn't successful enough to make money on those days, YOU need to change, not wage law.

Bruce Baines wrote on Mar 8^th, 2016 at 2:45pm:

If you are a Cafe owner who cannot afford the wages to open on a Sunday/public holiday... then don't open.

...thanks Bruce, good example of penalty rates causing unemployment. 

Swagman wrote on Mar 8^th, 2016 at 7:13pm:

Bruce Baines wrote on Mar 8th, 2016 at 2:45pm: If you are a Cafe owner who cannot afford the wages to open on a Sunday/public holiday... then don't open. ...thanks Bruce, good example of penalty rates causing unemployment.

Sounds to me much more like the cafe doesn’t do enough business on a Sunday.

Jovial Monk wrote on Mar 8^th, 2016 at 7:20pm:

Swagman wrote on Mar 8th, 2016 at 7:13pm: Bruce Baines wrote on Mar 8th, 2016 at 2:45pm: If you are a Cafe owner who cannot afford the wages to open on a Sunday/public holiday... then don't open. ...thanks Bruce, good example of penalty rates causing unemployment.  Sounds to me much more like the cafe doesn’t do enough business on a Sunday.

The market not strong enough huh?

....maybe the Govt should force people to buy coffee at his business on Sundays like they force him to pay penalty rates?  :D

Maybe take a break now and then swag?

Jovial Monk wrote on Mar 8^th, 2016 at 7:29pm:

Maybe take a break now and then swag?

http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b76/timbo2530/kitkat.jpg

:D

Whats your vested interest in penalty rates Swag ?

Hey Swag, how about you jump over to the lib corruption thread and help make the case for the libs?  They are in serious need for any BS to cover their stench of corruption.

Its time wrote on Mar 8^th, 2016 at 8:00pm:

Whats your vested interest in penalty rates Swag ?

No vested interest other than the challenge of making a case for the benefits of IR deregulation.....

As long as Swag’s wage doesn’t suffer or he starts being required to work on weekends, of course.

Swagman wrote on Mar 8^th, 2016 at 8:31pm:

Its time wrote on Mar 8th, 2016 at 8:00pm: Whats your vested interest in penalty rates Swag ? No vested interest other than the challenge of making a case for the benefits of IR deregulation.....

Hmmmm im not buying it.

Its time wrote on Mar 8^th, 2016 at 8:44pm:

Swagman wrote on Mar 8th, 2016 at 8:31pm: Its time wrote on Mar 8th, 2016 at 8:00pm: Whats your vested interest in penalty rates Swag ? No vested interest other than the challenge of making a case for the benefits of IR deregulation..... Hmmmm im not buying it.

Geeze, I told them it'd be a tough sell  ;D ;D :D

http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b76/timbo2530/swag_1.jpg

A Surcharge To Cover Penalty Rates

They are either greedy or should not be opening on a PH.

My experience indicates that you make 4 times the profit on a PH after factoring in penalty rates. I would think that if you business model or demand on the day does not make it viable to open then it is obvious that the penalty should be allowed to achieve what it is meant to - ensure that employees gat a day off work.

You have to be dumb to be opening on days where your business model will fail.

Swagman wrote on Mar 8^th, 2016 at 1:11pm:

Wolseley wrote on Mar 8th, 2016 at 9:11am: Swagman wrote on Mar 8th, 2016 at 8:39am: Australia's manufacturing industry is a good example.  It has declined 50% over the last 40 years due to it's inability to be viable (uncompetitiveness) But what does this have to do with cafes charging a surcharge on weekends? ....the discussion just developed that way.  The surcharge is subject to the market.  The cafe may lose business to a competitor that is not charging a surcharge.  Whilst the penalty rate is an imposition. If the cafe with the surcharge starts losing business it will drop the surcharge.  It can't do that with penalty rates?  They are compulsory.  A millstone around its neck.

There is, of course, an easy solution: abolish all holidays and make everyone work 7 days a week.  After all, who needs to celebrate Christmas, Easter, ANZAC Day, Australia Day and so on.

Wolseley wrote on Mar 8^th, 2016 at 9:57pm:

There is, of course, an easy solution: abolish all holidays and make everyone work 7 days a week

...many small-business people do this already  :(


Dnarever wrote on Mar 8^th, 2016 at 9:48pm:

My experience indicates that you make 4 times the profit on a PH after factoring in penalty rates.

That would make the penalty rates "inside" the market Mr Puddleduck.


Dnarever wrote on Mar 8^th, 2016 at 9:48pm:

You have to be dumb to be opening on days where your business model will fail

....and many don't for that reason.  Another fine example of penalty rates causing unemployment.  8-)