Unions Tasmania thanks Easter holiday workers in penalty rate campaign   


Updated about 11 hours ago
ABC News

Unions Tasmania members dressed as Easter bunnies have rallied in the state's north-west against any cuts to penalty rates.      
Key points:

    Unions Tasmania enlists Easter bunnies in continuing penalty rates campaign
    Spokesman says Easter workers deserve thanks
    The Hospitality Association wants penalty rates changed

About a dozen union members handed out cards in Devonport thanking those who worked on the Easter Monday public holiday.

The group was campaigning against changes to penalty rates that the Productivity Commission recommended last year.

Some business groups have argued a reduction in penalty rates would encourage more businesses to open on public holidays and weekends.

But union spokesman Jake Denny said he believed it would have an unfair impact on workers.  

"They're working today, they could be out camping with their family, out holidaying, but nope, they're at work," he said.

"We're here to protect their penalty rates, which are compensating them for that lost time with family, kids, mates.

"Some people are lucky enough to work a nine to five job, so they get to go home, see their kids at night, but other people, they're working all through the night.

"I think it's very unfair on those people that are trying to work at this time of the year that they shouldn't be compensated for it."

Mr Denny called on the Federal Government to not consider penalty rate reductions. 

But the Federal Government called the campaign misguided, and said there were no plans to change penalty rates.

Deputy Premier Jeremy Rockliff said the Tasmanian Government was not advocating for any change at a state level because it was a federal matter.
Reduced penalty rates 'could allow more businesses to open'

The Hospitality Association's Steve Old said the Productivity Commission's recommendation of reducing Sunday penalty rates to match the Saturday rate was the right move.

He believed it would allow more businesses to open around Tasmania.

"There's nothing worse than going around a city centre, even Devonport, Burnie, Launceston, you go through these places and there's hardly a venue to be open," he said.

"Which means there's a lot of people disappointed, there's also no one getting employment so I would have thought the union would want to work with the industry to see people employed."

Mr Old said some businesses that opened over the Easter long weekend could have avoided paying penalty rates.

"A lot of them are employing family and other people, that means that don't have to get on the penalty rates scale, so there's a lot of ways people that work around it," he said.

A solution appears on the horizon, with the Fair Work Commission set to hand down its decision on hospitality and retail penalty rates around the middle of the year.

Swagman wrote on Mar 29^th, 2016 at 7:23am:


Incorrect.

Swagman wrote on Mar 29^th, 2016 at 7:25am:


That's correct: you are incorrect.

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 29^th, 2016 at 8:46am:


That's incorrect as well

stunspore wrote on Mar 29^th, 2016 at 8:55am:


Any product that has its price set artificially is outside the market Stunpy....

Your argument should really be about whether, that, is a good or a bad thing. 

Sir Grappler Truth Teller OAM wrote on Mar 29^th, 2016 at 9:54am:


I believe those particular items have market competition.  Penalty rates do not.

Swagman wrote on Mar 29^th, 2016 at 10:16am:


Cartel prices, controlled by government setting the yardsticks?  Hardly market are they?

A business owner has money in the bank.

He can use this money to buy things which he needs.

He might need a motor vehicle.

he goes and negotiates the best price he can with the local auto yard.
if its a "valuable" vehicle, he pays more.

he might need computers and phones.
These, he also buys according to market conditions in what he and the seller agree is a fair price.

None of this needs to involve government.
Its is buyers and sellers.
If he doesnt offer enough money, the seller is under no obligation to sell.

The employee is a seller of labor.

If he is very valuable, like a BMW, he will fetch a fine price.
If he has failed to make himself valuable, if he blows smoke, has a dodgy clutch and bald tyres, he will fetch a lesser price.

Either way, it is the a trade of money for labor. it is something that has been going on since time began.
Both sides need to agree on a price for this exchange and the government does not need to be involved.

The dodgy car with the bad paint and rust cant really appeal to the government. what the dodgy car should do to fetch a good price is to look after its tryes, work hard on improving its performance, wash itself regularly to prevent rust , always be relaible, never complain when asked to tow a heavy load. In this way the purchaser will say...this car is valuable. i will retain it and i wont be replacing it as it serves my purpose well

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 29^th, 2016 at 12:03pm:


yep

aquascoot wrote on Mar 29^th, 2016 at 11:57am:



It doesn't matter if he's a BMW or whatever - unless there are minimum wage values he will be paid a tiny amount if left in the hands entirely of the business owner.

Sell a bad car to anyone and the government can and will jump all over you.

You need to get into town a bit more often..... this isolated life on the horse farm is not doing you a lot of good.

aquascoot wrote on Mar 29^th, 2016 at 3:13pm:

aquascoot wrote on Mar 29^th, 2016 at 4:10pm:


aqua

Swagman wrote on Mar 29^th, 2016 at 9:27am:



but it's not set ... you can always pay more if you like

aquascoot wrote on Mar 29^th, 2016 at 4:10pm:


zip it rtard

Its time wrote on Mar 29^th, 2016 at 5:13pm:



what he said!

John Smith wrote on Mar 29^th, 2016 at 5:12pm:


Yes - no doubt they found that more work was done on ordinary days anyway and could be fitted in, so they were actually losing by signing up to WorkChoices....  I've long advocated a return to full Award conditions, which gives a guarantee to all sides of the question.  A manager/owner can decide not to work Sundays if it costs too much.... as an example.

The lib supporters need to get out of ivory towers (or not so politely, out of someone's behind) and get into the real world.

They wonder why people join unions.  Go figure.   

aquascoot wrote on Mar 30^th, 2016 at 10:22am:

stunspore wrote on Mar 30^th, 2016 at 1:14pm:



If we dig a little deeper , what is going on here can be simply explained by "ego-defense" as most things can be.

If you arent doing well in life, if you arent going up in life, you have 2 choices.

1  blame the greedy bosses, the capitalists, the gubment, the 'system"

or

2  admit you are messing up, admit you havent been working to increase your skills, admit that others are getting ahead because they work harder then you, are basicly "better' then you.


choice one allows you to preserve your ego intact and also remain in your comfort zone (lazy and safe).

choice two results in a hit to your ego, feeling bad about yourself and then having to push outside your comfort zone and work much harder.

It is hardly surprising that most people are heavily focused on choice 1.  its low consciousness thinking which is always the easy route, the wrong route, the route to nowhere .  It will all change for people when they can honestly reflect on their choices and not enter the low conscious ego preservation reactive state.

Joining a union is a consolation prize for mediocre beta-males

Swagman wrote on Mar 29^th, 2016 at 9:27am:



That would mean that there is no market as it sets no price at all.