The Senate
Education, Employment
and Workplace Relations
Legislation Committee
Fair Work Amendment (Small Business–Penalty
Rates Exemption) Bill 2012
March 2013
© Commonwealth of Australia
ISBN: 978-1-74229-784-2
This document was produced by the Senate Standing Committee on Education, Employment
and Workplace Relations and printed by the Senate Printing Unit, Parliament House,
Canberra.
iii
MEMBERSHIP OF THE COMMITTEE
Members
Senator Gavin Marshall, Chair, ALP, Vic.
Senator Chris Back, Deputy Chair, LP, WA
Senator Catryna Bilyk, ALP, Tas.
Senator Bridget McKenzie, Nat., Vic.
Senator Lee Rhiannon, AG, NSW
Senator Matt Thistlethwaite, ALP, NSW
Participating Members
Senator the Hon. Eric Abetz, LP, Tas.
Senator Nick Xenophon, IND, SA
Secretariat
Mr Tim Watling, Secretary
Ms Bonnie Allan, Principal Research Officer
Ms Natasha Rusjakovski, Senior Research Officer
Ms Nerissa Stewart, Senior Research Officer
Mr Tim Hillman, Research Officer
Mr Isaac Overton, Research Officer
Ms Sarah Bainbridge, Administrative Officer
PO Box 6100 Ph: 02 6277 3521
Parliament House Fax: 02 6277 5706
Canberra ACT 2600 E-mail: [email protected]
TABLE OF CONTENTS
MEMBERSHIP OF THE COMMITTEE ...................................................... iii
RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................................................................vii
CHAPTER 1 ........................................................................................................ 1
Introduction .............................................................................................................. 1
Reference ................................................................................................................ 1
Conduct of inquiry .................................................................................................. 1
Background and purpose of the bill ....................................................................... 1
Key provisions of the bill ....................................................................................... 2
Compatibility with human rights ............................................................................ 3
Acknowledgment .................................................................................................... 3
Notes on references ................................................................................................ 3
CHAPTER 2 ........................................................................................................ 5
Issues .......................................................................................................................... 5
Key issues raised by those in favour of the bill ...................................................... 5
Key issues raised by those opposed to the bill ....................................................... 9
Unintended consequences of the bill .................................................................... 24
Penalty rates immediately following the introduction of WorkChoices .............. 26
Non-compliance with requirement to pay penalty rates ....................................... 28
Conclusion ............................................................................................................ 29
COALITION SENATORS' ADDITIONAL COMMENTS ......................... 31
SENATOR NICK XENOPHON'S DISSENTING REPORT ....................... 33
The concept of a weekend .................................................................................... 35
Recompense for working 'unsociable hours' ........................................................ 36
The current regulatory environment ..................................................................... 37
APPENDIX 1 ..................................................................................................... 39
Submissions received .............................................................................................. 39
Additional information received ........................................................................... 84
Responses to questions taken on notice ................................................................ 84
APPENDIX 2 ..................................................................................................... 85
Witnesses who appeared before the committee ................................................... 85
RECOMMENDATIONS
Recommendation 1
2.63 The committee recommends that the government task the Department
and/or the Fair Work Commission to provide advice on how best to identify non-
managerial and non-professional employees who continue to work outside the
coverage of a modern award, and bring them within award coverage.
Recommendation 2
2.75 The committee recommends that the Senate not pass the bill.
CHAPTER 1
Introduction
Reference
1.1 On 23 August 2012, the Senate referred the provisions of the Fair Work
Amendment (Small Business—Penalty Rates Exemption) Bill 2012 (the bill) to the
Senate Education, Employment and Workplace Relations Legislation Committee (the
committee) for inquiry and report by 29 November 2012. The reporting date was
subsequently extended to 12 March 2013.1
Conduct of inquiry
1.2 The committee advertised in The Australian on 29 August 2012, calling for
submissions by 20 September 2012. Details of the inquiry were made available on the
committee's website.2
1.3 The committee also contacted a number of organisations inviting submissions
to the inquiry. Submissions were received from approximately 1800 individuals and
organisations, as detailed in Appendix 1.
1.4 A public hearing was held in Melbourne on 7 December 2012. The witness
list for the hearing is at Appendix 2.
Background and purpose of the bill
1.5 The bill was introduced in the Senate by Senator Nick Xenophon, independent
Senator for South Australia, on 16 August 2012. It seeks to implement measures
relating to modern awards, penalty rates and the definition of an excluded small
business employer.3
1.6 The bill has four objectives presented under Schedule 1. Broadly, the bill
proposes to:
Amend the Fair Work Act 2009 to exclude small business employers
from paying penalty rates (Schedule 1);
Amend the definition of 'excluded small business employer' in the Fair
Work Act 2009 (Schedule 1);
1 Journals of the Senate, p. 2864.
2 Senate Standing Legislation Committee on Education, Employment and Workplace Relations,
Fair Work Amendment (Small Business—Penalty Rates Exemption) Bill 2012,
http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate_Committees?url=eet_ctte/
penalty_rates/index.htm, accessed 29 August 2012.
3 Explanatory Memorandum, Fair Work Amendment (Small Business—Penalty Rates
Exemption) Bill 2012, p. 2.
2
Amend the Fair Work Act 2009 to calculate the number of employees
employed by an in employer at a particular time; and
Amend the Fair Work Act 2009 to state that all associated entities within
the same industry are taken to be one entity.4
1.7 The bill purports to strike a compromise between small business employers
and their employees in relation to penalty rates, on the rationale that a global
economy, technological progressions and deregulation of trading hours have made it
common for businesses to trade every day of the week. As a result, some employees
routinely work on weekends and during public holidays. The bill works on the
premise that, for these employees at least, weekend and public holiday hours comprise
part of their standard working hours.5
1.8 The Fair Work Act (the Act), the bill's Explanatory Memorandum states,
generally does not recognise this shift towards a seven day week. The intention of the
bill is to rectify this perceived shortcoming of the Act. It would achieve this by
recognition of the shift towards a seven day working week by permitting certain small
businesses to exclude selected aspects of penalty rates for employees to ease the
financial burden the rates can create.6
1.9 The businesses covered by the bill are limited to small businesses (those with
fewer than 20 full time and full time equivalent employees) in the hospitality and
retail sector. If the bill is passed these businesses will, the Explanatory Memorandum
states, be able to 'remain true to the original intention of penalty rates while avoiding
the high cost burden during specific days of the week.'7
Key provisions of the bill
Exclusion of small business from penalty rates
1.10 Schedule 1 of the bill proposes to amend the Fair Work Act 2009 to define the
terms concerning penalty rates payable by small business employers. The bill states
that an existing or future modern award should not necessitate a term that requires an
employer that is considered as a small business employer, to pay penalty rates to an
employee unless the work undertaken consists of more than thirty eight hours a week;
or ten hours of work in a day.8
4 Explanatory Memorandum, Fair Work Amendment (Small Business—Penalty Rates
Exemption) Bill 2012, pp 2–3
5 Explanatory Memorandum, Fair Work Amendment (Small Business—Penalty Rates
Exemption) Bill 2012, p. 2.
6 Explanatory Memorandum, Fair Work Amendment (Small Business—Penalty Rates
Exemption) Bill 2012, p. 2.
7 Explanatory Memorandum, Fair Work Amendment (Small Business—Penalty Rates
Exemption) Bill 2012, p. 2.
8 Explanatory Memorandum, Fair Work Amendment (Small Business—Penalty Rates
Exemption) Bill 2012, p. 3.
3
Definition of 'excluded small business employer'
1.11 Clause 155A(2) of the bill seeks to insert the definition of 'excluded small
business employer' such that an excluded small business employer would consist of an
employer that, at a particular time, employs less than twenty employees in either the
restaurant and catering industry or the retail industry.9
Calculating the number of employees
1.12 Schedule 1 of the bill proposes that the number of employees engaged by an
employer should be calculated by considering all full-time and full-time equivalent
employees engaged at a particular time, while any other employee in the business at
that time should not be taken into account. Any connected businesses or associations
within the industry should be considered as a single entity.10
Compatibility with human rights
1.13 The explanatory memorandum contains a Statement of Compatibility with
Human Rights (the Statement), which acknowledges the implications of the bill on the
right of an individual to freely chose or accept work and the right not to be deprived of
work unfairly under articles 6, 7 and 8 of the International Covenant on Economic,
Social and Cultural Rights. The Statement concludes that the bill is compatible with
human rights and would not have any effect on the rights to work or the rights in
work.11
Acknowledgment
1.14 As mentioned earlier, the committee received approximately 1800
passionately-argued submissions to this inquiry, and wishes to thank those individuals
and organisations who contributed to the inquiry by preparing written submissions and
giving evidence at the hearing.
Notes on references
1.15 References in this report to the Hansard for the public hearing are to the Proof
Hansard. Page numbers may vary between the proof and the official transcripts.
9 Explanatory Memorandum, Fair Work Amendment (Small Business—Penalty Rates
Exemption) Bill 2012, p. 3.
10 Explanatory Memorandum, Fair Work Amendment (Small Business—Penalty Rates
Exemption) Bill 2012, p. 3.
11 Explanatory Memorandum, Fair Work Amendment (Small Business—Penalty Rates
Exemption) Bill 2012, p. 4.
CHAPTER 2
Issues
Key issues raised by those in favour of the bill
2.1 Proponents of the bill argued that the rationale for penalty rates is now largely
out-dated, thanks to improvements in technology, the development of a global
economy and the deregulation of trading hours, resulting in many businesses trading
over all seven days.1 The Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (ACCI)
submitted that:
Late nights and weekends are significant trading periods in the services
sector. Typically awards have adopted a series of penalty rates which
compensate employees for working ‘unsociable hours’. This original
justification for a high penalty rate regime has limited foundation, with the
advent of fundamental changes in our society, particularly in the retail and
restaurant sectors. Despite this reality, a number of modern awards have
adopted a more restrictive span of ordinary hours, that is, hours where
employers are not required to pay higher rates of pay, and maintained the
penalty rates. These penalty rates are a deterrent to operating outside of
designated ordinary hours and where penalties have increased under the
new modern award, this has threatened the viability of business, the
majority of them [small to medium enterprises] in the services sectors.2
2.2 To further illustrate the point, ACCI provided the following quote from an
employer, received in response to ACCI's National Employer Survey:
I still do not understand how we can move to seven day trading and still
have penalty rates. Surely any hour of any day should be an hourly rate.
Sure, if staff work over a sensible number of hours overtime should be paid
but not simply because it is a Sunday – many of our part time and casual
staff can only work weekends so in fact there is no penalty. We open to
provide a service in a remote area and at best break even. Further, we try to
employ pharmacy students and school students to give them experience but
this gets challenging when wages have penalty rates attached as well – it
defeats the purpose.3
1 See, for example, Restaurant and Catering, submission 452, p. 3; Australian Retailers
Association, submission 75, p. 3; Small Business Development Corporation (WA Government),
submission 115, p. 2; Australian Federation of Employers and Industries, submission 116, pp
6–7. The committee also received submissions from several hundred individuals and businesses
in support of the bill.
2 ACCI, Submission 106, p. 10.
3 ACCI, Submission 106, p. 8.
6
2.3 The Victorian Employers' Chamber of Commerce and Industry (VECCI) felt
similarly:
The great failing of the Act is that it was designed to operate on the basis
“unsocial, irregular or unpredictable hours” plus work on weekends, public
holidays and shifts must attract penalty rates because they are imposition on
all workers and that all manner of businesses can afford to pay a premium
to operate during such times. The Act and the modern award system do not
recognise that in the modern economy some workers can actually only
work at certain times and do not regard them as an imposition because they
actually fit in with other aspects of their lives. They also do not recognise
that certain businesses have to operate during certain times. Why should
such workers who need or choose to work at such times be entitled to a
greater rate of pay simply because the times they choose and prefer to work,
and in some cases, can only work, happen to fall on a weekend? Equally,
why should some businesses that have to trade on weekends or at night or
on public holidays such as tourism operators, café owners, restaurateurs and
publicans and accommodation providers be penalised because they have to
operate during these hours?4
2.4 Supporters of the bill claimed that as a result of the new paradigm many part
time or casual employees consider weekends to be part of their regular hours, and that
as a result it is not necessary to pay penalty rates to attract them to work. While
submitters such as the Australian Retailers Association reported research suggesting
that 39.9 per cent of respondents to a survey cited 'lifestyle' as a reason they worked
weekends, and 45.5 per cent 'availability', the committee notes that while 64.5 per cent
of employer respondents 'had no difficulty in securing staff to work on weekends', the
situation might be different if penalty rates were not payable. Indeed, later in their
submission the Association acknowledged that penalty rates were a 'substantial reason'
why staff chose to work weekends, with 53.3 per cent saying this was a factor.5 The
argument that a substantial proportion of workers prefer to work weekends was
vehemently rejected by the Queensland Council of Unions, who dismissed it as
'spurious' and lacking any credible evidence.6
2.5 A number of submitters also argued that the Fair Work Act required modern
awards to include the term 'necessary to achieve the modern awards objective', and
that modern awards have failed to deliver a structure which is consistent with these
objectives, which include, among other things:
The need to promote flexible modern work practices, efficient and productive
performance of work (s.134(1)(d));
the principal of equal remuneration for work of equal or comparable
value(s.134(1)(e));
4 Victorian Employers' Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Submission 107, pp 2–3.
5 Australian Retailers Association, Submission 75, p. 5.
6 Queensland Council of Unions, Submission 415, p. 3.
7
the likely impact of any exercise of modern award hours on business,
including on productivity, employment costs and the regulatory burden
(s.134(1)(f)); and
the likely impact of any exercise of modern award powers on employment
growth, inflation, sustainability, and competitiveness of the national economy
(s.134(1)(h)).7
2.6 Proponents also pointed to an increase in small business bankruptcy rates, and
a decline in small business start-ups, over recent years, and argued that:
Labour costs represent some 45% of total expenditure for restaurant and
catering businesses and significant spikes in labour costs introduced by the
Fair Work Act Modern Award regime must be included in the factors that
result in high business failure rates.8
2.7 To this end, the Australian Retailers Association submitted that retailers were
'increasingly concerned' that the minimum safety net guaranteed by the retail award
was too generous, leading to labour cost pressures and threatening business viability:
There is direct evidence retailers of all sizes find trading on Sundays in
particular marginal at best. Some owner- operators can only open if they
man the stores themselves while others will simply not open because it is
not viable due to penalty rate structures.9
2.8 Restaurant and Catering estimated that in 2011 some 509 356 shifts have been
lost or 2945 jobs lost to the industry as a result of increased labour costs. The
Australian Federation of Employers and Industries (AFEI) summarised its view of the
situation thus:
The slower jobs growth and decrease in overall hours offered to employees
in these sectors, along with the adjustment of trading hours are indicative of
the cost impact of modern awards which is now to be exacerbated by the
new penalty rate regime… The outcome in these sectors in response to
labour cost increases will inevitably be further reductions in jobs, available
work hours, and careful management of rosters to avoid paying penalty
rates.10
2.9 Restaurant and Catering drew on a survey of its members in late 2011, with a
view to obtaining 'detailed information about the state of the industry in respect of its
financial, business and human resource elements'.11
Some of the key conclusions of
the survey presented to the committee in support of the argument that changes are
needed to the penalty rates system, were:
7 See, for example, Victorian Employers' Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Submission 107,
p. 2.
8 Restaurant and Catering, Submission 452, p. 7.
9 Australian Retailers Association, Submission 75, p. 4.
10 Australian Federation of Employers and Industries, Submission 116, p. 11.
11 Restaurant and Catering, Submission 452, p. 8.
8
65.8 per cent of respondents indicated that a further minimum award rise in
July 2012 would have a significant financial impact on their business;
Were a wage increase to occur, 32 per cent of respondents would not employ
additional staff, and 20.3 per cent would employ the same number of staff but
for fewer hours;
70.9 per cent of respondents would employ fewer staff is labour costs rose
across 2012–2013;
33.3 per cent of restaurant respondents indicated they closed their business on
public holidays and 18.2 per cent reduced their opening hours on those days.12
2.10 Proponents also argued that restaurant, cafe and catering businesses have
already incurred significant costs with the introduction of the Fair Work system which
has resulted in some businesses applying significant labour cost increases as a result
of the making of the Restaurant Industry Award 2010 and the Hospitality Industry
General) Award 2010 which took effect in part from 1 January 2010. It was argued
that businesses had incurred additional costs in the transitional arrangements and are
further concerned about significant monetary increases applied by way of new penalty
rates that in some cases did not apply under the pre modern award system. The system
at present, it is argued, has resulted in Australia having the highest minimum wage in
the OECD.13
2.11 Among those who were in favour of the bill, a number considered that it did
not go far enough, and should apply to businesses with more than 20 employees. The
AFEI argued that:
…the proposed legislative changes extending only to employers with
businesses in the restaurant and catering or retail industries with fewer than
20 full time or full-time equivalent employees does not go far enough.
Reform is also required for employers facing unsustainable penalty rates in
other sectors where modern awards either introduced penalty rates where
previously none applied or increased them significantly beyond pre modern
award levels…In our view, legislative reform that targets sectors where
penalty rates regimes have previously applied, but are no longer relevant in
a contemporary economy and are in fact detrimental, such as in the fast
food sector, is also necessary. To achieve this, penalty rates for weekend
work should not apply where these hours form part of the worker’s
ordinary, not overtime, hours. Further the introduction of a “cut off” point
at 20 employees has the potential to introduce distortion and unintended
consequences in the labour market.14
12 Restaurant and Catering, Submission 452, pp 9–10.
13 Restaurant and Catering, Submission 452, p. 11. See also, for example, Australian Retailers
Association, Submission 75, p. 3.
14 Australian Federation of Employers and Industries, Submission 116, p. 2.
9
2.12 It was also argued that small business owners' human rights were potentially
in jeopardy on the basis that they were 'forced to work excessive long hours because
of regulatory changes to business operations that were not foreseen when they started
the business', and that:
…the Fair Work Act 2009 has fundamentally swung the pendulum in
favour of employees and trade unions to the extent that running a small
business in Australia is oppressive, unjust and unfair to the community of
entrepreneurs that should be rewarded not punished by Government.15
Key issues raised by those opposed to the bill
2.13 Opposition to the bill was very strong. The Shop, Distributive and Allied
Employees Association (SDA) represented the underlying views of many of those
opposed to the bill, putting the case for the retention of penalty rates in this way:
Penalty rates are not a prehistoric concept to be derided and eradicated
because some do not consider them 'modern'. Indeed, they reflect the very
basic tenet of our modern industrial legislation, the Fair Work Act 2009, in
that they are 'fair' - they compensate employees for working unsociable
hours at times and on days when many others enjoy family gatherings,
social occasions, religious commitments or leisure time.16
2.14 The remainder of this chapter will outline the major themes expounded upon
by those opposed to the bill, before highlighting a number of potential unintended
consequences it may have.
Antisocial hours
2.15 Submitters who opposed the bill cited as one of their primary arguments the
special status that weekends hold among the majority of Australians. Unions NSW
spoke for many when they submitted that:
Whilst there have been significant increases in business hours in the last 50
years, Unions NSW does not believe that this makes the concept of the
weekend or public holidays redundant…Unions NSW submits that
increased business operating hours have not eliminated the social costs
imposed on employees who work on weekends. A weekend that falls on a
Saturday and Sunday remains the norm for the majority of Australian
workers. Additionally, a Monday to Friday week also remains the normal
operation hours of schools. Employees who work on weekends will
generally find themselves working whilst their friends, partners and
extended family are not. Additionally, employees with children who work
weekends will find themselves working on the only two days of the week
that their children are not in school. Weekends continue to be the time of
15 Restaurant and Catering, Submission 452, p. 15.
16 SDA, Submission 71, p. 3. See also, in a similar vein, Australian Services Union, submission
318; Queensland Council of Unions, submission 415. The committee also received many
hundreds of submissions from individuals opposing the bill.
10
week that organised sporting games and activities are played. Depending on
an individual’s religion, Saturday or Sunday remains a day of rest and
worship where religious services are conducted. Weekends also remain the
time of week when large scale community events, markets, fairs and fetes
are held.17
2.16 Likewise, the Australian Catholic Council for Employment Relations
submitted that:
The fact that an industry may be described as a "seven day a week industry"
does not disentitle workers to penalty rates for the working of unsocial
hours. Penalty rates are payable to workers whether they are employed as
shift workers or only perform part of their work (either regularly or
occasionally) in unsocial hours. Penalty payments are paid for work in
unsocial hours in seven day a week industries, such as health, aged care,
policing, emergency services and private security. The claim that retail, for
example, has become more of a seven day a week industry does not support
a claim that penalty rates should be reduced or removed. Similarly, in the
restaurant and catering industries, which have always operated over seven
days a week, an increase in the number of businesses opening on weekends
would be no reason to reduce or remove penalty rates.18
2.17 The Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations
(DEEWR) agreed, submitting that:
[A]n extension of trading hours, largely in response to consumer demand,
does not diminish the unsociability of weekend or late night work. Many
employees are less inclined to work on Saturdays and Sundays because they
are the primary days where other family members are available and where
sport, leisure, community activities and religious celebrations occur.
Employees cannot readily or easily substitute week days for activities that
they would normally do on weekend days.19
2.18 The committee was told that a study drawn from Australian Bureau of
Statistics (ABS) data indicated that the weekend - and Sundays in particular -
remained the most important days for social and community interaction for
Australians of working age. Comparisons of the way those who work weekends spend
their time compared with those who do not indicated that, for Sunday workers, there is
a significant fall in participation in community activities (including volunteering), a
large drop in socialising, a big fall in recreational activities, less opportunity to
'catchup' on domestic work, less sleep-in time and less personal care time. The authors
concluded that Sunday was the most critical day for families to spend time together,
17 Unions NSW, Submission 416, p. 6.
18 Australian Catholic Council for Employment Relations, Submission 112, p. 7.
19 DEEWR, Submission 418, p. 6.
11
and that both Saturday and Sunday are days of importance social contact with friends,
colleagues and neighbours.20
2.19 Unions NSW made the point that weekend and public holiday work has a
significant effect on families who have caring responsibilities for children, and that
the lack of formal education on these days means that when parents need to work on
weekends, they need to be placed in childcare. Weekend childcare is often unavailable
in many areas and when it is, it is considerably more expensive than mid-week care. It
was submitted that the removal of penalty rates on weekends and public holidays
would lead to greater financial pressure being placed on employees with such caring
responsibilities.21
2.20 The importance and unique status of weekends is reflected in a poll
undertaken by Galaxy Research which found that, in spite of deregulation of shopping
hours and the expanded daily spread of working hours, there is virtually universal
agreement – 97 per cent– that weekends are important times for families. Eighty seven
per cent of Australians agree that people who are required to work on weekends as
part of their job should receive a higher rate of pay for weekend shifts, and 77 per cent
do not agree with the argument that working on the week end is no different to any
other day of the week.22
Effect on incomes
2.21 The committee was told that the most immediate and obvious effect of the
Bill would be the adjustment by businesses of their rostering arrangements to avoid
allowing employees to work shifts of longer than 10 hours, or more than 38 hour per
week, in order to avoid payment of penalty rates.23
This would result in part-time
workers in relevant industries, already among the lowest-paid, who do any evening or
weekend work having their pay significantly reduced.24
2.22 The SDA submitted a number of case studies to illustrate the potential impact
of the bill on individual incomes. One was for a full-time shiftworker in South
Australia working Monday to Thursday 10pm to 6am and Friday 10pm to 4am,
currently entitled to $794.70. The same hours in Victoria would equal $865.93. The
removal of their nightshift penalty rates would see them earn $666.10 per week. For
the South Australian shiftworker, that is a reduction of $128.80, or just over 16 per
20 ACTU, Submission 231, p. 14, citing Bittman, M (2005) ‘Sunday Working and Family Time’
59 Labour & Industry 16(1) at 68. See also, for example, Australian Catholic Council for
Employment Relations, Submission 112, p. 8; United Voice, Submission 417, p. 26.
21 Unions NSW, Submission 416, pp 9–10.
22 United Voice, submission to Modern Award Review 2012, pp 3–4,
www.fwa.gov.au/documents/awardmod/review/AM2012215_sub_uv.pdf (accessed on
18 December 2012).
23 See, for example, ACTU, Submission 231, p. 26.
24 SDA, Submission 71, p. 4; See also, for example, ACTU, Submission 231, p. 26; Unions NSW,
Submission 416, p. 8.
12
cent of their wage. The Victorian employee would have their wage reduced by
$199.83, or over 23 per cent.
2.23 Another involved a part-time employee employed by a small employer in
New South Wales who works from 6pm to 9pm Thursday and Friday and 10am to
4pm on Saturday and Sunday, currently entitled to $460.57. The bill would see the
employee’s wage reduced to $298.01 for working the exact same hours. This
employee would stand to lose over 35 per cent, or $162.56 of their weekly income.25
2.24 While the number of dollars in lost income is part of the story, United Voice
reminded the committee that restaurant and catering workers, 45 per cent of whom
receive award wages, rely heavily on the extra income provided by penalty rates. This
point is illustrated by the fact that in 2008, the Australian Bureau of Statistics
estimated that approximately 72 per cent of workers in the Accommodation and Food
Services industry usually work on the weekend. By contrast, only 28% of workers in
the industry have patterns of work which vary each week. United Voice took these
statistics to mean that the removal of penalty rates in these sectors amounts to an
assault on the wages and conditions of restaurant and catering employees.26
2.25 DEEWR submitted that:
Penalty rates have been a long-standing feature of the employment safety
net in Australia for employees who work weekends, public holidays and
other unsociable hours…penalty rates are an important component of the
total remuneration for low paid employees, including in the
accommodation, retail and hospitality industries.27
2.26 The ACTU provided tables illustrating the current and proposed pay rates
under the awards likely to be affected. These are set out below.
25 SDA, Submission 71, p. 5.
26 United Voice, Submission 417, p. 17.
27 DEEWR, Submission 418, p. 4.
13
General Retail Industry Award 2010 – Saturday
Permanent
(125%)
current
Permanent
(100%)
proposed
Difference
per hour
Casual
(135%
between
7am and
6pm only)28
Casual
(100%)
proposed
Difference
per hour
Adult 21.91 17.53 4.38 23.67 17.53 6.14
20 (90%) 19.72 15.78 3.94 21.30 15.78 5.52
19 (80%) 17.53 14.02 3.51 18.93 14.02 4.91
18 (70%) 15.34 12.27 3.07 16.56 12.27 4.29
17 (60%) 13.15 10.52 2.63 14.20 10.52 3.68
16 (50%) 10.96 8.76 2.20 11.83 8.76 3.07
16 and
under
(45%)
9.86 7.89 1.97 10.65 7.89 2.76
General Retail Industry Award 2010 – Sunday
Permanent
(200%)
current
Permanent
(100%)
proposed
Difference
per hour
Casual
(200%)
current
Casual
(125%)
proposed
Difference
per hour
Adult 35.06 17.53 17.53 35.06 21.91 13.15
20 (90%) 31.56 15.78 15.78 31.56 19.72 11.84
19 (80%) 28.04 14.02 14.02 28.04 17.53 10.51
18 (70%) 24.54 12.27 12.27 24.54 15.34 9.20
17 (60%) 21.04 10.52 10.52 21.04 13.15 7.89
16 (50%) 17.52 8.76 8.76 17.52 10.96 6.56
16 and
under
(45%)
15.78 7.89 7.89 15.78 9.86 5.92
28 Outside these workers are paid time-and-a-half for the first three hours and double time
thereafter.
14
Restaurant Industry Award 2010 – permanent employees
PERMANENT
EMPLOYEES (FULL-TIME AND PART-TIME)
Saturday Sunday
Permanent
(125%)
current
Permanent
(100%)
proposed
Difference per hour
Permanent
(150%)
current
Permanent
(100%)
proposed
Difference per hour
Adult (20+) 20.53 16.42 4.11 24.63 16.42 8.21
19 (85%) 17.45 13.96 3.49 20.94 13.96 6.98
18 (70%) 14.36 11.49 2.87 17.24 11.49 5.75
17 (60%) 12.31 9.85 2.46 14.78 9.85 4.93
16 and under (50%)
10.26 8.21 2.05 12.32 8.21 4.11
Restaurant Industry Award 2010 – casual employees
CASUAL EMPLOYEES
Saturday Sunday
Casual
(150%)
current
Casual
(125%)
proposed
Difference per hour
Casual
(175%)
current
Casual
(125%)
proposed
Difference per hour
Adult (20+) 24.63 20.53 4.10 28.74 20.53 8.21
19 (85%) 20.94 17.45 3.49 24.43 17.45 6.98
18 (70%) 17.24 14.36 2.88 20.11 14.36 5.75
17 (60%) 14.78 12.31 2.47 17.24 12.31 4.93
16 and under (50%)
12.32 10.26 2.06 14.37 10.26 4.11
15
Hospitality Industry (General) Award 2010 – Saturday
Permanent
(125%)
current
Permanent
(100%)
proposed
Difference
per hour
Casual
(150%)
current
Casual
(125%)
proposed
Difference
per hour
Adult (20+) 20.53 16.42 4.11 24.63 20.53 4.10
19 (85%) 17.45 13.96 3,49 20.94 17.45 3.49
18 (70%) 14.36 11.49 2.87 17.24 14.36 2.88
17 (60%) 12.31 9.85 2.46 14.78 12.31 2.47
16 and
under
(50%)
10.26 8.21 2.05
12.32 10.26 2.06
Hospitality Industry (General) Award 2010 – Sunday
Permanent
(175%)
current
Permanent
(100%)
proposed
Difference
per hour
Casual
(175%)
current
Casual
(125%)
proposed
Difference
per hour
Adult (20+) 28.74 16.42 12.32 28.74 20.53 8.21
19 (85%) 24.43 13.96 10.47 24.43 17.45 6.98
18 (70%) 20.11 11.49 8.62 20.11 14.36 5.75
17 (60%) 17.24 9.85 7.39 17.24 12.31 4.93
16 and
under
(50%)
14.37 8.21 6.16
14.37 10.26 4.11
16
Fast Food Industry Award 2010 – permanent employees
Saturday Sunday
Permanent
(125%)
current
Permanent
(100%)
Proposed
Difference
per hour
Permanent
(150%)
current
Permanent
(100%)
Proposed
Difference
per hour
Adult 21.91 17.53 4.38 26.30 17.53 8.77
20 (90%) 19.73 15.78 3.95 23.67 15.78 7.89
19 (80%) 17.53 14.02 3.51 21.03 14.02 7.01
18 (70%) 15.34 12.27 3.07 18.41 12.27 6.14
17 (60%) 13.15 10.52 2.63 15.78 10.52 5.26
16 (50%) 10.96 8.76 2.20 13.14 8.76 4.38
Under 16
(40%)
8.76 7.01 1.75 10.52 7.01 3.51
Fast Food Industry Award 2010 – casual employees
Saturday Sunday
Casual
(150%)
current
Casual
(125%)
Proposed
(Current
ordinary
time rate
with 25%
casual
loading)
Difference
per hour
Casual
(175%)
current
Casual
(125%)
Proposed
(Current
ordinary
time rate
with 25%
casual
loading)
Difference
per hour
Adult 26.30 21.91 4.39 30.68 21.91 8.77
20 (90%) 23.67 19.72 3.95 27.62 19.72 7.90
19 (80%) 21.03 17.53 3.50 24.54 17.53 7.01
18 (70%) 18.41 15.34 3.07 21.47 15.34 6.13
17 (60%) 15.78 13.15 2.63 18.41 13.15 5.26
16 (50%) 13.14 10.96 2.18 15.33 10.96 4.37
Under 16
(40%)
10.52 8.77 1.75 12.27 8.77 3.50
17
2.27 The SDA submitted that:
The reduction or removal of penalty rates, whether they be penalty
payments to compensate workers for shiftwork, overtime, working at night,
working on weekends and /or working on public holidays would have a
most serious adverse impact on those workers and their families.29
2.28 The SDA also argued that the bill had the potential to:
…create an underclass of workers who cannot hope to earn more than
$34,637.20 per annum if they are a Level 1 permanent, full-time ‘adult’.
That is a mere $3,104.40 per annum more than the minimum wage.
However, an employee performing the same role but for an employer with
20 or more full-time equivalent employees could earn significantly more if
their shifts cover weekends, evenings, public holidays or night shifts.30
2.29 The SDA provided the example of two part-time retail or fast food workers on
a public holiday, under the award, who could perform the same tasks at exactly the
same time but one would receive $43.83 per hour for their work, whilst the other
would receive $17.53 per hour, and concluded that 'It would not be an understatement
to declare this scenario completely unjust. These rates are set to compensate
employees for giving up a holiday to which all workers are entitled'.31
Application of the bill only to restaurant, retail and catering sectors
2.30 A number of submitters questioned the application of the bill only to
businesses in the restaurant, retail and catering sectors. United Voice asked why these
industries represented a special case in need of an exemption 'to what is otherwise [an]
accepted community standard?', adding that:
In United Voice’s opinion, before an Australian parliament took the very
significant step of removing one set of rights and entitlements from a group
of workers, it would need to be presented with overwhelming and
inarguable evidence in favour of that proposition. In order to demonstrate
that businesses covered by the Bill fall into a special or unique category
proponents must demonstrate not only a sound economic case for a drastic
reduction in penalty rates, but also a social case. Penalty rates perform not
only an economic function but also an important social function. By
compensating workers who work on weekends or at night penalty rates
protect and enhance family and community life in Australia. Employer
groups and other supporters of the Bill have not put forth either a rigorous
economic or social argument to support the idea that the restaurant and
catering industry is a special case. Consequently, on equity grounds alone,
the Committee should not support passage of the Bill.32
29 SDA, Submission 71, p. 2.
30 SDA, Submission 106, p. 6.
31 SDA, Submission 106, p. 6.
32 United Voice, Submission 417, p. 15.
18
Uncertainty of scope
2.31 The Bill seeks to preclude modern awards from awarding penalty rates to
employees of exempted small businesses, except where employees work either more
than 38 hours per week or more than 10 hours during a 24 hour period, in the
restaurant and catering industry or the retail industry. The ACTU submitted that, while
it was difficult to estimate the total number of workers who would be affected by the
bill's passage, 'it is undoubtedly in the hundreds of thousands'.33
The SDA considered
that the number affected could be 'considerably higher than 250 000'.34
2.32 The uncertainty stemmed from the difficulty in determining which modern
awards would be subject to the bill. While the majority of affected workers would
likely be employed under the General Retail Industry Award 2010 and the Restaurant
Industry Award, the ACTU argued that employers may seek to argue that the bill also
applies to other awards which have a retail component. The Hair and Beauty Industry
Award 2010, the Pharmacy Industry Award, and the Fast Food Industry Award 2010
were cited as examples.35
2.33 In the same vein, it was also argued that:
To add confusion, the explanatory memorandum to the Bill refers to an
intention aimed at 'small businesses in the hospitality and retail sector'. The
modern award system distinguishes between the general hospitality industry
and the restaurant industry, and it is subsequently unclear whether the intent
of the Bill is to effect workers engaged under various classifications in the
Hospitality Industry (General) Award 2010.36
2.34 DEEWR set out numerous instances of lack of specificity in the bill, any one
of which could give rise to arguments over whether an employment relationship was
covered by its provisions:
The Bill also provides no definition or framework to determine what may
constitute a ‘full time equivalent employee’ or whether an employer
operates in a particular sector. The Bill refers to ‘restaurant and catering
industry’ and the ‘retail industry’. Whether an employer operates in a
particular industry could be determined in a range of ways, including
whether a particular modern award applies to their operations, whether it is
in accordance to [Australia and New Zealand Standard Industrial
Classification], an ABS statistical measure, the employer’s assessment or
something else. In addition, the Bill does not outline how to determine
whether the provisions would apply and how they would operate in respect
of an employer operating a mixed business with employees performing
some functions in a particular industry but other functions in another
industry.
33 ACTU, Submission 231, p. 6.
34 SDA, Submission 71, p. 4.
35 ACTU, Submission 231, p. 6. See also, for example, Unions NSW, Submission 416, pp 3–4.
36 ACTU, Submission 231, p. 6. Emphasis in original.
19
2.35 The committee was told that the retail, accommodation and food services
industries represented the largest groups of award-reliant employees in the Australian
workforce, and that between them the sectors employed over 496 000 award-reliant
employees, comprising 36.5 per cent of all minimum award-rate earners.
2.36 Of those working on awards, the committee heard that 45.5 per cent work for
businesses with fewer than 20 employees.37
It is for this reason that small business
employees are, as individuals and as a group, highly vulnerable to small wage
decreases and in need of award protection. This protection has for many years come in
the form of penalty rates.
2.37 The bill was also criticised for defining small business inconsistently with the
Fair Work Act. The Fair Work Act, for the purposes of unfair dismissal, defines the
meaning of a small business employer as employing fewer than 15 employees at a
particular time. This definition requires all employees to be counted. Casuals are
counted if they are employed on a regular and systematic basis. The bill defines a
small business employer as an employer who 'employs fewer than 20 employees'.
Under this definition only full-time and fulltime equivalent employees need to be
counted, rendering it inconsistent with the Fair Work Act. It was argued that
definitional variations such as this create confusion for employers and employees.38
Uncertainty of rostering and wages arrangements
2.38 The committee heard that most workers affected by the bill are unlikely to
have a high degree of control over their own rostering arrangements, and that the bill
could enable employers to alter rosters in a manner which would remove employees'
entitlement to penalty rates (by ensuring that workers are not rostered to work more
than 38 hours in any week or more than 10 hours in any 24 hour period). It is also
possible that, depending on rostering arrangements, employees could be entitled to
penalty rates one week and not the next. This would render it more difficult for
employees to budget, and could create significant uncertainty relating to an
employee’s take-home wage.39
Lack of evidence that measures are required
2.39 The ACTU expressed concern over the veracity of the evidence purporting to
justify the need for the amendments proposed in the bill, submitting that:
In his second reading speech, Senator Xenophon seeks to set out an
economic case for the removal of penalty rates in the retail, restaurant and
catering industries. To this end, Senator Xenophon cites “[a] Benchmarking
Report by the Restaurant and Catering Australia conducted late last year” as
37 ACTU, Submission 231, p. 7. See also ACCI, Submission 106, p. 16.
38 Unions NSW, Submission 416, pp 4–5. See also DEEWR, Submission 418, p. 8.
39 See, for example, ACTU, submission 231, p. 30.
20
indicating that businesses have reduced their hours as a result of the
payment of penalty rates, employed fewer staff because of high labour
costs, and indicated an intention to reduce their number of staff if labour
costs rose in the next 12 months. Restaurant and Catering Australia is an
employer association which represents the interests of employers and
owners of restaurants, cafes and caterers. We are unable to critically
examine the “Benchmarking Report” because the report is not publicly
available. The ACTU understands that the report is based on an online
survey conducted by Restaurant and Catering Australia (“R&CA”),
although it is unclear what the sample size was for the survey, or what
questions were asked. The ACTU expresses general caution against reliance
on survey data where the methodology of the survey is unable to be
critically examined.40
2.40 The ACTU also pointed to the findings of the Minimum Wage Panel of Fair
Work Australia in its 2012 minimum wage decision, when it considered:
…a number of surveys conducted by employer associations, including a
survey conducted by the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry -
which was based on a group of 56 award-reliant enterprises - which sought
to establish that a minimum wage increase would have negative
employment effects for some employers in some industries. The Full Bench
declined to place reliance on these surveys because the survey respondents
were small in number, self-selected and / or not representative of employers
generally. The Minimum Wage Panel found that the surveys could not be
relied on for any conclusions about aggregate effects either from either an
industry or an economy-wide perspective.41
2.41 The ACTU also submitted that any argument that small business was being
hampered by labour costs did not hold water, based on the fact that growth in small
business employment levels was outstripping that of larger business:
Any negative effect of industrial arrangements would be expected to
manifest itself as more sluggish employment growth in small retail
businesses than in others. In fact, the opposite has occurred. Employment in
small retail businesses has grown more rapidly in recent years than
employment in larger retail businesses, and more rapidly than employment
across businesses of all types. ABS data show that employment in small
business in the retail trade industry rose by 7.7% between June 2009 and
June 2011. Employment in large retail businesses fell over the same period
by 1.1%...The fact that employment in small retail businesses has grown
faster than large retail employment and employment generally does not
support claims that small retail businesses are facing difficulty as a result of
penalty rates and modern awards. The retail and hospitality industries have
also seen profits remain around their typical level as a proportion of total
income, slightly increased in the case of retail trade.42
40 ACTU, submission 231, p. 19.
41 ACTU, Submission 231, pp 19–20.
42 ACTU, Submission 231, p. 20.
21
2.42 United Voice agreed, adding that the average labour cost in the restaurant and
catering sectors had experienced only modest (14 per cent) growth over the years
2006 to 2011, and that wages growth comprised only a 'very small part' of the growth
in expenses in an industry that had experienced 'significant growth' over the period, as
illustrated by the following chart.43
2.43 United Voice also sought to demonstrate that wages as a proportion of overall
costs have remained stable in recent years. The following table, supplied by United
Voice, suggests that the role of wages in overall costs has increased only 0.8 per cent
in the years 2007–08 to 2010–11.44
43 United Voice, Submission 417, p. 20, drawing on Australian Bureau of Statistics. Australian
Industry 2010-2011 (Cat. No. 8155.0).
44 United Voice, Submission 417, p. 22.
22
2.44 This is of little surprise to the committee, given evidence it received from the
Department that:
The analysis of penalty rate provisions for modern awards determined by
the AIRC indicates that…modern awards did not introduce new penalty rate
entitlements; and penalty rates included in modern awards generally
reflected rates commonly found in existing state awards.45
2.45 The Department pointed to a number of examples of the similarities, including
the public holiday rate for full time and part time workers in the Restaurant Industry
Award 2010 of 250 per cent, which is identical to rates found in state awards reviewed
for that industry, except in South Australia (which had a lower penalty rate of 200 per
cent).
2.46 Another example made the point that the overtime rate in the General Retail
Industry Award 2010 of 150 per cent for the first three hours of work and 200 per cent
thereafter is the same rate as existed across retail awards in all States and Territories
pre award modernisation. In NSW, Western Australia and the ACT the higher rate
was payable after 2 hours of work.46
2.47 Finally, DEEWR submitted that it did not consider there were compelling
reasons to depart from the current principle that penalty rates should be provided to
compensate employees for working these hours, whilst acknowledging the detail of
particular provisions in modern awards is a matter to be determined by FWA. It is to
this matter that the committee now turns.47
Appropriateness of infringing on FWA jurisdiction
2.48 Many submitters considered the bill to be ill-conceived as a matter of public
policy given the overall framework of workplace relations law and an inappropriate
infringement on the jurisdiction of Fair Work Australia, an independent tribunal
established by Parliament to oversee industrial matters such as the payment of penalty
rates. With a view echoed by others, including the SDA, the ACTU argued that:
45 DEEWR, Submission 418, p. 12.
46 DEEWR, Submission 418, p. 13.
47 DEEWR, Submission 418, p. 4.
23
If passed, the Bill would remove existing wages and entitlements that have
been determined by an independent tribunal established by the Parliament
for the purpose of determining such matters. The tribunal has set (and is
required to periodically review) the wages and entitlements attacked by the
Bill, following the presentation of merits-based cases by representatives of
workers and employers and consideration of all relevant facts and
circumstances. There is no basis for Parliament to override this process for
a section of the economy.48
2.49 The ACTU elaborated on their argument in the following way:
The powers and functions vested in FWA by the FW Act requires the
Tribunal, when it is considering any application to vary a modern award, to
undertake an independent assessment of whether the proposed variation is
necessary to meet the modern awards objective. The modern awards
objective…ensures that modern awards – taken together with the National
Employment Standards in the Act – provide a fair and relevant minimum
safety net of terms and conditions. Specifically, the modern awards
objective requires the Tribunal to consider:
a. relative living standards and the needs of the low paid; and
b. the need to encourage collective bargaining; and
c. the need to promote social inclusion through increased workforce
participation; and
d. the need to promote flexible modern work practices and the
efficient and productive performance of work; and
e. the principle of equal remuneration for work of equal or
comparable value; and
f. the likely impact of any exercise of modern award powers on
business, including on productivity, employment and the regulatory
burden; and
g. the need to ensure a simple, easy to understand, stable and
sustainable modern award system for Australia that avoids
unnecessary overlap of modern awards; and
h. the likely impact of any exercise of modern award powers on
employment growth , inflation and the sustainability, performance
and competitiveness of the national economy.
Generally speaking, in performing its functions or exercising powers, the
Tribunal is also compelled to take into account equity, good conscience and
the merits of a matter, the need to respect the value and diversity of the
work force, and the object of the FW Act.49
48 ACTU, Submission 231, p. 3. See also, for example, SDA, Submission 71, p. 1; DEEWR,
Submission 418, p. 16.
49 ACTU, Submission 231, p. 4.
24
2.50 The ACTU also reminded the committee that FWA was in the process of
conducting a 2-year review of modern awards, and that:
As part of the current 2-yearly review, FWA has convened a Full Bench to
consider 24 separate applications which seek to make variations to penalty
rate provisions in 7 modern awards, including awards which would be
covered by the Bill. Of those 24 applications, a number seek to remove or
reduce penalty rates under various modern awards. Those applications will
be heard, consistent with the aims and objects of the FW Act and the
modern awards objective. In addition to the 2-yearly review, the Fair Work
Act 2009 also requires that modern awards be reviewed every 4 years.
Consistent with the scheme of the FW Act, these reviews are the only
appropriate forum for considering any reduction in the safety net.50
2.51 However, some proponents of the bill considered that it was incumbent on the
Parliament to act, and took the view that:
Parliament provided the statutory mandate and instructions to the
Australian Industrial Relations Commission (AIRC) to create modern
awards under then Part 10A of the Workplace Relations Act 1996.
Parliament has also created national minimum employment standards under
the National Employment Standards. Under the Act, there is a hybrid dual
safety net which is governed by the rules set by Parliament…The
Parliament now has responsibility to monitor the effect of these rules and
act when there is evidence to suggest legislative intervention is warranted.51
Unintended consequences of the bill
False economy for small businesses
2.52 Some submitters identified what they saw as the potential for market
distortion brought about by the application of the bill to businesses employing fewer
than 20 employees. This point was made both by supporters and critics of the bill. The
Australian Retailers Association submitted that:
While lower rates would be of significant benefit to small retailers, ARA
can report many of its members would employ more than 20 full time
employees (FTE), in some instances in a single store. Hardware stores are a
prime example of a single store small business employing many staff and
another example would be hairdressers. There is also a concern on the limit
acting like an additional tax which would restrict a retailer from expanding
beyond 20 FTEs without having their business model impacted and could
cause them to cap expansion of their staff numbers and business. The ARA
would therefore like to ask what measures would be in place to address a
retailer creating multiple entities to work around the cap, and whether this
would have the potential of acting as a retardant for employees applying for
50 ACTU, Submission 231, p. 4. See also SDA, Submission 71, p. 3.
51 ACCI, Submission 106, pp 10–11. See also, for example, VECCI, Submission 107, p. 2;
Australian Federation of Employers and Industries, Submission 116, p. 2.
25
positions in small retail businesses or going over the road and applying for
work in their bigger, higher paying competitor.52
2.53 Enacting this legislation would, effectively, result in employees being
remunerated at different rates for performing the same job, for the same duration of
time. As put by one submitter:
You will create a two tier wage system and this will mean you will have
two people doing roughly the same job getting paid a different amount of
money depending on how big the business is.53
2.54 DEEWR saw potential for even more complexity:
…[A]n employer with employees performing functions in industries not
excluded by the provisions may have some employees entitled to penalty
rates on a particular day or time but other employees within the same
business not entitled to penalty rates as a result of the provisions. This may
result in additional complexity for the employer and may have other
outcomes such as those employees not receiving penalty rates for that day
not attending work due to the lack of compensation and the other
employees being required to perform the work of those employees.54
2.55 Although workers already receive different pay rates from different
employers, the bill would drastically widen this disparity. Formalising a system
wherein certain businesses pay their employees far less than others may in fact
constitute a false economy for small businesses, as the most skilled and in-demand
workers vote with their feet and seek employment elsewhere. Larger businesses not
covered by the bill will attract the best employees through better remuneration, further
disadvantaging small businesses in the long run.
Penalty payments on public holidays and inconsistency between legislation
2.56 The Statement of Compatibility with Human Rights attached to the
Explanatory Memorandum to the Bill indicates that the Bill is not intended to affect
the remuneration of employees for public holidays. However, the drafting of the Bill
does not differentiate between penalty payments which relate to evening or weekend
work, and penalty rates payable for work performed on public holidays. DEEWR
expressed concern that:
The Bill would prevent any consideration by FWA of whether penalty rates
would be appropriate in a particular situation. For example, the Bill would
prevent FWA from hearing submissions from all interested parties and
determining in accordance with the modern awards objective whether
penalty rates should be payable for a retail worker in a small business who
is rostered to work a on Christmas Day to stack shelves for the Boxing Day
52 Australian Retailers Association, Submission 75, p. 5. See also, in a similar vein, Small
Business Development Corporation (WA Government), Submission 115, p. 4.
53 Mr Graeme Frappell, Submission 5, p. 1.
54 DEEWR, Submission 418, p. 8.
26
sales. The Department submits that these are issues that should continue to
be heard and determined by FWA…55
2.57 The committee takes the view that the bill would be likely to have the effect
of removing penalties payable on public holidays for workers caught by it.
2.58 In a similar vein, Unions NSW expressed concern over the wording of the
bill, which it was submitted would remove penalty rates for all workers in retail and
hospitality, even in those businesses of 20 or more workers:
The requirement for employers to pay penalty rates is included in the
relevant modern awards of retail and hospitality employees. Within these
Modern Awards, there is no variation on conditions based on the size of the
employer. As such, the wording of the Bill to ‘not include a term…’ would
effectively require the removal of the entire clause relating to penalty rates.
As such, no employee working in hospitality or retail would have an award
entitlement to penalty rates for work on weekends, public holidays, or late
at night.56
2.59 Unions NSW also expressed concern over what it considered to be
inconsistency between the bill and the NSW Retail Trading Amendment Bill (The
NSW Bill) that is currently before the NSW Parliament, which provides for shops
meeting certain conditions to open (and therefore roster staff) on days on which they
would otherwise be required not to trade. Unions NSW considered that the interaction
between the bills would see employees required to work on otherwise restricted days
(such as Christmas Day and Easter Sunday) without an entitlement to penalty rates.57
Penalty rates immediately following the introduction of WorkChoices
2.60 During the course of its hearing in Melbourne, and following evidence from
Restaurant and Catering and DEEWR. the committee was disturbed to learn that:
Immediately following the commencement of Work Choices on 27 March
2006, there was scope for newly established federal system employers to
engage employees on terms and conditions which did not include penalties.
This capacity applied to federal system employers that commenced
operations after 27 March 2006. It was not limited to Victoria, the
restaurant industry or any particular penalty rate…In practice, many federal
system employers that commenced operations after 27 March 2006 were
not bound by any award, and therefore would not have been obliged to pay
penalty rates.58
55 DEEWR, Submission 418, p. 7.
56 Unions NSW, Submission 416, p. 3.
57 Unions NSW, Submission 416, p. 12.
58 DEEWR, Answers to Questions Taken on Notice, 7 December 2012 (received
11 January 2013).
27
2.61 The committee sought further information on the number of employees who
remain engaged on terms and conditions which exclude penalty rates, and learned
that:
Modern awards cover the vast majority of federal system employers that
were not covered by a pre-reform federal award due to having commenced
trading after Work Choices. The objective of the award modernisation
process, as set out in the award modernisation request, was to create a
'comprehensive' set of modern awards covering industries and occupations
that have historically been award-regulated. As a result modern awards,
such as the Restaurant Industry Award 2010 and the General Retail
Industry Award 2010, have broad industry coverage and can be expected to
cover employers and their employees that would ordinarily have been
covered by pre-reform federal awards. In addition, the Miscellaneous
Award 2010 is expressed to cover employees who are not covered by
another modern award (excluding managerial and professional employees
who have not traditionally been award-covered, and employees in an
industry covered by a modern award who do not fall within a classification
in that award).
The Office of the Fair Work Ombudsman has reported only very limited
instances of becoming aware of gaps in modern award coverage: junior
lawyers in South Australia and the possibility that cleaners engaged by a
manufacturer to clean offices attached to the manufacturing plant may not
be covered by either the Manufacturing and Associated Industries and
Occupations Award 2010 or the Miscellaneous Award 2010 (in the case of
the cleaners, there is some doubt as to whether they were covered by a pre-
modernised award).
In the Department’s view, having consulted with the Office of the Fair
Work Ombudsman and the Fair Work Commission, the award
modernisation process (which consolidated more than 1500 awards into 122
industry and occupation modern awards) has achieved widespread coverage
of traditionally award-regulated employees, and any remaining gaps in
coverage are very much exceptions to the rule.59
2.62 The committee is encouraged by the Department's advice that the great
majority of instances of employees continuing to work under terms and conditions
which exclude penalty rates have been identified and brought under the modern award
umbrella where not otherwise covered. Nonetheless, in the interests of equity, the
committee recommends that the government task the Department and/or the Fair
Work Commission to provide advice on how best to identify non-managerial and non-
professional employees who continue to work outside the coverage of a modern
award, and bring them within that coverage.
59 DEEWR, additional information, received 11 February 2013.
28
Recommendation 1
2.63 The committee recommends that the government task the Department
and/or the Fair Work Commission to provide advice on how best to identify non-
managerial and non-professional employees who continue to work outside the
coverage of a modern award, and bring them within award coverage.
Non-compliance with requirement to pay penalty rates
2.64 The committee is also aware of media reports that hourly rates of $8 to $10
are not unusual among restaurant staff in Sydney and Melbourne, in spite of the
minimum wage being $15.96 per hour. Mr John Hart, representing Restaurant and
catering Australia is reported as estimating that 'about half' of restaurants and cafes in
Australia 'opt out' of regulations such as pay rates.60
2.65 It was also reported that:
The Fair Work Ombudsman, which polices the industry, makes a small
number of prosecutions each year. But it is drowning in complaints and
inquiries, which last year topped 52,000. It recovered wages owed to
around 1200 people working in the industry last year.61
2.66 The committee finds such reports deeply alarming, and explored the issue
more deeply at the Additional Estimates hearings in February 2013. Officials from the
Fair Work Ombudsman reported that:
If you look at the broad sector of accommodation and food services, which
takes in restaurant and catering, we identify it as a high-risk industry. It
makes up over 11 per cent of our overall complaints. In terms of the actual
contravention rates—so in terms of the complaints we receive and then in
what percentage do we find contraventions—we find nearly 60 per cent
contraventions. So it is certainly a sector that has our interest.62
2.67 On this basis, officials saw no reason to disagree with Mr Hart's reported
comments that about half of employers in the sector fail to comply fully with relevant
regulations.
2.68 It strikes the committee as being no wonder that some employers bemoan the
difficulty in achieving a reasonable return on their investment and labour, when they
face apparently widespread, unscrupulous competition employing labour at
significantly reduced rates.
2.69 When questioned on measures underway to tackle the problem, officials
detailed an active compliance program over recent years:
60 See, for example, Sydney Morning Herald, Wages of sin, 26 January 2013; The Age, Dishing
out pay of $8 an hour, 26 January 2013; The Age, Diners 'unwittingly fund hospitality
underclass', 18 January 2013.
61 The Age, Dishing out pay of $8 an hour, 26 January 2013.
62 Mr Ronson, Proof Estimates Hansard, 13 February 2013, p. 29.
29
We have commenced a three-year campaign on what we are calling the
hospitality sector. It is a targeted campaign that will be run in three waves.
The first wave has commenced and that relates to hotels, pubs, bars and
taverns. The second wave—and we have just begun the consultation with
key stakeholders—specifically relates to restaurants. That part of the three-
year campaign—we are in our second year—has commenced and the actual
audits of the companies are expected to commence in August this year.
…
[S]ince July 2009—since the Fair Work Ombudsman came into being—
because this sector is so high risk we have actually commenced 15
campaigns across that sector. We are continually, if you like, running
campaigns in various pockets. We believe that is one way of ensuring a
level playing field. It is a massive sector with many employers. In terms of
your question about current activities, there are some activities that have
just been completed. We conducted a campaign in the last two years
through the ACT sector. We are currently conducting compliance activities
in Sydney's west. We are continually looking at various pockets in various
areas that need our attention to ensure a level playing field.63
2.70 The committee commends the Fair Work Ombudsman on its initiative, and is
confident that efforts already on foot will have some positive impact. Nonetheless, it
is also apparent that the scope of the problem is very broad, and while it would be
unrealistic to expect total compliance across all employers, the committee remains to
be convinced that existing efforts will address the problem to an acceptable level.
Conclusion
2.71 Providing for the payment of penalty rates as compensation for working
unsociable hours and weekends has been a feature of Australian workplace regulation
for almost 100 years. Industrial tribunals at the state and federal level over time have
determined and reiterated the position that penalty rates should be provided to
employees to compensate for work in these circumstances, even as community
standards about the nature, frequency and extent of working hours have changed. 64
2.72 Current penalty rates, as specified in modern awards, largely reflect state
awards which were in place prior to award modernisation. They are not a new
entitlement, nor do they represent a significant departure from earlier award
protections.65
2.73 In the committee's view, DEEWR was correct when it summarised that the
bill:
…has the potential to result in greater complexity, uncertainty, discontent
and adverse financial outcomes for employers and employees, including as
63 Mr Ronson, Proof Estimates Hansard, 13 February 2013, pp 28–9.
64 Gas Employees Case (1919), 13 CAR, Higgins J.
65 Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations, Submission 418, p. 3.
30
employees seek employment where they will be provided with safety net
wages appropriate for the days and times they work.66
2.74 Overall, the committee was not presented with any compelling evidence to
support claims that small businesses in the retail, restaurant and catering industries are
suffering to the extent that workers’ wages should be reduced. Reliable data indicating
that the viability of small businesses is at particular risk as a result of the existence of
penalty rates is similarly absent. Neither anecdotal evidence, nor evidence from
unreliable surveys, should be used to justify a Bill which will substantially reduce the
wages of some of the lowest-paid working Australians.
Recommendation 2
2.75 The committee recommends that the Senate not pass the bill.
Senator Gavin Marshall
Chair, Legislation Committee
66 Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations, Submission 418, p. 9.
COALITION SENATORS'
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
1.1 Coalition Senators firmly believe that the determination of Modern Awards
should stay with the independent tribunal, the Fair Work Commission. We do not
believe that the Parliament should be in the business of legislating on each and every
Modern Award – rather, the Parliament should provide a safety net and then let the
tribunal work out the details.
1.2 However it is important that Fair Work Australia take a common-sense
approach to the current review and future reviews
1.3 Coalition Senators are concerned about reports that young Australians are
being priced out of the labour market.
1.4 Coalition Senators have always believed in a fair day's pay for a fair day's
work and that workers who work unsociable hours or long shifts should have that
acknowledged in their pay. We believe in reward for effort.
1.5 At the same time we are very cognisant of the practical problems being
experienced by small business and workers and we encourage Fair Work Australia to
take a pragmatic approach to these issues.
1.6 Coalition Senators support the comments of Tourism Minister the Hon.
Martin Ferguson MP, who stated that::
I hope the bench of Fair Work Australia has given proper regard to the
input of the tourism industry in this context [penalty rates] because I
understand that is the key issue to industry at this point in time.1
1.7 Nonetheless, Coalition Senators support recommendation 2 of the Report.
Senator Back Senator Bridget McKenzie
Deputy Chair
1 ABC News Online, 'Tourism minister backs penalty change push', 5 September 2012,
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-09-05/hopes-for-penalty-rate-
relief/4243724?section=business (accessed 1 March 2013).
SENATOR NICK XENOPHON'S
DISSENTING REPORT
1.1 Small businesses in Australia are an integral part of the very fabric of our
society and economy. They are the businesses which many Australians are first
employed by and they are the first to lend their support to local communities,
particularly in regional communities. According to the Council of Small Business
Organisations of Australia, as at 30 June 2011, 93 per cent of retail businesses were
small and 84 per cent of businesses in the accommodation, café and restaurant
industries were small.1
1.2 Unfortunately, small businesses face a multitude of challenges today. Patchy
consumer sentiment and spending, the high Australian dollar, increasing input costs
(particularly electricity costs) and increasing labour costs have all contributed to a
difficult operating environment. A benchmarking survey conducted by Restaurant and
Catering Australia revealed that 18 per cent of small restaurant and catering
businesses were closed on weekends - which equates to the loss of approximately
3000 jobs – due to the financial burden of paying penalty rates. Restaurant and
Catering Australia also revealed:
We expect that we have had further reductions in staff numbers, given that
70.9 per cent of the respondents to our survey… reported that they would
be further reducing staff numbers as wage costs increased. One-third of the
businesses also reported that they intended to close their businesses on
weekends or public holidays as a result of those increases in costs.2
1.3 The importance of small businesses cannot be underestimated, nor can their
vulnerability in a soft economy. The Fair Work Amendment (Small Business –
Penalty Rates Exemption) Bill 2012 (‘the bill’) aims to give small businesses
employing less than 20 people in the retail and hospitality sector an exemption from
paying penalty rates unless the employee has worked for more than 10 hours in a 24
hour period or 38 hours in the week.
1.4 There was some debate amongst submitters as to the accuracy of data presented
regarding labour market conditions. The Australian Council of Trade Unions agreed
that meaningful data collection is required:
Senator XENOPHON: You referred to some industry specific ABS data and
said you do not support the assertions of Restaurant and Catering from their
surveys. Do you think there is some useful work to be done to establish a
consensus as to what job losses there have been and how many businesses have
1 Council of Small Business Australia, Submission 352, p. 2.
2 Mr John Hart, Chief Executive Officer, Restaurant and Catering Australia, Proof Committee
Hansard, 7 December 2012, p. 30.
34
closed down on Sundays in that small business, restaurant and catering, and
retailing sector?...
Mr Lyons: We would never oppose the collection of meaningful data. It is
always better from an industrial participant's view and a public policy process
that we have all got the facts.3
Recommendation
1.5 That the Federal Government establish a mechanism to collect and
report on labour market conditions in a timely manner.
1.6 The bill seeks to recognise that Australia has moved away from the traditional
Monday to Friday work week and it is not uncommon for a 38 hour work week to
span weekends. Therefore the rationale for paying penalty rates on weekends which
form part of an ordinary 38 hour work week is less justifiable, particularly in the small
business context. The unique pressures on small businesses are reflected in the
provisions of this bill. It is not intended that the bill be extended in any circumstances
to businesses with more than 20 full time equivalent employees.
1.7 As was recently stated in the Sydney Morning Herald:
Economic growth without a significant population increase requires a
flexible workforce to be paid fair and affordable wages. When laws prevent
this and impose out-dated standards to the detriment of job creation and
higher incomes for all, it is time for modernisation.4
1.8 The Productivity Commission has provided valuable guidance in terms of
how to set penalty rates, explaining that:
In principle, penalty rates in awards should not be set in excess of the
minimum necessary to avoid unfair or unduly harsh treatment of
employees, and an efficient level of penalty rates would be one which is
just sufficient to induce people with appropriate skills to voluntarily work
the relevant hours. Some workers may be very comfortable with (or even
prefer) weekend and evening work and, for these people, the additional pay
incentive may not need to be as large as exists under the current penalty rate
structure. If work at existing penalty rates in keenly sought, this may also
be suggestive of those rates being higher than is necessary to compensate
workers for working at times that are inconvenient.5
1.9 It is clear from the submissions received and exchanges at the committee's
public hearing that the concept of penalty rates evokes a strong reaction from the
community. I welcomed the debate that took place because the reality is small
3 Senator Nick Xenophon and Mr Tim Lyons, Assistant Secretary, Australian Council of Trade
Unions, Proof Committee Hansard, 7 December 2012, p. 42.
4 Sydney Morning Herald, Editorial, 11 February 2013, p. 8.
5 Productivity Commission, Economic Structure and Performance of the Australian Retail
Industry, Report No. 56, 2011, p. 341.
35
businesses are struggling and something must be done to ensure these businesses
remain in operation and continue to provide jobs.
1.10 However, I was disappointed that of the 30-odd pages in the committee’s
majority report only four pages were dedicated to reflecting the arguments in favour
of the bill.
1.11 Furthermore calls for an additional hearing were not heeded by the committee.
Despite this I believe some valuable contributions have been made during the course
of the inquiry.
The concept of a weekend
1.12 This bill was introduced in order to acknowledge the changing nature of
business trading hours, and the special needs of small businesses and their employees.
It was argued by some that this bill sought to eliminate the concept of a weekend.
Unions NSW submitted:
Whilst there have been significant increases in business hours in the last 50
years, Unions NSW does not believe that this makes the concept of the
weekend or public holiday redundant.6
1.13 This position was countered by Restaurant and Catering Australia:
I point out that a number of the submissions made by the trade union
movement make some points about this bill abolishing the weekend as we
know it. That is far from the truth. This is nothing about abolishing the
weekend. What it is really about is ensuring that small businesses can
manage their business and have profitable operations. The only way to do
that is to make sure that the business model that they have is something that
actually works.7
1.14 Restaurant and Catering Australia continued:
When you have, in some cases, low-skilled employees on hourly rates of
over $45 an hour you can understand why these small business
entrepreneurs are concerned.8
1.15 As the Explanatory Memorandum states, the Fair Work Act and modern
awards do not (generally) recognise this shift towards a seven day week:
The intention of this bill is to allow small businesses in the hospitality and
retail sector… to remain true to the original intention of penalty rates while
avoiding the high cost burden during specific days of the week.9
6 Unions NSW, Submission 416, p. 6.
7 Mr Greg Parkes, Workplace Relations Director, Restaurant and Catering Australia, Proof
Committee Hansard, 7 December 2012, p. 30.
8 Mr Greg Parkes, Workplace Relations Director, Restaurant and Catering Australia, Proof
Committee Hansard, 7 December 2012, p. 30.
9 Explanatory Memorandum, Fair Work Amendment (Small Business – Penalty Rates
Exemption) Bill 2012, p. 2.
36
1.16 In fact, Mr John Hart, CEO, Restaurant and Catering Australia, told the
committee that since recent minimum wage increases some employers are now
'paying hourly wage rates during the week they used to pay employees inclusive of all
penalty rates under the pre-modern award system on Sundays'.10
He provided an
example of a casual waiter in Brisbane who in 2008 earned $17.87 an hour on
Sundays and in 2012 earns $25.93 an hour on Sundays. The same employee will now
earn $22.00 an hour Monday to Friday for shifts between 10am and midnight.
Recompense for working 'unsociable hours'
1.17 The Shop Distributive and Allied Employees' Association told the committee
about an analysis of Australian and international literature regarding the effect of
working unsociable hours:
For employees, the adverse effects include physical and mental health
problems, psychological distress, job satisfaction, poor work-life balance
and work-family strain. For families, there is a record of higher marital
discord and marital dissolution, more parenting stress, poorer education and
social outcomes for children, higher adolescent depression and anxiety,
poorer cognitive outcome and poorer mental health…11
1.18 Penalty rates were implemented in order to compensate the employee from
working unsocial hours and for the associated adverse effects listed above. However,
even more significant adverse effects could be attributable to a person who is not
employed. This bill seeks to prevent small businesses closing down and therefore to
allow workers to enjoy a regular income. This would have particular relevance to
employees who would find working on weekends more convenient, especially
university students.
1.19 The committee received a number of submissions from small businesses who
attributed rising labour costs as the reason fewer staff are employed and for shifts
being cut short. For example, multiple franchisees shared the views of this submitter:
I wish to provide my full support for the passage of this Bill through
Parliament as my labour costs have blown out since the introduction of the
Restaurant Industry Award regulated wages and penalty rates. Accordingly
I have cut back staff hours and employed less senior staff. If penalty rates
were abolished not only would my business be more viable on weekends I
would employ more staff and open longer hours. People expect us to be
open every day and night yet this can only be achieved if it is commercially
viable to trade through de-regulation of the mandatory penalty rates applied
under the Modern Industrial Award System.12
10 Restaurant and Catering Australia, Response to Question taken on notice, 7 December 2012
(received 14 January 2013).
11 Ms Daniela De Martino, National Industrial Officer, Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees'
Association, Proof Committee Hansard, 7 December 2012, p. 13.
12 The Coffee Club (Sandgate), Submission 946. See also Taco Bell Melton, Submission 949 and
Burroso's, Submission 933.
37
The current regulatory environment
1.20 A considerable amount of time was devoted to examining the current
regulatory environment and whether it was appropriate for the legislature to interfere
with the jurisdiction of Fair Work Australia.
1.21 The ACTU argued that:
If passed, this Bill would remove existing wages and entitlements that have
been determined by an independent tribunal established by the Parliament
for the purpose of determining such matters….There is no basis for
Parliament to override this process for a section of the economy.13
1.22 However, the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry disagreed:
The Committee will be aware that these businesses have a personal face.
They are largely micro businesses, many of whom are run by families and
owners (who) put in their own hours to keep open the doors. They sacrifice
time with their own families to run businesses during the day servicing the
demands of customers and consumers, only to return home at night to do
the paperwork. They run on tight margins and many have mortgaged their
own homes to take on a risk which ultimately provides for jobs in the
community. Small businesses should not be taken for granted and their
costs pressures, whatever their sources, need to be taken seriously and if
required, assisted by changes in the law.14
1.23 There were also concerns amongst small businesses that the objectives in
section 3 of the Fair Work Act 2009 do not afford sufficient protection to small
businesses. Restaurant and Catering submitted that:
The Fair Work Act also has in its objectives that there should be special
consideration of the needs of small- and medium-sized businesses. The
problem with the Fair Work Act and its objectives is that it does not go far
enough in relation to what looking after the special needs of small- and
medium-sized businesses means. We think this is an opportunity for the
Senate and the parliament to put something in place to help small
businesses continue on so that they evolve into larger and more profitable
businesses.15
1.24 It is therefore clear from a small business perspective that it is not only
desirable but necessary for Parliament to legislate for a more realistic operating
environment for small businesses. Given penalty rates have been a common feature in
Australia's labour market since the 1970s it is time that a review of their effectiveness
and suitability be undertaken particularly in the small business context.
1.25 With this in mind, any legislated changes must be phased in over a period of
five years in order to allow small businesses to make the necessary changes to their
13 ACTU, Submission 231, p. 3.
14 Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Submission 106, p. 6.
15 Mr Greg Parkes, Workplace Relations Director, Restaurant and Catering Australia, Proof
Committee Hansard, 7 December 2012, p. 30.
38
hiring and staffing arrangements. Consideration should also be given to whether new
arrangements for weekend work should apply to new employees only. However, it
must not be forgotten that there are small businesses already on a knife's edge, and
therefore must be given some form of relief in order to continue operating in the short
to medium term.
Recommendation
1.26 That the bill be passed with a five year phase-in period.
Senator Nick Xenophon
APPENDIX 1
Submissions received
1 Mrs Heather Smith
2 Name Withheld
3 Ms Pauline Morrison
4 Name Withheld
5 Mr Graeme Frappell
6 Name Withheld
7 Ms Marissa Ilsley
8 Mr Scott O'Keeffe
9 Ms Elspeth Gardner
10 Ms Michelle Fidock
11 Mr Dowon Cho
12 Mr Derek Page
13 Mr Roy Scaife
14 Ms Margaret Channon
15 Mr Grahame Saunders
16 Ms Jennifer Arrow
17 Mr Philip Lewis
18 Ms Sarah Thomas
19 Lindsay Thomson
20 Mr Michael Conway
21 Mr Michael Reid
22 Mr Richard Lourensz
23 Mr Goeffrey Kearney
24 Ms Suzanne Mammone
40
25 Mr Rory Chapple
26 Mr Graham Barr
27 Mr Rolando Blandon
28 Mr Doug McFarland
29 Ms Lisa Anderson
30 Mr Paul Lieu
31 Ms Diana Sully
32 Ms Ann Brita Nilsson
33 Mr Simon Gray
34 Mr James Watt
35 Ms Karen Sheridan
36 Mr Bernard Butler
37 Mr Jonathan Vincent
38 Mr Mark Cohen
39 Ms Stephanie Mathieson
40 Mr Scott Drennan
41 Ms Justine Fischer
43 Ms Rosalind Haining
44 Mr John Groppi
45 Ms Sharon O'Grady
Supplementary Submission
46 Ms Margaret Fooks
47 Mr Nigel Robertson
48 Mr Evin Donohoe
49 Ms Suzanne Russell
50 Ms Jennifer Reed
51 Mr Bernie Hynes
41
52 Mr James McAllister
53 Mr Rodney Jones
54 Lesley Douglass
55 Mr Webster Kyle
56 Mr Andrew Olsson
57 Mr Rob Pattison
58 Mr Scott Carriage
59 Mr Duncan Fairbairn
60 Ms Claire Firman
61 Mr David Dean
62 Ms Gloria Van Mosseveld
63 Ms Kay Hughes
64 Mr Alan Smith
65 Ms Sarah Rantall
66 Mr Brian Love
67 Leigh Rainbird
68 Mr Wayne Mawbey
69 Working Women's Centre SA Inc
70 Pay Justice Action
71 Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees' Association
Supplementary Submission 1
Supplementary Submission 2
Supplementary Submission 3
72 Ms Sharon Bennett
73 Australian Newsagents' Federation Ltd
74 APESMA
75 Australian Retailers Association
76 Ms Tracy Jones
42
77 Mr Gary Price
78 Ms Paula Hanson
79 Ms Helen Gollan
80 Ms Virginia Mansel Lees
81 Mr Mark Marcus
82 Mr David Tannahill
83 Mr Anthony Oldfield
84 Ms Heather Wallace
85 Mr Steve Kennewell
86 Mr James Gyngell
87 Mr Daniel Stone
88 Mr Peter Enge
89 Ms Audra Davies
90 Mr Karl Crisafulli
91 Ms Brigid-Ann Lord
92 Ms Muriel Grieve
93 Mr Peter Ridgewell
94 Mr Gary Brown
95 Ms Maria Lawson
96 Mr Paul Reiner
97 Mr Michael Lynn
98 Ms Jennifer Levett
99 Mr Ewan Cox
100 Mr Daniel Golden
101 Fouzia Aden
102 Mr Peter Shead
103 Mr Trevor Shell
43
104 Mr Steven Falivene
105 Mr Robert May
106 Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry
107 Victorian Employers' Chamber of Commerce and Industry
108 UnionsWA
109 Freedom Socialist Party
110 Name Withheld
111 Chamber of Commerce and Industry Queensland
112 Australian Catholic Council for Employment Relations
113 Job Watch Inc
114 Name Withheld
115 Small Business Development Corporation
116 Australian Federation of Employers and Industries
117 Ms Susan Jackson
118 Ms Ruth Boydell
119 Mr Phil Jones
120 Mr Phillip Vassallo
121 Ms Sue Brown
122 Ms Polly Walker
123 Mr Peter Francis
124 Mr Phil Grant
125 Kym Russell
126 Mr Douwe Goedhart
127 Mr Anthony Mcaleer
128 Ms Miriam Walter
129 Mr Jackson Black
130 Mr Michael Dowling
44
131 Ms Lisa Rush
132 Ms Janine Garrier
134 Mr Alistair Parr
135 Ms Leone Clough
136 Ms Carmen Thaller
137 Ms Anne Goodfellow
138 Ms Catherine Crittenden
139 Mr Matthew Holle
140 Ms Fiona Deegan
141 Ms Julie McDonald
142 Mr Anthony Beer
143 Mr Carlo Arena
144 Mr Tim Causer
145 Mr Michael Schembri
146 Gabriel Oriti
147 Mr Gerard D'souza
148 Mr Adam Deane
149 Mr George Piggins
150 Ms Emmy Capaan
151 Mr Ian Robinson
152 Mr Bob Elliston
153 Mr Paul Black
154 Mr Christopher Mcintyre
155 Mr Darren Dwyer
156 Ms Tanya Davis
157 Mr Anthony Nardella
158 Ms Wendy Dunn
45
159 Mr Jim Higgins
160 Mr Mark Taylor
161 Mr Robert Egan
162 Ms Kanticha Fumfuai
163 Mr Kevin Keane
164 Mr Bob Innis
165 Mr Simon Hickling
166 Mr Matthew Kamer
167 Mr Travis Chalkley
168 Ms Lynda Groom
169 Ms Georgina Kategiannis
170 Mr Jason Atkinson
171 Dieter Huber
172 Mr Scott Carruthers
173 Mr Ryan Collins
174 Ms Anna Bridle
175 Mr Shaun Mcquaid
176 Mr David Mcgrath
177 Mr David Bremner
178 Mr Ewdard Bacon
179 Ms Paula Houghton
180 Mr Mathew Sproule
181 Mitra Jovanovic
182 Ms Helen Bell
183 Andreas Gavriel
184 Mr Roberto Smythe
185 Mr Glen Mitchell
46
186 Mr Alan Gilbert
187 Mr Benjamin May
188 Mr Jason Egan
189 Mr Michael Eiberg
190 Mr Slobodan Angelkoski
191 Mr Denis Roscoe
192 Mr Ray Maybury
193 Ms Vicki Stirling
194 Mr Shane Stevens
195 Mr Martin Trama
196 Dzevad Ibric
197 Mr Warwick Rothacker
198 Mr Anthony Zagorc
199 Mr David Collard
200 Mr John Fitzpatrick
201 Ewhen Kowal
202 Mr Cameron Staples
203 Mr Byron Craig
204 Mr Chris Wilkinson
205 Mr Joe Worboys
206 Mr Mark Gilligan
207 Mr Doug Reckord
208 Mr Michael Agius
209 Mr Cameron Barnes
210 Balraj Singh
211 Ms Patrice Vallet
212 Students' Representative Council - University of Sydney
47
213 Mr Bernard Gallen
214 Ms Julie Vojneski
215 Mr Stephen Evans
216 Ms Mary Bond
217 Mr Trevor Dean
218 Mr Tony Lau
219 Ms Mandy Dempsey
220 Ms Carol Corless
221 Mr Brett Maddock
222 Mr Dave Packer
223 Ms Jenna Butturini
224 Mr Andrew Sidebottom
225 Mr Shane Oliver
226 Ms Melissa Buglar
227 Mr Patrick Cook
228 Mr Brenton Grocke
229 Mr Peter Howlett
230 Mr Bruce Hill
231 ACTU
232 Name Withheld
233 Mrs Sandra Bradley
234 Mr Garry Wilson
235 Mr Doug Kelly
236 Mr Daniel De Mol
237 Ms Jodi Hyde
238 Mr John Taylor
239 Mr Ian Rogers
48
240 Mr Michael Woods
241 Mr Sean McCourt
242 Mr Dave Butterworth
243 Mr Tim Mathews
244 Mr Tim Frazer
245 Mr William Fenner
246 Mr Graham Newell
247 Mr Matt Bantick
248 Mr Carl Kirwin
249 Mr Bernard Oliver
250 Mr Richard Stephenson
251 Mr Garry Laing
252 Heiko Viefhaus
253 Mr Graham Rogers
254 Mr Adrian Cummings
255 Mr Dave Chestnutt
256 Mr Terence O'Brien
257 Mr David Dixon
258 Mr Gavin Gillett
259 Mr Brian Cutler
260 Ms Sarah Brown
261 Mr Peter Cooke
262 Mr Wayne Dunseath
263 Mr David Taylor
264 Mr Aaron Meredith
265 Ms Glenys Kendal
266 Mr Milan Pupavac
49
267 Mr Peter Anderton
268 Mr Adam Bennett
269 Mr David Wilson
270 Mr Aaron Monks
271 Matan Lavi
272 Mr Brian Hastie
273 Mr Steve Lange
274 Mr Dave Stephens
275 Ms Linda Coyle
276 Ms Pauline Olson
277 Mr Gareth Davies
278 Dayna Knowles
279 Mr Karl Reed
280 Mr James Allen
281 Mr Rod MacLennan
282 Ms Joanne Bower
283 Mr Ian Dayman
284 Mr David Parsons
285 Mr Evan Winstanley
286 Shan Williams
287 Ms Kristy Youd
288 Mr Simon Bodfish
289 Mr Wayne Cobbing
290 Ms Maree Waters
291 Mr Jim Stirling
292 Mr Richard Leigh
293 Ms Andrea Garwood
50
294 Mr Michael Booth
295 Mr Craig Tate
296 Alex Donnelly
297 Kym Jones
298 Mr Daniel Wright
299 Vance Painter
300 Tracey Purcell
301 Mr Daniel Cohen
302 Mr David Wellmann
303 Ms Denise Barnett
304 Mr Rick Sullivan
305 Mr Alan Mcconnachy
306 Mr Richard Scarff
307 Ms Maria Dege
308 Ms Brenda Cawthorne
309 Mr Shane Daley
310 Ms Rebecca Ludwick
311 Robyn Moroney
312 Mr Joseph Harland
313 Mr Mick Fiolet
314 Alynn Pratt
315 Ms Debbie Ellis
316 Mr Kevin Nunn
317 Ashleigh Lustica
318 Australian Services Union
319 Ms Karina Morgan
320 Mr Stuart Grigg
51
321 Mr Jos Vandersman
322 Ms Melissa de Silva
323 Ms Gillian Joiner
324 Mr Denis Millar
325 Mr Peter Hood
326 Mr Ken Mayes
327 Mr Tony Brooks
328 Mr Matthew Drake-Brockman
329 Daryl Sandford
330 Mr Ron Chenoweth
331 Mr Tim Niven
332 Ms Janene Metcalfe
333 Ms Ellen Richardson
334 Ms Kirsty Burke
335 Alex Donaldson
336 Andries Combrinck
337 Ms Veronica Adolphe
338 Mr Andrew Olsson
339 Mr Robert Smith
340 Ms Lara Shanahan
341 Mr Greg Barker
342 Ms Sandra Murray
343 Mr James Hautot
344 Mr Geoff Browne
345 Mr Mick Bee
346 Mr Gavin Swayn
348 Ms Gillian Harrison
52
349 Mr Gregory Daly
350 Mr Peter Cartwright
351 Sharn Forsyth
352 Council of Small Business of Australia
353 Audrey and Tom McDonald
354 The Original Pancake Kitchen
355 Mr Neil White
356 Ms Denise Woolsey
357 Indiyum Restaurant Pty Ltd.
358 Sorelle Restaurant
359 Chocolate @ No. 5
360 Via Italia
361 Puccini's Restaurant
362 Pat Francis
363 Melvyn Cheal
364 Mr Carlos Van Nek
365 Mr Mark Bondfield
366 Mr Don Smith
367 Mr John Deacon
368 Mr Bill Shaw
369 Mr Russ Webb
370 Mr Luke Hays
371 Mr Micheal Puttock
372 Ms Karen Lewis
373 Ms Maria Riet
374 Ms Mel Rushby
375 Mrs Mary Madigan
53
376 Mr Brett Griffiths
377 Mr Tom Simpson
378 Ms Emily Flett
379 Cian O'Dwyer
380 Mr Steven Diston
381 Mr Dan Bourke
382 Mr Graeme Edgerton
383 Mr Edward Godwell
384 Vera Kaliczinsky
385 Mr Loukas Mavrikios
386 Ms Annette Wood
387 Nissanka Jayalal
388 Mr Max Popovic
389 Mr Steven Curren
390 Mr Keith Hailey
391 Mr Kirk Paterson
392 Mr Owen Bennett
393 Ms Tracy Roberts
394 Mr Andrew Mahar
395 Mr Phil Graham
396 Ms Joan Cottrell
397 Mr Ronald Maskell
398 Bernie Maxwell
399 Mr Tarek Soueid
400 Mr Bruce Campbell
401 Ms Ann Holmes
402 Ms Janice Poulson
54
403 Mr Jeff Cassar
404 Mr Evan Walters
405 Mr Daniel Conway
406 Mr Clinton Lewin
407 Mr Reindert Toia
408 Mr Nick George
409 Mr Shane Larson
410 Mr Tim Sezai
411 Mr Kevin Eagle
412 Mr Shane Van Heusden
413 Mr Russell Cavanagh
414 Mr Dale Menadue
415 Queensland Council of Unions
416 Unions NSW
417 United Voice
418 Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations
419 Australian Industry Group
420 Mr Greg Hollands
421 Mr Anthony Bray
422 Mr Gary Harrower
423 Sergio Schiessler
424 Kim Lindgren
425 Mr Glenn Jones
426 Mr Peter Faith
427 Mr Darron Hull
428 Mr Stephen Miller
429 Mr Roger Mcarthur
55
430 Mr Guy Henderson
431 Mr Randall Bowley
432 Ms Tamara Lawson
433 Mr Peter Cairns
434 Rangi Rewharewha
435 Ms Harriett Perry
436 Ms Wendy Haydock
437 Mr Graham Allen
438 Mr Shaun Wedekind
439 Mr Bob Rackemann
440 Ms Jennifer McNiven
441 Mr John Tully
442 Ms Gillian King
443 Mr Brian Mitchell
444 Mr Peter Macinnis
445 Ms Isobel Bobir
446 Ms Kate Morris
447 Ms Pauline Bleach
448 Mr Allan Forsyth
449 Ms Ellen Van Haren
450 Mr John Barnett
451 Ms Sandra Gore
452 Restaurant and Catering
Additional Information 1
453 Mr James McAllister
455 Ms Susan Horsley
456 Mr Rohan Lee
56
457 Ms Rachel Heinrichs
458 Mr Lawrence Caruana
459 Mr Daniel Vincent
460 Ms Deniese Lawson
461 Mr Dennis Gladman
462 Ms Jennifer Hickey
463 Ms Gill Jeffery
464 Mr Darin Broughton
465 Ms Susan de Bomford
466 Mr Don Tumilty
467 Mr Greg Page
468 Mr Ian MacLeod
469 Mr David Turnbull
470 Mr Steve Kenworthy
471 Mr Gerard Doorakkers
472 Ms Penelope Joy
473 Mr Ian Hopkins
474 Ms Jan Robinson
475 Mr Tim Boyanton
476 Ms Vicki Graham
477 Mr Jason Murphy
478 Mr Stephen Donaldson
479 Ms Margaret Foy
480 Ms Anne Revell
481 Mr Tony Bell
482 Ms Sandra Thapa
483 Mr Norman Heckenberg
57
484 Mr Geoff Hillier
485 Mr Michael Johnson
486 Mr Terry Neuendorf
487 Mr John Prpic
488 Maurice Perry
489 Ms Zoe Yates
490 Mr Gary Robertson
491 Chris Lalor
492 Mr Grahame Auston
493 Mr Justan Knoff
494 Ms Dawn Skelton
495 Mr Tim Tansey
496 Mr Alister Gehrmann
497 Mr Nick Lefkadiis
498 Ms Heather de la Motte
499 Ms Lynanne Butturini
500 Mr Michael Lee
501 Mr Bob Fawcett
502 Ms Maryanne Duggan
503 Mr Ross Paton
504 Ms Marie Stannus
505 Ms Jenny Papani
506 Mr Jason Clement
507 Ms Piquet Copeland
508 Mr John Keogh
509 Mr Greg Fleming
510 Mr John Mortlock
58
511 Mr Glen Humphreys
512 Mr Paul Lemist
513 Ms Carolyn Brookes
514 Ms Sandra Davenport
515 Mr Alan McEvoy
516 Mr James Harvey
517 Ms Rosemary Iacono
518 The Pharmacy Guild of Australia
519 Ms Louise Snowdon
520 Ms Kim Sayers
521 Mr Les Quinn
522 Mr Max Lloyd-West
523 Mr Barry Moore
524 Mr Stephen Keily
525 Mr Bill Whitehead
526 Ms Jen Midkiff
527 Ms Jewel Wheeler
528 Ms Jane Scott
529 Mr Julius Timmerman
530 Ms Jennifer Jinks
531 Mr Glen Smyth
532 Miguel Duran
533 Mr Timothy White
534 Ms Catherine Story
535 Mr Rob Vail
536 Lou Baxter
537 Ms Jill Loane
59
538 Mr Terrence Purdey
539 Mr Ross Harper
540 Queensland Nurses' Union
541 Mr Jeff Smith
542 Ms Tamara Stubbs
543 Mr Roger Cass
544 Ms Sally Morris
545 Mr John Carter
546 Mr Laurence McCurdy
547 Mr Jack Schwartz
548 Mr Craig Moyle
549 Mr Robert Tendelli
550 Mr Peter Robson
551 Ms Kim Grundy
552 Mr Bradley Crouch
553 Mr Tony Huxley
554 Mr Glen Camenzuli
555 Mr Chris Bradley
556 Mr Michael Tassone
557 Mr John King
558 Ms Claire Coller
559 Mr Thomas Males
560 Mr Terry Munday
561 Mr Anthony Johnstone
562 Mr Ian McCallum
563 Ms Alice Lydall
564 Terri Berends
60
565 MS Hannah Christensen
566 Mr Peter Brown
567 Ms Kathy Nash
568 Ioan Despi
569 Mr Gilbert Texier
570 Mr Ben Hockings
571 Mr John Ambrose
572 Mr Karl Olson
573 Mr Johnny Batchelor
574 Mr Scott Wilson
575 Pia Cerveri
576 Lee Constable
577 Ms Farah Sultani
578 Mr Peter Thurgood
579 Ms Verity Taylor
580 Mr Andrew Forrest
581 Mr Geoff Byron
582 Mr Bruce Charles Gale
583 Ms Leonie Dean
584 Ms Jane Cook
585 Ms Jo-Ann Davidson
586 Ms Amanda Spinks
587 Mr Peter Murphy
588 Mr David Anderson
589 Ms Donna Poulton
590 Ms Diane Smith
591 Ms Helen Macias
61
592 Ms Alyce Goodwin
593 Mr Martin Sun
594 Mr Rod Kippax
595 Mr Steve Robinson
596 Mr Charles Sowerwine
597 Mr Darryl Balks
598 Ms Jodie Stubbs
599 Mr Jason Wright
600 Synned Aborro
601 Mr David Stone
602 Mr Brett Holmes
603 Mr Paul Nudd
604 Mr Dallas Thompson
605 Mr Michael Avalos
606 Ms Monica Tribe
607 Ms Linda Lutherborrow
608 Ms Rhiannon Noltorp
609 Mr Ian Evans
610 Mr Phil Bonning
611 Mr Ewen Kloas
612 Ms Philippa O'Dowd
613 Mr Jack Schwartz
614 Mr David Henderson
615 Ms Carmen Blanco
616 Mr David Lewin
617 Mr Raymond Briggs
618 Ms Darlene Billett
62
619 Milkha Singh Dhaliwal
620 Ms Janet Roden
621 Mr Benjamin Newman
622 Ms Colleen` Enchelmaier
623 Ms Kate Boyd
624 Mr Graeme West
625 Ms Rosanna Kellett
626 Ms Patricia Galea
627 Kash Stha
628 Ms Jenny Douglas
629 Ms Simone Shaw
630 Kerry Emmett
631 Ms Jacquene Boyce
632 Ms Wendy Fogarty
633 Ms Dianne MacDougall
634 Ms Stephanie Cunio
635 Mr Greg Lilly
636 Mr Stephen Eldridge
637 Ms Melissa Dixon
638 Ms Marlene Palmai
639 Ms Anthea Sjoberg
640 Ms Trudy Hopkins
641 Mr James Scott
642 Ms Kathryn Cheney
643 Ms Glenys Serslev
644 Ms Cassandra Barford
645 Ms Lucinda Peters
63
646 Ms Kate Adams
647 Ms Victoria Busch
648 Ms Norma Buttriss
649 Ms Jennifer Thompson
650 Ms Belinda Hart
651 Ms Elizabeth Oak
652 Amit Parmar
653 Ms Sylvia Sullivan
654 Mr Glen Kellner
655 Ms Wendy Starr
656 Ms Lisa Sheens
657 Ms Linda Robertson
658 Ms Jane Skardon
659 Mr Colin Burke
660 Mr Matthew Gillman
661 Ms Mary Jenkins
662 Ms Elizabeth Hillian
663 Mr Robert Everitt
664 Ms Anne Maree Jack
665 Mr Don Lappin
666 Mr John French
667 Ms Jennie Claire McHalick
669 Ms Dianne Dryden
670 Ms Michelle Selden
671 Ms Michelle Mackintosh
672 Ms Kerrie Hay-Smith
673 Ms Kim Taylor
64
674 Ms Dianne Pritchard
675 Ms Regina Tomazetti
676 Ms Vicki King
677 Ms Brigita Feltham
678 Mr Stephen Knynenburg
679 Mr Brian Sweeney
680 Ms Nora Walker
681 Mr Norbert Pereira
682 Ms Anna Marie Mannion
683 Ms Kerrie Ellison
684 Mr Evan Gabriel
685 Ms Jenny Cossor
686 Ensieh Amini-Ghomi
687 Mr Geoffrey Ewin
688 Ms Jenny Holmes
689 Ms Christine Carson
690 Ms Danielle McDonald
691 Ms Trudie Laffan
692 Ms Elizabeth Maurer
693 Ms Bronwyne Bevan
694 Ms Julie Donoghoe
695 Ms Nicola Young
696 Ms Judy Moldenhauer
697 Ms Vicki Kell
698 Ms Michelle Sharp
699 Ms Anne Maggs
700 Ms Katrina Weir
65
701 Ms Jessica Gray
702 Ms Leigh Pfeiffer
703 Terry Head
704 Mr Brian Bruce
705 Ms Kim McIntyre
706 Gay Woodhouse
707 Ms Kayleen O'Reilly
708 Ms Jill Fisher
709 Morag Williams
710 Mr Russel Mills
711 Ms Sally Bamblett
712 Ms Lena Boshnyak
713 Ms Linda Hardman
714 Mr Gerard Oomen
715 Ms Robyn Forrester
716 Ms Eleanor Lord
717 Kitsa Talianas
718 MS Annmaree Geering
719 Ms Janice Lewis
720 MS Deborah Van Der Sluys
721 Mr Colin Gaul
722 Ms Kate Stewart
723 Ms Yvette Brouff
724 Ms Alison Nebart
725 Ms Donna Cook
726 Ms Mary Crichton
727 Ms Helen Grazek
66
728 Ms Ann Murphy
729 Ms Janet Tyrer
730 Ms Kay Stimson
731 Ms Colleen Evans
732 Ms Cheryl Pascual
733 Ms Therese Cameron
735 Ms Anne Parish
736 Ms Alena Ward
737 Mr John Watt
738 Ms Beth White
739 Mr Matt Ring
740 Ms Jenny Hughes
741 Ms Deborah Chant
742 Ms Simone Davis
743 Mr Kenneth Rule
744 Ms Dianne Smith
745 R. Warden
746 Ms Sandra Monger
747 Ms Sheila Cramer
748 Ms Lisa Woolfrey
749 Mr Mark Winn
750 Ms Mung No Cheng
751 Mr Nick Dunne
752 Mr Nick Abbink
753 A Gourmet Plate
754 Ms Lea Shannon
755 The Coffee Club
67
756 Cocolat Rundle St
757 Aztecmontezuma
758 Thyme Cafe Restaurant
759 Ed Dixon Food Design Pty. Ltd.
760 Penny Garden Restaurant
761 Shanikas Resturant
762 Donto Sapporo Japanese Restaurant
763 Vibe Waterfront Bar and Restaurant
764 The Burger Bar Noosa
765 Cafe Roma
766 Rigoni's Bistro
767 Gurpreet Singh
768 Coffee By Di Bella
769 George's Paragon Seafood Restaurant
770 Ms Robyn Fitzpatrick
771 Turret Cafe
772 Diva Tea and Coffee House
773 Lobethal Bierhaus
774 Michaels Brasserie, Narooma
775 Zouch Catering Group
776 Luciano Fabbri
777 Delish of Erina
778 La Grande Bouffe
779 Cafe Bettina
780 Wild Dog Winery
781 The Organic Market and Cafe
782 Assisi Cafe Ristorante
68
783 Mr Nick Ates
Supplementary Submission 1
784 Saltwater Cafe and Restaurant
785 Mr Robert L Wignall
786 Mr Marco Piat
787 Ms Joanne Tapiolas
788 Mr Peter Cianci
789 Cocina Restaurant
790 Betty Beans Coffee Emporium
791 Azure Cafe
792 Metro Cafe and Events
793 Bayleaf Catering
794 Aubergine
795 Guthega Alpine Inn
797 University Cafe
Supplementary Submission
798 Restaurant Le Paradis
799 Simpatico Bistro
800 The Boat House by the Lake
801 The Edge Food Store
802 The Currant Shed
803 Sesames Restaurants
804 Ms Amanda Yazbek
805 Grazing Restaurant
806 Treasury on King William
808 Angelo's On the Bay
809 Francesco Nardi
810 Port Geographe Tavern Pty Ltd
69
811 Mr John Toubia
812 Chabaar Restaurant
813 Mr Jeff Gale
814 Ms Janet Maclean
815 Cafe Delissio
816 Chillipadi Group
817 The Deli Bulimba
818 St Kilda Pier Kiosk and Little Blue Restaurant
819 Ms Shirley Thomas
820 Wine Odessey Australia
821 Big Fat Greek Bar and Grill
822 Iku Wholefood Kitchen Pty Ltd
823 Cafe Bambini JCU
824 Bram Leigh Receptions
825 Mr Stefano Rossi
826 Ms Cindy Halasz
827 Mr Jon Brady
828 Ms Lisa Parianos
829 Bon Aroma Restaurant
830 The Hobson Stores
831 Mr Vince Anello
832 Terrazza Cafe Restaurant and Pizzeria
833 Jam Corner
834 The South Melbourne Trader
835 Tuileries Restaurant Rutherglen
836 Mount Beauty Bakery
837 Sheldon Wearne
70
838 WineCountry Catering Pty Ltd
839 Qi'lin Restaurant
840 Ms Rosemary Portelli
841 Shehnai Tandoori Indian Restaurant
842 Harvest Restaurant
843 Mr George Issa
844 Caves Beachside Cuisine Pty Ltd
845 La Boheme Restaurant and Cafe
846 Pittstop Catering
847 Soda Sunlounge
848 Trigg Pizza
849 Soda Cafe
850 Cafe Bliss Kenmore
851 Harem Turkish Restaurant
852 The Old Vine
853 Cafe Sani
854 Imperial Peking Souths Juniors
855 Rustlers Steakhouse
856 Indian Tandoori Restaurant Albury
857 Mr Jonathan Burfurd
858 Columbia Cafe and Bar
859 Lido Cafe Restaurant
860 Shalini Carnevale
861 Mr Garry Griffin
862 Ms Doris Khan
863 Alex Allen
864 Phuoc Toan Nguyen
71
865 Mr Keith Rowlands
866 Fiasco Ristorante and Bar
867 Crave Catering
868 Weston Hospitality
869 Bushrangers Bar and Brasserie
870 Wasabi Restaurant and Bar
871 Lexie's on the Beach
872 Mr Tony Crowe
873 Ecucina Bar/Restaurant
874 Mr Simon McNamara
875 Ms Lisa Slaughter
876 Mr Stuart Lofthouse
877 Mr Harry Lambropoulos
878 Pure Espresso Pty Ltd.
879 George's Paragon Seafood Restuarant
880 MCA Restaurant, Circular Quay
881 Windy Point Restaurant and Cafe
882 The Bank Cafe and Espresso
883 The Marina Cafe Church Point
884 Oliver's on James Street
885 Renzo Deleonardis
886 Sauce Bar and Grill
887 Whet Restaurant
888 Da Vinci Ristorante Pizzeria
889 Lobethal Bierhaus
890 Mr Dennis Ruzzene
891 Ms Elizabeth Long
72
892 Sea Cow Restaurant and Take Away
893 Spice of Life Cafe Deli
894 Mr David Campbell
895 Delivino On Tamborine
896 Spaghetti Tree
897 Lemon Cafes Pty Ltd
898 Sails on the Lake
899 Qadisha Lebanese Catering
900 High Valley Wine and Cheese Co
901 Mr Gregory Lo Presti
902 Mr George Alexopoulos
903 The Coffee Club Tamworth
904 Pavilion by the Pier
905 The Aviator Lounge
906 Little India Bistro and Tandoor
907 Subsolo Restaurant
908 Jetty's Restaurant
909 The Coffee Club
910 Roadies Cafe
911 Sixty Seven Dining
912 Mr Jim Dimitropoulos
913 Montmartre by the Sea Cafe
914 Taco Bill
Supplementary Submission 1
915 Zest Waterfront Venues
916 Simply Sensational Catering and Events
917 Ms Susan Meadowcroft
73
918 Mr Peter Ford
919 Two Buoys
920 The Oysterbeds
921 The Olive Branch Cafe and Catering
922 Ms Ruby Minocha
923 Ms Belinda W Lai
924 Dish Cafe Parkes Radio Telescope
925 Sails on Lavender Bay Restaurant
926 Tokar Estate
927 The Coffee Club
928 Verve Cafe
929 Name not legible
930 Ms Sheree Allen
931 Salsa Bar and Grill
932 Mr Norm Frohnert
933 Borruso's
934 Domanis Cafe Restaurant and Bar
935 Amory Catering
936 Mr Cameron Taylor
Supplementary Submission 1
937 Abell's Kopi Tiam
938 Victorian Golden Roast
939 Vietdelites Restaurant
940 Name not legible
941 Luscious Affairs Toorak
942 Speciality Coffee and Smart Food
943 My Thai Restaurant
74
944 B. Goldfinch
945 The Coffee Club
Supplementary Submission 1
946 The Coffee Club
947 The Coffee Club
948 Stapletons Restaurant
949 Taco Bill Melton
950 Mr Michael Verga
951 Delight Foods Pty Ltd
952 Weston Restaurants
953 Seven Stones Restaurant
954 Ms Kim Richwol
Supplementary Submission 1
955 Mr Peter Gordon
Supplementary Submission 1
Supplementary Submission 2
956 Mr Rex Gordon
957 Mr Dave Ebert
958 Mr Christopher Christophidis
959 Perminder Thind
960 Ms Jullianne Thind
961 Casey Millikin Murray
962 Ms Elizabeth Horsburgh
963 Ms Judith Kwiatek
964 Ms Anna Halls
965 Ms Gillian Stubley
966 May Graham
967 Ms Vanessa Caval
968 Mr Luke Potts
75
969 Ms Rachel Pollard
970 Ms Michele Scarcella
971 Ms Diane Mood
972 Ms Grace Rae
973 Ms Jennifer Short
974 Ms Isabelle Hughes
975 Ms Helen Kearney
976 Mr Anthony Forrester
977 Ms Barbara Maguire
978 Gunilla Haydon
979 Mr Robert McDermott
980 Ms Jan Maskell
981 Ms Rose Oliphant
982 Ms Michelle Constance
983 Mr David Gannon
984 Ms Melissa Toms
985 Ms Ailsa Seguna
986 Cor Fillarca
987 Mr Stephen Macdonald
988 Mr William Mason
989 Nuala Fogarty
990 Mr Gareth Brown
991 Ms Vanessa Barahona
992 Ms Maree Ryan
993 Mr Mark Huxstep
994 Ms Angela Pridham
995 Ms Diane Ireland
76
996 Ms Beverley Hanna
997 Ms Felicity Rostron
998 Ms Jane Wright
999 Ms Colleen Thomas
1000 Ms Alley Kuttykrishnan
1001 Ms Katrina Koo
1002 Ms Jenni Sullivan
1003 Ms Annette Gilbert
1004 Ms Janine Wangemann
1005 Ms Amanda McGurgan
1006 Mr Ian Anderson
1007 Ms Elizabeth Browne
1008 Mr Victor Ayers
1009 Ms Roberta Elston
1010 Ms Margaret Earsman
1011 Ms Diane Swainson
1012 Ms Lucy Coll
1013 Ms Wendy Lance
1014 Ms Renae Toogood
1015 Ms Catharine Delfendahl
1016 Ms Linda Patterson
1017 Ms Bronwyn Mascord
1018 Fatema Islam
1019 Mr Tony Heathwood
1020 Mr Graham Wardell
1021 Ms Katy Hunt
1022 Lea Collins
77
1023 Ms Gina Parslow
1024 Ms Fiona Millington
1025 Ms Lauren Palmai
1026 Ms Kathryn Powell
1027 Ms Helen Teakel
1028 Ms Katrina Austin
1029 Ms Pushpaleela Puhenthirar
1030 Solange Villagran
1031 Mr Shane Leonard
1032 Mr Stephen Carey
1033 Sumit Singh
1034 Mr Daniel Carey
1035 Ms Alana Darmanin
1036 Ms Robyn Laurenson
1037 Ms Carol Donaldson
1038 Ms Beverley Breeze
1039 Ms Ang Roach
1040 Ms Felicity Kleu
1041 Ms Emma Schaefer
1042 Ms Gail Dwyer
1043 Ms Sarah Bovington
1044 Ms Jess Miller
1045 Ms Emma Pollock
1046 Ms Anna Benn
1047 Nirav Thakker
1048 Ms Christine Lee
1049 Ms Maria Baker
78
1050 Mr Jim Dow
1051 Attaullah Jan
1052 Ms Deborah Reid
1053 Ms Narelle Zappas
1054 Ms Marina Cheung
1055 Ms Sarah Smythe
1056 Mr Stuart McKiernan
1057 Ms Deidre Guthrie
1058 Mr Paul Riviere
1059 Mr David Nielsen
1060 Ms Fiona Ostini
1061 Phemelo Pitso
1062 Mr Gordon Blair
1063 Mr Karl Amos
1064 Ms Hayley Butler
1065 Paulo Gomes
1066 Ms Patricia Roberts
1067 Ms Heather Kenny
1068 Mr Lucas Turner
1069 Ms Flor Gonzaga
1070 Ms Donna Leaon
1071 Ms Sherry Brown
1072 Ms Jessica Johnston
1073 Kerry Rees
1074 Ms Marisa Carney
1075 Ms Lyn Gumm
1076 Mr Peter Stein
79
1077 Ms Ainslie Mansell
1078 Ms Valerie Patterson
1079 Watson Johny
1080 Ms Mary Salmon
1081 Mr Clinton Beale
1082 Ms Eileen Mcallister
1083 Ms Laura Velm
1084 Ms Heidi Anderson
1085 De Pedro Mary Joy
1086 Ms Annette Drapalski
1087 Ms Catherine Smith
1088 Mr Ron Peterson
1089 Ms Lauren Farmer
1090 Ms Linda Harvey
1091 Mr Craig Small
1092 Robyn Atherton
1093 Ms Leah Bunyan
1094 Ms Susan Wardle
1095 Ms Noeleen Lennon
1096 Mr Thomas Swift
1097 Ms Elizabeth Metz
1098 Ms Kathryn Mussing
1099 Zarko Djekic
1100 Ms Cheryl Cassell
1101 Sorell Masters
1102 Mr Rhys Goodwin
1103 Ms Susan Vaughan
80
1104 Ms Rachel Upton
1105 Rameshwar Reddy Gamannagari
1106 Ms Jennifer Clarke
1107 Ms Jacqueline Price
1108 Ms Daphne Burrows
1109 Ms Gloria Albert
1110 Mr Andrew Tracey-Smith
1111 Mr Peter Cameron
1112 Mr Matthew Bradfield
1113 Ms Nicoletta Zuydervelt
1114 Ms Lauren Dickson
1115 Ms Roslyn Dennett
1116 Ms Lesley Miller
1117 Ms Holly Allen
1118 Ms Christine Ibbett
1119 Ms Karen Eddie
1120 Ms Nicole Winkley
1121 Mr David Harris
1122 Ms Melanie Dickmann
1123 Ms Margaret Gissing
1124 Ewan Gemmell
1125 Ms Katie Loffler
1126 Ms Kate Lone
1127 Mr John Elfes
1128 Ms Bronwyn Cox
1129 Ms Kate Carbines
1130 Ms Jane Martin
81
1131 Ms Trisha Brisley
1132 Nargis Abram
1133 Ms Joanne Esposito
1134 Ms Anne Woodward
1135 Ms Kerrie Wheeler
1136 Mr Giles Patterson
1137 Ms Karen Fazzari
1138 Ms Nancy Carey-Berryman
1139 Ms Melanie Edmonds
1140 Ms Carole Durnan-Silva
1141 Mackay Daniel
1142 Mr Wayne Pearson
1143 Mr Thanduxolo Gogwana
1144 Mr John Sowerby
1145 Ms Jackie Cheal
1146 Mr Greg O'Reilly
1147 Ms Lea MacDonald
1148 Ms Kim Baker
1149 Ms Jill Telfer
1150 Ms Janine Woods
1151 Ms Susan Payne
1152 Ms Jeni McRae
1153 Mr Aaron Ryan
1154 Ms Geraldine Callaghan
1155 Ms Vicki Duff
1156 Mr Doug Reckord
1157 Ms Hilda Saumatua
82
1158 Ms Lyn Ingram
1159 Mr Luke Simmonds
1160 Mr David Minutello
1161 Ms Barbara Page
1162 Mr Rowan Payne
1163 Mr Mark Powell
1164 Eli Candani
1165 Ms Louise Christie
1166 Ms Ann Shoobridge
1167 Ms Maree Backhouse
1168 Ms Kara Altschwager
1169 Ms Linda Dow
1170 Namuna Dharel
1171 Ms Deborah Delany
1172 Ms Tracey Fuller
1173 Ms Wendy Noble
1174 Ms Judy Nikola
1175 Ms Eileen Hetherington
1176 Ms Gail Latham
1177 Ms Elizabeth Algie
1178 Genesis Gurierrez
1179 Ms Elizabeth Eglington
1180 Ms Lisa-Jane Shilling
1181 Mr Russell Cook
1182 Mr Patrick Steel
1183 Mr Stephen Pennells
1184 Ms Liz Schroeder
83
1185 Mr Graeme Stoner
1186 Ms Jan Gerhardt
1187 Mr David Wadling
1188 Ms Leonie Dean
1189 Mr Brenden Hatton
1190 Mr Brad Tito
1191 Mr Ryan Terry
1192 Vilma FitzGerald
1193 Mr Shaun Furber
1194 Ms Helen Sheehan
1195 Ms Maree Klafas
1196 Mr Bernhard Racz
1197 Ms Pavla Munclinger
1198 Ms Maree Purvis
1199 Ms Deborah Grover
1200 Ms Diane Green
1201 Alex Holewa
1202 Ms Jeanette Creedon
1203 Ms Justine Lau
1204 Mr Brendan Frost
1205 Mr Nick Whiting
1206 Ms Isobel Brown
1207 Mr Raymond Pastoors
1208 Mr Stephen Kernohan
1209 Ms Kathrine Grover
1210 Ms Liz Henigan
1211 Mr Jason Smith
84
1212 Valdis Berzins
1213 Pfitzner Jocelyn
Additional information received
1 Document tabled by Shop, Distributive and Allied Employee's Union on 7
December, 2012.
2 Documents tabled by Shop, Distributive and Allied Employee's Union on 7
December, 2012
3 Additional information provided by Department of Education, Employment
and Workplace Relations on 11 February, 2013.
Responses to questions taken on notice
1 Response to questions on notice from Shop, Distributive and Allied
Employees' Association received 21 December, 2012.
2 Response to questions on notice from the Department of Education,
Employment and Workplace Relations received 11 January, 2013.
3 Response to questions on notice from Australian Chamber of Commerce and
Industry received 14 January, 2013.
4 Response to questions on notice from Australian Council of Trade Unions
received 14 January, 2013.
5 Response to questions on notice from Restaurant and Catering received 16
January, 2013.
APPENDIX 2
Witnesses who appeared before the committee
Melbourne, Friday, 7 December 2012.
ANGRELLI, Ms Marie, Member, United Voice
BREEN, Mr Adrian, Senior Executive Lawyer, Department of Education,
Employment and Workplace Relations
BURNLEY, Ms Sue-Anne, National Industrial Officer; Shop, Distributive and Allied
Employees' Association
CLANCY, Mr William Richard, Executive Director, Industry Policy and Workplace
Relations, Victorian Employers' Chamber of Commerce and Industry
DE MARTINO, Ms Daniela, National Industrial Officer; Shop, Distributive and
Allied Employees' Association
HART, Mr John, Chief Executive Officer, Restaurant and Catering Australia
LYONS, Mr Tim, Assistant Secretary, Australian Council of Trade Unions
MAMMONE, Mr Daniel, Director of Workplace Policy and Director of Legal Affairs,
Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry
MOREHEAD, Dr Alison, Group Manager, Workplace Relations Policy, Department
of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations
MOREY, Mr Mark, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Unions New South Wales
PARKES, Mr Greg, Workplace Relations Director, Restaurant and Catering Australia
STRONG, Mr Peter, Executive Director, Council of Small Business Organisations of
Australia
TARRANT, Ms Louise, National Secretary, United Voice
WEBER, Miss Lucinda, Industrial Officer, Australian Council of Trade Unions