Disappointing Results !

The argument used when Fair Trading was reviewing penalty rates for weekend work was that Australia had embraced the 24/7 economy and that these wage surcharges were preventing many businesses from weekend trading.   It was reasoned that if they were abolished there would be a jobs bonanza !

Fair Trading bought that argument and penalty rate reductions are being incrementally applied.  The first round of three five percent cuts came into force in June.  The Business Council applauded and contended that working on a Sunday was not more " unsociable " than working on a Saturday.   There was the expectation that many business which closed on weekends would have a change of mind and grasp this business opportunity.

Sadly, that has not happened.  A joint survey of  1351 workers by the University of Wollongong and Macquarie University deliver surprising results.  It found that fifteen percent of retail workers who were employed on Sundays worked nine percent fewer hours between June and July, while hospitality workers experienced no change in their hours.

These results confirm a statistically significant decrease in the proportion of award employees working on Sundays between June and July 2017.   This is in sharp contrast to the hypothesised outcome predicted when the award was changed.

No doubt both sides of politics will use these figures to score points, but most realists would see it as a predictable outcome.  Some would sheet these negative results to the " wait and see syndrome ".   There are many  aspects the average business owner would consider before making such a monumental change.

For a start, those closing on a Sunday have the benefit of at least one day of rest a week.  That is not given up lightly and penalty rates are not abolished, merely reduced - with more to come in the future.   That seems a good reason to delay a decision on expanded weekend trading.  We are also very much creatures of habit.   If a business is returning an adequate profit the incentive to open for longer hours has less appeal.

Then there is the bond with long serving retail staff.  Any employer values the services of people who do their job well and regularly turn up on time.  Delivering a pay cut for longer hours is something some employers may abandon in the interests of continuity - at least in this first, minor stage.

We may also be seeing a change in the staffing of what may be termed " family businesses " - where the spouse and children of the owner are the workers.  Rarely do such people get paid at award rates and the prospect of cheaper casual labour may lead to extended trading hours or weekend opening, but not until full rate reductions are in place.

The most logical conclusion is that this survey has been taken far too soon, and that the results of this wage change will take a lot longer to filter through the general economy.