The bundle of behaviours called wage theft refers to employer non-compliance with minimum standards in base wages, loadings, overtime or superannuation. While widespread, wage theft is not gender neutral. The behaviour involved most commonly and most significantly affects low paid employees in part-time and casual work—all groups in which women predominate.
The Government has recently issued a Discussion Paper canvassing penalties for wage theft. However, in our view neither the discussion paper nor the proposed remedies came to terms with the extent and implications of non-compliance with legal wage and entitlements requirements. For this reason, we welcome the opportunity offered by this Inquiry to extend the national conversation on wage theft beyond the limited proposals raised in the discussion paper.
Wage theft is endemic in Australia and a contributor to the persistent low wage growth undermining the national economy (McKenzie, 2018). It has a massive direct impact on employees who lose entitlements (on average $10,789 for each affected employee) and costs taxpayers over $600m annually (PwC, 2012, iii).
The Minister for Women has done a gallant job of extracting some money from the Government for women. However, $109 million over 4 years is roughly $26m a year. You cannot do much to increase women’s economic security on an investment of around $26m a year. You have to pad it out with old budget initiatives and do what you can on the cheap.
This submission briefly addresses the gender segregation issues identified in the first three terms of reference. The issues identified in those sections are expanded upon and addressed in detail under the last two terms of reference, which discuss approaches to gender segregation and suggested remedies.
Commentson Selected Recommendations of the 2017 report of the Senate Finance And Public Administration Committee concerning Gender Segregation In the Workplace. We appreciate Labor’s invitation to put our views on the matters identified in the consultation paper. Our commentary below is numbered to mirror the sections of the consultation paper to which it responds.
The National Foundation for Australian Women (NFAW), a non-politically aligned feminist organisation, in conjunction with experts from a range of women’s organisations, has prepared this submission to the Productivity Commission’s (the Commission) inquiry into the workplace relations framework.
The Commission’s draft report argues that ‘a sound workplace relations system must give primacy to the wellbeing of employees (and would-be employees), and take account of community norms about the fair treatment of people
The origins of the NFAW role lay in the process of national consultations with women and their organisations during 2006 and 2007 on the impacts on their working lives of the former Government’s changes to the industrial relations system (WorkChoices). In consequence early NFAW discussions about a national system of paid maternity or paternity leave were framed around industrial relations policy.
