Thread: help needed to save our manufacturing.

I will ask again , what dollar figure should wages be. There have been several posts justifying individual pay. That is fine ,but the continual mantra of high wages are causing the downfall of the economy , never seems to set any figures as to what the rate of decrease should be. At 19 per hour am I over , under or about right in pay. I am a delivery driver/storeman. What is a fast food worker really worth or a truck driver ? Basic rates not loading screen etc.

Wages, Good post Trog,...I'll be interested in the responses you achieve.
wages,.."Penalty Rates"?...I was talking to a local shop owner yesterday, who is open 7 days a week. Asked the owner how business was going & does he have to pay penalty rates over the W.E.?...to which his answer was yes, I asked him could he afford to pay them, he said no, unless he opens at a loss. So I asked him how He still manages to opens., he said, well to avoid operating at a loss, he simply employs less staff,...
That is right from the horses mouth, and also what has been said in the press. Many businesses cannot profitably afford to pay 2-3 times rates, so they either do not open,...or as in the case of my example, they employ less staff.....so either way, also as has been stated in the press, exhorbitant penalty rates ARE costing jobs.
Frantic, I don't know the situation in your sphere,....so can you guys obtain 2-3 times normal rates for W.E. work?
Pickles.

Wage rises seem to be averaging about 2.5% at the moment in the examples I've noticed, so that is hardly excessive, particularly when we now know that economic growth is 3.1%.
As for penalty rates at weekends and nights, employers have made the situation worse by making about 40% of workers casual, so those workers are desperate to make enough to pay their bills, given that they don't know from week to week how much work they will get, so they usually can't get mortgages to buy houses.
If employers want to restrain penalty rates they need to offer their workers more security in their employment. One way is to trade off penalty rates for more fulltime or permanent part-time work.
It's not always about money. I have a relation who is a student and she can only work up to about 25 hours a week, but she needs that work to be regular and predictable. Either she gets enough money on normal pay rates, or she needs penalty rates to make a similar amount from night and weekend work. A smart employer would put her on a regular roster to suit both their needs, making her happy and less likely to seek a different job. Everyone would gain from that.
Nurses and people in similar jobs are another example. Often its the regularity of their work which is most important to them, and they need the penalty rates to reduce the uncertainty about where their dollars are coming from.
In my case, we do extra unpaid work in exchange for extra holiday days off. Everyone is happy with that.
There are lots of people who would trade off penalty rates for enough work at regular rates, if they were given the chance by smart bosses.
Workers do have choices. Historically, unemployment rarely falls below about 5%, so that is effectively full employment. Below that, bosses can't get enough workers. Money is not usually the main reason people leave their jobs. Workers who are treated fairly usually stay in their jobs and happy workers work better than unhappy ones.

The western Australian experience showed dropping penalty rates had no longer term effects on employment rates.. So where is your proof that taking money away from those least able to afford it fixes the problem because proof is pretty thin on the ground....

It's interesting to analyse these claims about "not being able to afford penalties" by many business owners.
Some are absolute bunkum, as a CBD coffee shop has far fewer customers on a weekend compared to a tourist zone or shopping centre and even with people working for $4/hour would struggle to make a profit!!.
Now go to a tourist area and watch the coffee shop numbers on mon-friday, then go back on a nice weekend and watch the traffic double, or quadruple in certain places. Locally a perfect example would be most of the shops in Kiama and Berry. With Berry in particular deserted on a weekday yet people lined out the door once a month during the markets.

As to "employing more staff" proof is in the pudding. A vast majority of our merchant fleet is gone , forced out by FOC ships with foreign crews on a flat basic international wage that is only paid whilst their onboard. Not one of those ships has any more crew than a similar sized Australian merchant vessel, actually many have less. Most western vessels including Australia have a rostered on and off crew usually working even time, as do the Captain , mates and Engineers of FOC vessels. The crew or labour on most FOC ships have no relief so do 6months-2.5years with a very short break back home.

Wages should be based on cost of living. Now with increases in health care, housing and food, wages should keep pace. i am not saying every man and his dog should be able to afford a home in potts point, but a family should be able to repay a reasonable house,within a realistic commute to work, eat and meet the bills on the average wage.
So ill turn the question around , Trog is your wage adequate for your needs?
Would about $800/week before tax( about $693 afterhttp://www.vincents.com.au/tools-resources/tables-litigation/nsw/after-tax-weekly-income-ready-reckoner) feed , clothe, and house you?
Would that figure cover medical, power and car costs?

How about we break that down in my "flashy" postcode of 2530. One of the least expensive in Illawarra and 1.5-2.2hrs from Sydney
2-3 bedroom house or flat $3-400/week rent or buy from about $350k http://www.realestate.com.au/rent/in...Sort=price-asc
Transport. $150/week on a car(rego $25/week comp insurance $15-20 fuel $60 for basic running around $50 for tires and servicing )
plus Train fare as 20,000 commute from illawarra to sydney for work each day $55/week.
Bills like power, water, gas, rates? $70-100/week
Now the total is around $670 which leaves you $23 to eat each week, if there is a dependent, $11.50 each on food a week

If you get sick or your dependant/s incur a medical bill, your stuffed.


To directly answer Pickles question, yes I work weekends for penalty rates,and do regular overtime for penalty rates without which i would not have been able to afford the medical devices and coverage that have REPEATEDLY saved my daughter and sons life.
Without those rates i possibly would never have owned or built a house or could have been forced to sell it to cover certain bills and would most definitely not have my defender, but would instead be driving around in an older appliance AKA a toyota camry.
Now lets see if pickles will answer? How many loans did you give to people who where paid penalty rates, and with out those would not have had any chance of getting a loan?

Originally Posted by frantic

It's interesting to analyse these claims about "not being able to afford penalties" by many business owners.
Some are absolute bunkum, as a CBD coffee shop has far fewer customers on a weekend compared to a tourist zone or shopping centre and even with people working for $4/hour would struggle to make a profit!!.
Now go to a tourist area and watch the coffee shop numbers on mon-friday, then go back on a nice weekend and watch the traffic double, or quadruple in certain places. Locally a perfect example would be most of the shops in Kiama and Berry. With Berry in particular deserted on a weekday yet people lined out the door once a month during the markets.

As to "employing more staff" proof is in the pudding. A vast majority of our merchant fleet is gone , forced out by FOC ships with foreign crews on a flat basic international wage that is only paid whilst their onboard. Not one of those ships has any more crew than a similar sized Australian merchant vessel, actually many have less. Most western vessels including Australia have a rostered on and off crew usually working even time, as do the Captain , mates and Engineers of FOC vessels. The crew or labour on most FOC ships have no relief so do 6months-2.5years with a very short break back home.

Wages should be based on cost of living. Now with increases in health care, housing and food, wages should keep pace. i am not saying every man and his dog should be able to afford a home in potts point, but a family should be able to repay a reasonable house,within a realistic commute to work, eat and meet the bills on the average wage.
So ill turn the question around , Trog is your wage adequate for your needs?
Would about $800/week before tax( about $693 afterhttp://www.vincents.com.au/tools-resources/tables-litigation/nsw/after-tax-weekly-income-ready-reckoner) feed , clothe, and house you?
Would that figure cover medical, power and car costs?

How about we break that down in my "flashy" postcode of 2530. One of the least expensive in Illawarra and 1.5-2.2hrs from Sydney
2-3 bedroom house or flat $3-400/week rent or buy from about $350k Real Estate & Property For Rent?in NSW 2530 (Page 1) - realestate.com.au
Transport. $150/week on a car(rego $25/week comp insurance $15-20 fuel $60 for basic running around $50 for tires and servicing )
plus Train fare as 20,000 commute from illawarra to sydney for work each day $55/week.
Bills like power, water, gas, rates? $70-100/week
Now the total is around $670 which leaves you $23 to eat each week, if there is a dependent, $11.50 each on food a week

If you get sick or your dependant/s incur a medical bill, your stuffed.


To directly answer Pickles question, yes I work weekends for penalty rates,and do regular overtime for penalty rates without which i would not have been able to afford the medical devices and coverage that have REPEATEDLY saved my daughter and sons life.
Without those rates i possibly would never have owned or built a house or could have been forced to sell it to cover certain bills and would most definitely not have my defender, but would instead be driving around in an older appliance AKA a toyota camry.
Now lets see if pickles will answer? How many loans did you give to people who where paid penalty rates, and with out those would not have had any chance of getting a loan?

No worries Frantic. My example of Penalty rates was right from the horses mouth, not a friend of mine, nothing like that, just someone running a local small business, who gave me a direct answer when I asked,.."No, I can't afford to pay penalty rates 2.5-3times, so I just employ less staff". There would be many like him.
Lending to customers? Mate, I did very little "lending", I was mostly involved in "collecting" money from customers who couldn't pay,...so I saw tens of thousands of loans over my career. And guess what, in many instances, the reason why the customer couldn't pay was because the income figures they gave at inception of the loan were incorrect, mostly because they did not disclose ALL of their commitments, making it impossible for us to establish an "ability to service",....Of course you don't find out all of this stuff until the loan goes bad,...at which time the truth comes out.
On your question of income/penalty rates etc. Well in my time, it wasn't so much penalty rates it was overtime. Normally we wouldn't take the overtime into account,...."base net take home pay" was what we looked for, but if the customer explained how his job worked and that regular overtime was normal & likely to continue for the term of the loan, we would seek confirmation from the employer. But in answer to your question,no, we would not normally rely upon penalty rates/overtime, because if such was not available, or cut etc, then obviously an ability to service was not there.
Pickles.

Originally Posted by Pickles2

No worries Frantic. My example of Penalty rates was right from the horses mouth, not a friend of mine, nothing like that, just someone running a local small business, who gave me a direct answer when I asked,.."No, I can't afford to pay penalty rates 2.5-3times, so I just employ less staff". There would be many like him.
Lending to customers? Mate, I did very little "lending", I was mostly involved in "collecting" money from customers who couldn't pay,...so I saw tens of thousands of loans over my career. And guess what, in many instances, the reason why the customer couldn't pay was because the income figures they gave at inception of the loan were incorrect, mostly because they did not disclose ALL of their commitments, making it impossible for us to establish an "ability to service",....Of course you don't find out all of this stuff until the loan goes bad,...at which time the truth comes out.
On your question of income/penalty rates etc. Well in my time, it wasn't so much penalty rates it was overtime. Normally we wouldn't take the overtime into account,...."base net take home pay" was what we looked for, but if the customer explained how his job worked and that regular overtime was normal & likely to continue for the term of the loan, we would seek confirmation from the employer. But in answer to your question,no, we would not normally rely upon penalty rates/overtime, because if such was not available, or cut etc, then obviously an ability to service was not there.
Pickles.

Rofl, have you been retired for?
Every financial institution that I've seen, and my father, over 40 years in building, from the biggest bank to the small local credit union has since well before i started work used a persons full annual income, be they a day worker, or a permanent shift worker, to asses their lending!
But even if you "occasionally, under special circumstances" used a persons penalty rates to give a loan, you indirectly have benefited from those!
Also another benefit you got from penalty rates/overtime is when those in default found extra money to pay the loan by working overtime/weekends, which in turn provided for your job, boosting collection rates.

Nope Frantic.
"Full annual income" is useless. Too many variables,..tax, super, other "company deductions", all come off that, & how would we know what they were?..."Full Annual Income" may look brilliant,...but mate, it's the net income in the pay packet, what our potential borrower gets IN THE HAND, "to take home" from which our proposed commitment is to be made, is what we look at.
You would be amazed how much more "realistic" "take home pay" is.
Disagree on your penalty rate "theory". As I've said, penalty rates are costing jobs, that has been in the press, and I've quoted you an example that I've confirmed locally. Now, if penalty rates weren't so heavy, maybe those people who are now working less hours, would still be working, and more able to meet "their" commitments,...there's two sides to what you're saying.
Pickles.