Same Job Same Pay

[red750]

I won't comment. I'll leave it to you to state your opinion on the proposed new law.

[octave]

Here is some info

 

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/jun/05/will-labors-same-job-same-pay-bill-hurt-more-experienced-workers-experts-respond

[old man emu]

Here is an example of how I see the process operating. Let's look at the employment of a Registered Nurse in an aged care facility.

 

Nurse 1 has been employed directly by the management of the facility, which has examined the nurse's skill levels and experience in the tasks peculiar to aged care. As a result, management and the nurse have entered into a salary and conditions agreement, with the starting salary point based on an agreed Industrial award.

 

Nurse 2 has joined an agency through which the nurse obtains short-term placements, usually to fill temporary vacancies where people like Nurse 1 take leave for various reasons. The salary and conditions agreement Nurse 2 has is with the agency, and may be based simply on the fact that Nurse 2 is a legally registered by the Nursing and Midwifery Board of Australia. That salary might not take into account the experience, if any Nurse 2 has in the field of aged care. Therefore, Nurse 1 applies for holiday leave. The facility management needs a "registered nurse" to fill in while Nurse 1 is away because it is a requirement of their business registration that a registered nurse is on hand. Management contacts the agency and simply asked to hire a registered nurse, and Nurse 2 is assigned.

 

Nurse 2 is replacing Nurse 1,  but Nurse 2 might not have the skill levels and experience of Nurse 1, on which Nurse 1's employment agreement are based. Therefore it is fair that the employment agreement Nurse 2 has with the agency is based at least on that industrial award, not on an amount that the agency has set based on the award, minus the agency's costs, which would make Nurse 2's salary less than the award rate.

[Jerry_Atrick]

I don't know how it works in Australia (well, I sort of do in my profession as I used to be a labour hire - aka agency worker, and employ them when in Aus), but the above is not exactly how it works. The client will not usually take the word of the labour hire company except for roles that require little or no skill. The client will usually want to see the CV and originals of any claimed qualifications. Pre-employment screening may be delegated to the labour hire company (aka agency), but the client will be asking for the same or better qualified nurse as the one being replaced unless they intend to bring in someone more junior in that capacity and have someone else (an employee for example) cover more senior aspects of the role; in which case, the labour-hire role is different to that of the person being replaced.

 

In the nurse example, you don't want a senior surgical nurse going on holiday being replaced by a junior - but performing the senior's duties - think of the legal liability should something go wrong.. it is too risky. But, of course, there are roles where less experience and quals can be substituted. I recall when I was abut 18 I had a job at Melford Motors pre-delivering cars. I worked harder, did a better job, and was faster than those who had been there many years - yet I got some paltry under 21 pay when those older got a full award pay.. So even if I have less experience, and qualifications, If I am perfroming that role satisfactorily or better than those with more experience, why should I not be compensated similarly or even better? It is adding the same or better value to the company/organisation.

 

Over here, and the employers I worked with in Aus, agency, temp, labour hire, whatever you want to call it usually earned more per hour on a base salary basis to compenstate for the short-term nature of the role. If this is not happening in a profession/industry, it sounds more like they are using the labour hire agencies to rort due salaries to what would be permanent employees.. So, in principle, I agree with what Albo is doing.

 

[Edit] Even though I received that paltry under 21 pay, I owe it a great favour. I was so pissed off, I quit after 4 weeks and muscled my way into software development... never looked back. Well, except fopr stoopid decisions I made.. and still do.

Edited June 20, 2023 by Jerry_Atrick

[red750]

The way it is being portrayed in TV commercials by the Mining Council, is that someone, from their first day on the job, must be paid the same as someone with fifteen years experience if they are doing the same job, and someone who is always nicking off for a smoko, etc must be paid the same as someone putting in the full effort. No incentive or reward for effort or experience.

[Jerry_Atrick]

TV Commercials are paid advertising. Mining Council of Australia is an industry assocaition funded to represent the interests of the members. Do you think their ads are going to be free of bias, or put an even handed argument forward?

 

Awards are effectively minimum wage. My father had a business and used to complain awards meant he couldn't pay the better workers more than the not so good workers. There is some merit in it, because businesses operate in a competitive landscape, and especially with unskilled workers where normally you can easily replace the worker, this is an issue because you can bet if one competitor is paying their workforce less and undercutting you, you wil lneed to trim fat. But, in this sector, is the worst exploitation, so there has to be fundamental protections and a decent liveable wage. Despite this, my father did find the money to pay his best slightly more.. at the tiome a few cents an hour (it was the 70s), but it went a long way.

 

Let me ask you a question: Say you decided you were gong to be a labour hire person. Would you accept less money than a permanent employee normally gets to do the same job when you have no longevity, no employer super contributions, no other benefits?

 

In my team, I have both permanent and agency business analysts. Real numbers: My permanent BAs earn between £80k and £90K, and one is a capital markets specialist with many years experience on the trading floor. My two contractors are paid (incuding agency fee - which is 10% of their gross income), £900/day and £960/day. They work about 46 weeks a year. That is between £207K and £221k (almost). They don't get all of it, but I would guess they are between £150k and £170K.

Edited June 20, 2023 by Jerry_Atrick

[old man emu]

Wages for casuals were always higher than permanents because permanents got holiday, sick and long service payments. I would imagine now that employer superannuation contributions are compulsory, casuals receive them. You can't take on any paid work now without nominating a superannuation provider. I had to recently when I applied for a couple of bus driving jobs. What benefit of superannuation will I get at my age? No that I'm knocking compulsory super. It might not amount to much when you retire, but it's better than nothing. 

 

2 hours ago, red750 said:

The way it is being portrayed in TV commercials by the Mining Council,

 

1 hour ago, Jerry_Atrick said:

Do you think their ads are going to be free of bias, or put an even handed argument forward?

Of course not. And the people you see and hear doing the bleating are the very ones whose salaries are determined by negotiation, not industrial awards and which are not related in any way to actual productivity. It makes me laugh when I see these spokespersons describing anything that might improve the lot of the masses as the beginning of a slide into economic Armageddon. I think, "Hey dickhead! You're a wage slave like the rest of us. You have no power to improve your lot. If Big Business had its way, they would fire you for no reason and you'd have no come back, like it is in the Land of The Free.

[Marty_d]

If the Minerals Council of Australia are against it,  it must be a good thing. 

[spacesailor]

IT COULD !,

BE A GODSEND TO MY SON-IN-LAW, 

AS HE HAD TO GIVE UP HIS ' Mechanic apprenticeship '. ( parental breakup ).

Now he still works in the industry BUT only receives 1/3 the pay his co-workers get , even through he has more experience 

than all those " certified " workers. 

Same job without that piece of paper .

spacesailor

[old man emu]

11 minutes ago, spacesailor said:

Same job without that piece of paper

Doesn't he know that he can obtain that "piece of paper" based on the experience he has because he has been doing the work for so long? It's called Recognition of Prior Learning. Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL) involves an assessment of your previous skills, knowledge and experience and how they may meet the requirements of your qualification. Put simply, it means if you can demonstrate you already have the skills and experience you can complete a whole or partial qualification without needing to attend classes or participate in learning.

 

Scroll through this link: https://www.tafensw.edu.au/enrol/recognition-credit-transfers#:~:text=Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL,the requirements of your qualification.

 

[facthunter]

I sat numerous Practical tests for exemptions at Uni. You had to get distinction level in the prac. test to get it, and it only ever showed as an exemption granted. It still counts fully towards the Diploma or Degree you are doing.. There are subjects that count as equivalents in other courses. For University entrance you can apply for an "adult entry" if you've been active in learning processes. IF you aren't adequately prepared it's likely you will fail in your first year of some of the more difficult courses..   Nev

[Jerry_Atrick]

5 hours ago, old man emu said:

now that employer superannuation contributions are compulsory,

Yes, I did forget that goes for labour hiore workers as well, rather than leaving it to themselves. But, holdiay, sick, and compensation for the shrot duration, lack of security, as well as other benefits such as training, etc, come into it. Over here, I am lucky enough to be in a profession where health insurance is included.

 

I was out of Australia for so long that I didn't realises the health insurance changes Howard brought in, which makes it uneconomic for me (and yes, I didn't know about the levy or fee you could pay to stop the 2% per year premium loading  either).

Edited June 21, 2023 by Jerry_Atrick

[facthunter]

I keep the insurance up although it's costly and there's often extra to be paid but it's all manageable and I see the specialists I CHOOSE to have. There's worse places than here by far.. Howard the great has left some costly legacies in the system for his short term gain at the time. Plenty of people have pointed that out..  Nev