Major change for millions of Aussie workers next week
The controversial laws give employees the right to refuse to monitor, read, or reply to contact outside their working hours, unless doing so is unreasonable. This includes contact from an employer, colleagues and third parties such as clients and suppliers.
But the laws don't make it unlawful for an employer to contact an employee outside working hours. 'Instead, they give employees a right to refuse to monitor, read or respond to the contact, unless doing so is unreasonable,' the Fair Work Ombudsman website states.
Whether or not a refusal is unreasonable will depend on the circumstances. Factors could include the nature of the worker's role and level of responsibility, their personal circumstances and extra pay, or compensation received for working additional hours or being available after hours.
Ahead of the major change, the NSW Small Business Commissioner has urged employers and employees from the outset to have a conversation about what out-of-hours contact might mean. 'They should set expectations about contact and responding to contact when either party is not working,' the website states.
However, many questions remain, including what is considered unreasonable. There isn't any advice in the legislation, which encourages businesses to consider whether employees are being paid for this time after-hours or if the request is urgent. Those who don't comply with the laws have been threatened with hefty fines of up to $18,780 for individuals and $93,900 for companies per breach. However, no cases involving large companies have yet made it to court in the first year of legislation.
The laws have reignited online debate among employees and small business operators. 'I'm a manager and constantly get calls and texts after hours, weekends and holidays. Staff wanting to swap shifts, calling in sick, and security call-outs,' one woman posted online. 'Wow, I'm gonna be getting paid 24/7. Shouldn't this work both ways? Staff should respect their bosses' time off also.' A worker added: 'Your boss is only your boss during work hours, after work hours he's just another person & I decide if I answer their calls or not.'
Workers on call 24-7 were concerned about the potential impact the laws could have on their role. 'I work a job doing supermarket refrigeration service, does this mean I can ignore emergency breakdowns, even though I'm on call 24/7?' one wrote. 'Or can I ignore texts telling me which job I will be at next morning? Or what about important information about jobs I need to pass onto my boss? Can I just not do that because it's out of hours?' However, others had no problems with being contacted after hours by their bosses. 'I work for a small company and sometimes it just happens. If you have a respectful relationship with your management it shouldn't be an issue from time to time,' one woman commented.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Finextra
2 hours ago
- Finextra
MoneyMe selects SEON to strengthen fraud prevention and credit decisioning
SEON, the command centre for fraud prevention and AML compliance, today announced that MoneyMe, one of Australia's leading digital lenders, has selected SEON's unified platform to bolster fraud detection as it continues its growth trajectory. 0 SMoneyMe will deploy SEON to support a multi-product portfolio - including auto loans, credit cards and personal loans - strengthening capabilities in device intelligence, behavioural analysis and second-party fraud detection. The decision follows an evaluation of multiple vendors and reflects MoneyMe's focus on preemptively improving risk management capabilities without compromising customer experience. 'SEON stood out for its flexibility, strong device intelligence and scalability,' said Jonathan Wu, MoneyMe's Chief Operations Officer and Chief Product Officer. 'Its platform will help us consolidate tools, reduce complexity and enhance both fraud prevention and operational efficiency as we grow.' The phased rollout includes fraud prevention and credit decisioning enrichment via SEON's data engine. MoneyMe will gain comprehensive visibility across all risk vectors through SEON's integrated dashboard, enabling coordinated response across its fraud, risk and compliance teams. 'MoneyMe is the kind of forward-looking fintech we built SEON for,' said Troy Nyi Nyi, Senior Vice President and GM, APAC, SEON. 'By combining device intelligence, digital footprinting and real-time compliance in one centralised command centre, we're helping them to both stop fraud before it starts and scale securely.' MoneyMe aims to future proof its fraud detection approach, add additional data points to enhance credit modelling accuracy and generate cost savings across KYC and onboarding workflows. The company also plans to expand SEON's role to include transaction monitoring in future phases.
The Guardian
5 hours ago
- The Guardian
Gina Rinehart's apocalyptic visions for bush summits just the latest in a history of climate science denialism
You won't be able to have a cremation because the ovens won't be allowed to run on fossil fuels, and hospitals will be forced to shut for more than half the year because they've emitted too much CO2. Are you terrified yet? This is the vaguely comical and imagined world of Gina Rinehart, who wants people to think a George Orwell-style climate police state is just around the corner thanks to Australia's decision to join more than 130 other countries in backing the need to get greenhouse gas emissions to net zero. The mining billionaire laid this all out in a column for the Herald Sun this week, as part of a News Corp series of bush summits her companies are sponsoring. Rinehart's article was stuffed with more straw men than a Wizard of Oz convention where the only cosplay allowed is the Scarecrow. Sign up: AU Breaking News email Her argument – if you can call it that – is that Australia should have negotiated 'carve-outs' for a whole range of industries under the Paris climate agreement and, because it didn't, those industries will now be 'forced' to either down tools or go electric to be able to operate. Rinehart opened with a complaint that Australia had not negotiated a Paris 'carve-out' for its defence industry emissions. But in fact, much of the reporting in the Paris agreement is voluntary, including emissions from warfare – and in any case, Australia does in fact exclude reporting of defence and security agency emissions in its 2030 target. 'Our hospitals, again no carve-out – nurses, doctors, technicians forced to acquire EVs to be able to see patients. Who really wants this?' she went on. Perhaps the question should not be 'who really wants this' but rather, who has ever suggested that anyone would be 'forced' by climate policies to buy an electric vehicle? The answer is absolutely nobody – except, perhaps, Australia's richest person. What else is going to happen in Rinehart's alternative universe, where the imagined climate police are out to confiscate your tractor as soon as look at you? Here's just a short list from her column. Defence manufacturers would 'be forced to close for much of the year at least' The Royal Flying Doctor Service would not be able to collect any patients for eight months of the year 'as we've exceeded our emissions permitted' Cancer and maternity patients would be left to fend for themselves because 'we have to close the hospitals for nine or 10 months of the year' Funerals would be delayed because of something to do with refrigeration and 'ovens' – honestly, you'll have to work that one out for yourself 'It's time for truth,' wrote Rinehart, signing off with not even a whiff of irony. Other high-profile corporates sponsoring the summits, include Woolworths, Optus, Commonwealth Bank and Qantas. The prime minister, Anthony Albanese, is due to give a keynote at one in Ballarat next Friday. Rinehart also delivered a speech for the opening of the first summit in Broome this week, promoted by The Australian newspaper. 'Many of our farmers and their families and farms are already suffering from net zero ideology,' she said. 'They have more than enough to worry about with devastating droughts, floods, fires.' After removing their heads from their desks, climate scientists will point out that the risks of worsening droughts, floods and fires can be laid at the door of rising greenhouse gas emissions. Here's one now. 'Fire risk has increased due to climate change with increased fire season length, number of fire danger days, intensity and area burnt and this will also worsen with further climate change,' says emeritus professor Mark Howden, of the Australian National University. 'Climate change caused by human emissions of greenhouse gases is unequivocally increasing temperatures across Australia's farming lands and across the southern half of the nation and is driving down growing seasonal rainfall and water availability. Sign up to Breaking News Australia Get the most important news as it breaks after newsletter promotion 'This has dragged back the productivity and profitability of broadacre farming by around 20% compared with what it would otherwise be. A huge climate-change hit already. And worse is on the way.' Natalie Collard is the chief executive of Farmers for Climate Action – a group of more than 8,400 farmers and farming community members (the clue on what they want is in the name). 'I'm not aware of any country that is forcing anyone – let alone farmers – to change their combustion engines to EVs,' Collard pointed out. The organisation surveyed more than 700 farmers and people working in related industries in 2023, and 92% said they had seen climate-related 'on-farm impacts' in the last three years. Collard said 55% of farmers had identified climate change as the biggest threat to the future of farming, with the next-highest threat being bureaucracy, and red tape coming in at 15%. 'We know farmers are on the frontlines of climate change and they are hurting the most,' she said. There are real concerns from farmers and environmentalists about the roll-out of renewable energy, and those concerns should be listened to. But it is hard to see how imagined scare stories will help them negotiate the best outcomes for their future. Some of the organised voices railing against renewable energy and net zero have a history of also rejecting the risks of climate change. Their wild fear-mongering on net zero can be seen as the other side of the climate denial coin. Rinehart's climate science-denialism is well known and long-standing. In a 2021 video to students of her former girls' school she described concerns over climate change as 'propaganda'. In 2011, she wrote she was unconvinced that adding CO2 to the atmosphere could cause significant warming of the atmosphere. Rinehart has poured millions of dollars into the Institute of Public Affairs – another outspoken critic of net zero that continues to promote fringe and contrarian views on climate change. Her sponsorship of News Corp's bush summits has given her a vehicle to continue her anti-science crusade. Graham Readfearn is Guardian Australia's environment and climate correspondent
The Guardian
5 hours ago
- The Guardian
Giving Australians $2,700 tax back while widening GST could help generate $152bn windfall, economist says
Giving the average worker a $2,700 income tax cut in return for widening the GST would be part of a major tax overhaul that could add a combined $158bn to the Australian economy. Chris Murphy, an economist who provided the modelling for introduction of the GST and Ken Henry's 2010 tax review, has outlined a $91bn shift in the tax mix, which includes replacing stamp duties with a land tax and taxing corporate super profits. 'Comprehensive tax reform stands out as a way of delivering large benefits compared to other areas of economic reform,' Murphy says in a newly released paper. The proposed tax package would be budget neutral, according to Murphy's estimates, but would lift real GDP by about 6%, boost business investment by 11% and increase the number of homes by 8%. When announcing the roundtable on 18 June, Jim Chalmers raised hopes that the Albanese government was ready to tackle the thorny issue of tax. The treasurer told the National Press Club that 'no sensible progress can be made on productivity, resilience or budget sustainability without proper consideration of more tax reform'. 'I don't just accept that, I welcome it,' Chalmers said at the time. Sign up: AU Breaking News email But the prime minister has proved less welcoming, telling journalists two weeks ago that 'the only tax policy that we're implementing is the one that we took to the election'. The final sessions of the roundtable process, on Thursday, focused on a 'better tax system'. Murphy said shifting the tax base towards simpler and less-distortionary types of taxes was a useful starting point to think about potential reform. He said in his modelling, 'inefficient state conveyancing duty and land tax are abolished, with the revenue replaced by a broad-based land tax like municipal rates'. 'The company tax system is modified so that normal returns to capital are taxed less and economic rents and dividends are taxed more. 'To broaden tax bases, GST-free categories become taxable and the payroll tax threshold is cut by 75%, funding a large cut in personal income tax.' Murphy estimates that 54% of Australian company taxes are based on so-called 'economic rents', such as super profits linked to oligopolistic sectors such as financial services, as well as rents from the country's natural resources. Murphy says the answer would be a different type of company tax that cuts company tax rate, but introduces another tax to better target those rents – such as the 5% net cashflow tax recently proposed by the Productivity Commission. While the estimated benefits of these packages are large, the shifts in the tax base would be jarring. For example, Murphy's analysis shows getting rid of stamp duties on residential property purchases and state-based land taxes on investment properties would remove two very inefficient taxes. But filling that budgetary hole would require a new land tax that would be equivalent to trebling municipal rates, Murphy said. 'The states have to get back the money from abolishing conveyancing and state land taxes,' he said. Murphy said his next round of modelling would focus on the impact of the tax changes on the equity of the system, but that conceptually the household tax package – which included widening the net of the GST – would tend to raise the inequity of the tax system. In contrast, the corporate and property changes would likely be progressive. For example, Murphy said the evidence was that state land taxes drive up the cost of investing in property and artificially inflate rents. 'There would be winners and losers, but there's a strong argument that if you are doing tax reform, then go the whole hog, because what you lose on one thing, you might pick it up on something else,' he said.
