Labor moves to bolster penalty rates and overtime pay protections for millions of workers
The changes to the Fair Work Act would effectively ensure workers paid under awards cannot have their penalty rates reduced in return for a higher rate of base pay if it leaves workers worse off.
The legislation, which the government expects to pass, would provide protections for the approximately 2.6 million people whose pay is set by an award.
The employment minister, Amanda Rishworth, on Saturday said the government was responding to cases before the Fair Work Commission that could result in cuts to people's take-home pay.
'What's become clear is that we need added legal protection to make sure penalty rates and overtime are protected in our award system,' she said.
'We want to make it clear in law that these penalty rates and overtime rates should be protected because we don't want people earning less and working harder.'
Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email
Peak retail and business groups had applied to the industrial umpire to allow some companies to opt out of providing penalty rates for staff in exchange for a raise on base levels of pay. In response, Labor put forward a submission to the Fair Work Commission opposing the employer groups' proposed changes.
As she addressed the media in Canberra to formally announce the reforms, Rishworth was joined by retail workers Daniel and Liarne, who spoke of the 'huge difference' penalty rates made to their ability to live comfortably.
'My penalty rates are about $6.35 an hour, which is about $7,500 a year,' Liarne said.
'That's really important because it helps me pay for rent, groceries, school fees and the care of my animals, which I love dearly.'
Rishworth said women, part-time or casual staff and those under the age of 35 were more likely to be covered by penalty rates.
Sign up to Breaking News Australia
Get the most important news as it breaks
after newsletter promotion
The Albanese government had promised to enshrine penalty rates in law if re-elected, building on the sweeping industrial relations reforms it enacted during its first term despite fierce opposition from employer groups.
The new measures set the stage for further disagreements between the government, unions and the business lobby before next month's productivity summit at Parliament House.
Convened by the treasurer, Jim Chalmers, the government's 'roundtable' will also consider tax reform and ways to lift living standards.
The treasurer has said that the 19-21 August talks would be organised around themes of resilience, productivity and sustainability.
Federal parliament will resume on Tuesday for the ceremonial opening, with the first pieces of legislation – including the penalty rate protections and reductions to Hecs debt – to be introduced later in the week.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
10 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Australia lobbied UK to avoid Indigenous leaders in 1999; SA premier calls algae ‘natural disaster'; and the case against coffee snobs
Good afternoon. Papers released from Britain's National Archives have revealed Tony Blair's government was privately lobbied by Australia not to meet a group of Indigenous leaders who came to the UK in late 1999, including Prof Marcia Langton and former Labor senator Patrick Dodson, describing the delegation as 'troublemakers'. A memo written by Blair's foreign affairs adviser, John Sawers, refers to an apparent intervention by the then Australian high commissioner, Philip Flood, comparing the situation to John Howard meeting Northern Ireland republicans. The memo suggested: 'Can't we plead diary problems?' Elsewhere among the released papers, correspondence between the Blair and Howard governments reveal problems Australia still grapples with today – doubts about the US's reliability as an ally, wrestling with the issue of Indigenous reconciliation, and attracting criticism for its under-commitment to addressing the climate crisis. Sofronoff knew 'destructive' potential of leaking confidential documents to Australian and ABC journalists, court hears Labor's bill to slash Hecs debt likely to pass with Coalition support despite Greens demand to end indexation Australia condemns Israel for 'indefensible' Gaza deaths as it joins coalition of countries denouncing Israel Fire in overhead locker on Virgin Australia flight believed to be caused by lithium battery in power bank Cold front to dump 'decent dose' of rain on drought-affected parts of south-east Australia Alleged childcare paedophile Joshua Dale Brown likely to face more charges, court told South Australian premier declares algal bloom catastrophe a 'natural disaster' in defiance of federal Labor It is said there are three religions on the Tiwi Islands: culture, Catholicism and footy. The football grand final is held in the midst of the dry season as part of a larger cultural celebration that includes art, dance and fashion. The remote Northern Territory Indigenous community produces more AFL draftees per capita than anywhere else in Australia. 'I feel fine. My balance sucks. It's like being on a boat.' – Billy Joel The 76-year-old singer has opened up about his health after cancelling his scheduled concerts mid-tour in May and announcing that he'd been diagnosed with the neurological condition normal pressure hydrocephalus. Speaking on the Club Random podcast this week, Joel said he felt 'good'. 'They keep referring to what I have as a brain disorder, so it sounds a lot worse than what I'm feeling,' he said. New analysis from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office shows the major cuts to healthcare and welfare programs in Donald Trump's so-called 'big beautiful bill' are estimated to save the country $1.1tn – only a small portion of the $4.5tn in lost revenue that will come from the bill's tax cuts. The CBO estimates the bill will leave 10 million Americans without health insurance over the next 10 years. Sign up to Afternoon Update Our Australian afternoon update breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what's happening and why it matters after newsletter promotion My petty gripe: I don't begrudge your coffee addiction – but do you have to be such a bore about it? A fondness for hot brown liquid is not a personality trait, writes Janine Israel, who is sick of waiting around for people to find their perfect brew. Today's starter word is: LOP. You have five goes to get the longest word including the starter word. Play Wordiply. Enjoying the Afternoon Update? Then you'll love our Morning Mail newsletter. Sign up here to start the day with a curated breakdown of the key stories you need to know, and complete your daily news roundup. And follow the latest in US politics by signing up for This Week in Trumpland.
Daily Mail
10 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Aussie Labor Party's plan to raise taxes on property investors
Labor Party activists are pushing to scrap the discount on capital gains tax when selling investment properties, despite Anthony Albanese ruling out such changes when in Opposition. Former Labor leader Bill Shorten lost the 2016 and 2019 elections with a plan to halve the 50 per cent capital gains tax discount to 25 per cent. The lesson of those election defeats led Albanese to rule out tinkering with capital gains taxes after he took over as Labor leader, and he went on to win the 2022 election and was resoundingly re-elected in May. But now a grassroots organisation within the Prime Minister's own party – Labor for Housing – wants the 50 per cent capital gains tax discount scrapped entirely, not just diluted. That meant someone who made a $100,000 capital gain on their investment property would be taxed on the entire increase, not just $50,000 of it. Labor for Housing co-convener Julijana Todorovic (pictured) told Daily Mail Australia the 50 per cent capital gains tax discount for selling residential properties introduced in September 1999, needed to be dismantled. 'We think it should be removed entirely, so not immediately,' she said. 'Property should not be an investment for which you can claim the discount.' Ms Todorovic, a land rights lawyer, said the Albanese government should change policy before the next election campaign. 'Our view is that the Labor government now has a mandate to rectify inequity in Australian society,' she said. 'While it's clear from the election results that we can't be too radical, we must do something to stem the flow of generational inequity.' She argued the 50 per cent capital gains tax discount should be grandfathered for existing investors but scrapped for future purchases - a position the Greens took to the May election. 'We are proposing that residential property is removed as a category for which the discount can be claimed,' Ms Todorovic said. 'But we're proposing that this change is grandfathered to a certain date – so if people have structured their finances based on the discount, then they will have time to restructure – they won't be left high and dry.' Labor for Housing argued that scrapping the discount would encourage investors to invest in technology and businesses, rather than putting all their funds into real estate and thereby driving up the country's massive house prices. 'Australia's capital resources have become landlocked by a CGT discount on property,' it said in a submission to the government's August Economic Reform Roundtable. 'As Australia electrifies, transitions to renewables and increases our data capacity, businesses are struggling to find adequate capital. By incentivising investment in the productive powers of the market, the government can increase the circular flow of capital in the economy, creating jobs and additional economic activity.' The Greens went to the last election with a plan to scrap the 50 per cent capital gains tax discount for future purchases of investment properties, and grandfather it to one property for those who already owned an investment property. While Labor has a landslide majority in the House of Representatives, it needs the Greens or other Senate crossbenchers to get its legislation passed by the Upper House. The Labor-aligned McKell Institute has called for the federal government to reduce the 50 per cent capital gains tax discount to 35 per cent for existing investment properties with a backyard. This means $65,000 of a $100,000 capital gain would be taxed, up from $50,000 now. But it has also called for the 50 per cent capital gains tax discount to be increased to 70 per cent for newly-built apartments, arguing this kind of policy would boost housing supply and encourage more off-the-plan unit developments. That means only $30,000 of a $100,000 capital gain would be taxed - and force more Aussies into apartments rather than homes with a backyard as Labor aims to build 1.2million homes over five years. The McKell Institute's Harnessing Aspiration report argued the existing 50 per cent capital gains tax discount encouraged investor speculators to buy up houses at a time when there is a shortage. 'There is a unique incentive for investors to speculate on existing detached houses rather than non-existing off-the -plan attached dwellings or established attached dwellings,' he said. 'The blanket tax treatment of each of these asset types means an investor is much more attracted to high-growth existing detached dwellings than moderate-growth attached dwellings, especially new builds.' The average, full-time worker earning $102,742 a year is priced out of buying the median-priced house in every state and territory capital city except Darwin.
The Guardian
40 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Sofronoff knew ‘destructive' potential of leaking confidential documents to Australian and ABC journalists, court hears
Walter Sofronoff was fully aware of the 'destructive' potential of leaking confidential documents relating to his inquiry into the prosecution of Bruce Lehrmann to journalists, the federal court has heard. Hearings continued on Tuesday into the former Queensland judge's legal challenge to findings by the Australian Capital Territory's Integrity Commission that he had engaged in 'serious corrupt conduct' by leaking documents relating to his investigation into the Lehrmann case to Janet Albrechtsen at the Australian and Elizabeth Byrne at the ABC. Those leaked documents included notices sent to then-ACT director of public prosecutions Shane Drumgold that the inquiry was considering making adverse findings against him. Scott Robertson SC, representing the ACT Integrity Commission, told the court those documents were disclosed to journalists knowing they posed a significant risk to Drumgold's career. 'It wasn't an accidental disclosure, it was a knowing disclosure,' Robertson said. A 2022 criminal trial against Lehrmann, who was accused of raping Brittany Higgins in the ministerial office of Senator Linda Reynolds at Parliament House in 2019, was abandoned with no verdict because of juror misconduct, and prosecutors decided against a re-trial. Lehrmann denied the allegations. Sofronoff was appointed by the ACT government to determine whether the investigation into the trial had been affected by political influence or interference. His report ruled that out but made 'serious findings of misconduct' against Drumgold, which were partially overturned in March 2024. The Integrity Commission launched an investigation in May 2024 to determine whether Sofronoff acted corruptly in leaking confidential documents, including providing the inquiry's final report to journalists before its official public release. Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email The corruption watchdog's report, known as the Juno report, said Sofronoff claimed his conduct 'complied with the requirements of the Inquiries Act' and that, in leaking the documents, he had 'acted in the public interest to ensure the media were adequately informed' about his inquiry and 'in a position to comment accurately' about it. The commission found that Sofronoff 'had not, in fact, acted in good faith', that his actions 'undermined the integrity of the Board's processes and the fairness and probity of its proceedings to such an extent as to have been likely to have threatened public confidence in the integrity of that aspect of public administration. It therefore constituted serious corrupt conduct.' Sofronoff is challenging this finding on the argument that the commission made a series of errors in its interpretation of legislation, and that there was no evidence to support findings that he had acted dishonestly or not in good faith. Robertson said Sofronoff clearly knew the material he was disseminating ought to be kept confidential and that parties affected by it would expect him not to send it to journalists. The non-publication order that Sofronoff issued in April 2023 over the material provided to his own inquiry (as there was a risk that adverse findings may be made at the time), showed he 'quite appropriately' believed that material should be kept confidential, 'yet he acted inconsistent with that own indication', Robertson said. Evidence for that inconsistency included Sofronoff sending two subpoenaed statements relating to the investigation into Drumgold to Albrechtsen in a text message with the words 'strictly confidential' attached, Robertson said. Sign up to Breaking News Australia Get the most important news as it breaks after newsletter promotion While a number of people were notified that Sofronoff's inquiry was considering making adverse comments against them, Sofronoff only leaked the notices of possible adverse comment against Drumgold to Albrechtsen, the court heard. Serious adverse findings could, and in this case did, destroy Drumgold's career. The destructive potential of those documents could not reasonably have been lost on Sofronoff, Robertson said, as he was 'an individual of extensive [legal] pedigree'. 'As sensitive and confidential documents go, it's hard to identify a more serious example. The public release of these documents and even the use of it as journalistic background is or was apt to undermine Mr Drumgold's interest, that's the factual context in which the commission makes its relevant findings.' Robertson argued that if Justice Wendy Abraham were to find that the facts behind the commission's finding were not in error, she would be 'very unlikely' to find error in the subsequent evaluation of Sofronoff's conduct as dishonest. Sofronoff's barrister, Adam Pomerenke KC, said there was a difference between 'disclosure' and 'publication', and that the suppression order only related to publication. Sofronoff was aware of the terms of his own suppression order, but 'knew that [material] would not be published while this order was operative. That's a different thing from being disclosed'. Justice Abraham queried the distinction, saying: 'A person providing a statement [to the inquiry] would not expect that to be provided to a journalist without their knowledge, at this stage, with the order in place, would they? They would have the expectation that it would not be.' 'I'm going to stick to that distinction between publication and disclosure, it's a recognised distinction,' said Pomerenke. The court reserved its judgement.
