Its time wrote on Feb 25
th, 2016 at 8:50pm:
Worker loses penalty rates , has less disposable income , slams wallet shut ( a common narrative since sept 2013 ) , lets get this straight , are you trying to tell us the economy is going to improve when wage growth is the lowest its been in 18 years , unemployment at record high levels , you dont even have a GFC and you libtards want us to believe cutting penalty rates , is going , to bring us back to prosperity
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/f5528/f55286f0fb67f4d01167965b4c3a937ad64a8d65" alt="Grin Grin"
no wonder you lost the 2016 election
The very fact that wages growth is low is testimony to the fact that industrial relations policy should be aimed at making business more competitive. Unions don't employ many people, business employs the most people and business keeps the economy going. Unions with their anti-competitive behaviours do their level best to bash business and make it uncompetitive and then wonder why there is unemployment?
Business is more profitable when it is competitive (winning business). To be more competitive sometimes it has to drop its price. When demand is low it will drop its price compared to its competitors to win more business. When business is profitable, unemployment
declines and wages
go up NATURALLY. This is the market. Penalty Rates
ENFORCED for no other reason than the day of the week or the time of the day or what type of day it might be WITHOUT a corresponding increase in production, or increase in sales revenues are just a dead friggin weight around the neck of both business and the economy.
Penalty rates enforced outside market conditions simply make product more expensive, when it's more expensive it's harder to sell, when business sells less product, it gets less revenue, and less revenues mean less profits, and less profits leads to unemployment, less tax revenues for Govt and cuts to services (unless there's a Labor Govt and then it means much more public DEBT.
On the other hand if business is booming and labour is in short supply the short supply of labour will pull it's price up.
For example, If you are a Plumber sole trader and get called out to fix a blocked dunny on a Sunday you can quote double or triple your rate because of the inconvenience. Same work different price. The householder is free though, to shop around and get another plumber that is cheaper, to do the job. If they can't, then they have to pay more, if they can, they pay less. (a fair market)
If all the Plumbers get together however, and demand triple payment on Sundays, that is anti-competitive illegal collusion. What's the difference between that and enforcing a business to pay double time for example on Sundays
for the same work when there may be a pool of unemployed people willing to do that work, at a lower price? (outside the market)