Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

womens pay, too high?

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' started by roundabout, Nov 14, 2005.

  1. who would have thought in this time of conservative liberal government women would be coming close to equal pay for equal work. what we need is more AWA's, lower pay means a more productive worker, better yet, send em back to the kitchen, on ya Howard!

    while were at it, can't something be done about those underage bludgers sitting around in school?

    Women on AWAs 'get 11pc less'
    From: AAP
    November 14, 2005

    WOMEN employed under Australian Workplace Agreements (AWAs) were paid 11 per cent less than if they were on an award and almost half had no entitlement to annual leave, a Senate inquiry has been told.

    Victorian Industrial Relations Minister Rob Hulls said the Federal Government's industrial relations changes, which encourage people to sign up to AWAs, would force more women out of the workforce.
    Mr Hulls tabled a paper on the impact of the IR laws on families to the Senate committee, which is holding five days of hearings on the proposed laws.

    He said the paper made it clear AWAs were less family friendly and gave workers less access to annual leave, long service leave and sick leave.

    "Only 12 per cent of AWAs registered between 1995 and 2000 had any work and family provisions and women fare particularly badly as do part timers and casuals," Mr Hulls said.

    "Women on AWAs are paid 11 per cent less then women on collective agreements and 49 per cent of them have no entitlement to annual leave at all.

    "So at a time when we're trying to upskill our workforce to get as many women as possible involved in participation rates ... what's being proposed will have the adverse effect."
    ACT Industrial Relations Minister Katy Gallagher agreed the Federal Government's push towards AWAs would affect women unfairly.

    "We already know that history will show us from 1996 that women do not receive the same outcomes that men do under AWAs," she told the committee.
  2. So what? Who's problem is this? As Mouth so eloquently argued in a related thread:

    Women have plenty of opportunity before going into the workforce to retrain as men. It's not as though this was a great secret - their high school careers teacher can tell them that women have historically earned less than men. That they make a personal decision to continue to be women, despite being fully aware of the disadvantages, isn't something the employer should have to fund.
  3. Careful there, don't give them radical ideas, or approx 50% of the medicare budget is going to go on trans-gender elective surgery.