Justine Elliot (Richmond, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have spoken in the House before, raising my concerns that the government continues to support cutting penalty rates and cutting workers' pay packets. It shows that the government is so unfair and out of touch. The fact is that while, under this Prime Minister, on 1 July millionaires will get a tax cut of over $16,000, the very next day nearly 700,000 workers will have their penalty rates cut. This really shows where the government's priorities are and how harsh their choices are. The penalty rates cuts will be devastating throughout the nation, but they will hit especially hard in regional and rural areas and will be particularly detrimental to women, which is what I want to discuss today.

In my electorate of Richmond, retail is the second-biggest industry, employing more than 7,000 workers, with hospitality the third-biggest, employing more than 6,000—so any cuts to penalty rates will really hit hard. Women will be disproportionately impacted because they tend to work predominantly in those professions where the cuts will and can occur. In Australia, women make up 55 per cent of workers on the General Retail Industry Award, 54 per cent on the Fast Food Industry Award and 77 per cent on the Pharmacy Industry Award. In addition, the government has refused to rule out cuts to the Hair and Beauty Industry Award, 87 per cent of whose workers are women. Within these industries the reduction in penalty rates will have a severely disproportionate effect on women and their pay packets, and it will create issues beyond the basic detriment to take-home pay. Women will undeniably be more adversely affected than men.

The Australia Institute's Centre for Future Work has released data showing that when the number of women working part-time is taken into account the gender pay gap increases from 17 per cent to 33 per cent. Economist and Director of the Centre for Future Work Jim Stanford said it was impossible to separate the impact of the pure gender pay gap from the impact of women's concentration in part-time work. Women are more likely to work in a part-time capacity and also be reliant on the award, and the inclusion of penalty rates really does help them meet basic household expenses. It is patently unfair to penalise women by taking away penalty rates and affecting take-home pay, which could see them lose up to $77 a week. Penalty rates cuts mean that workers will now have less money to spend in the local economy—in shops, restaurants and other businesses—because they will have less disposable income. That is especially damaging in regional areas.

We know that the Prime Minister and his government have actively campaigned for these cuts to penalty rates. I again call on the government to do the right thing and support Labor's Fair Work amendment bill and protect the penalty rates of low-paid workers, especially women. We in Labor want to stop these cuts. We know that those on the other side do not want to stop them, that they do want to see the cuts go ahead. They will be responsible for it.

In the regions and the rural parts of Australia it will be the Nationals that will be held responsible for their continued support for cutting penalty rates. They are refusing to support workers in their communities. As I said, many people in regional areas rely on those penalty rates, particularly women. Those people in those communities know that it is only Labor that will defend their penalty rates and only Labor that will defend their take-home pay. And it is also only Labor that is committed to closing the gender pay gap because, particularly in this case, women will be disproportionately and adversely affected by the cuts in penalty rates.