WEL Australia, the Women’s Equity Think Tank and the National Pay Equity Coalition have just lodged their final joint submissions in the ongoing equal pay case. The case concerns wage rates in the social, community, home care and disability services industry.
Fair Work Australia has already found that work in the female-dominated industry is undervalued, and that the undervaluation is gender-related.
The most recent submissions dealt with how the gender-related undervaluation was to be remedied. FWA asked for submissions on the extent to which wage rates in the SACS industry are lower than they would otherwise be because of gender considerations, and how the amount of the gender related undervaluation of the work of the classifications in the industry should be calculated. It also asked for views on the amount or amounts, either dollar or percentage, to be included in any equal remuneration order.
The women’s organisations submitted that there are gender considerations affecting the valuation of all aspects of the work in the industry, including the nature of the work itself, the funding models adopted by governments for the industry, the supply of and demand for labour, the value put on employee credentials, and the access of employees to wage increases through enterprise bargaining.
Take a look at our submission.
WEL NSW has welcomed the federal government’s recent announcement to “meet its responsibilities” in respect of any phased pay increases that result from the Social and Community Sector (SACS) equal pay case currently before Fair Work Australia.
In its further written submission to Fair Work Australia last week, the government states that “the Commonwealth will meet its responsibilities and provide fair and appropriate supplementation, in consultation with key stakeholders, and taking into account the fiscal implications and opportunities to for reform in the SACA sector.”
As one of the key sources of funding to the social and community, financial support from the federal government is crucial to addressing the gender pay gap in the social and community services sector.
WEL NSW is pleased to see the federal government finally making this crucial financial commitment and looks forward to the government following through with this commitment, once Fair Work Australia’s final decision is handed down.
WEL NSW urges the NSW government to follow suit and similarly put “its money where its mouth is” by publicly committing to funding its share of any pay increases that may result from the equal pay case.
See the federal government’s media release here.
Charity Danquah
The Carbon tax debate has polarised and divided many people. On the 10th of July Prime Minister Julia Gillard unveiled her carbon tax package. Ninety per cent of Australian households will receive tax cuts and on average the household cost will rise by $10 a week. The tax free threshold will increase to $18,200 from July 1, 2012, and then increase to $19,400 from July 1, 2015. The government will set aside $10 billion for the establishment of a Clean Energy Finance Corporation which will introduce new technology and a further $3.2 billion has been allocated to the Australian Renewable Energy Agency. Amidst this very complex scheme and its fierce and often muddled debates about winners and losers, lies the very issue that is so conveniently sidelined for quick political spin. Yes, we all agree climate change is a problem, yes we all believe something should be done about it, but not if we’re going to be $1000 short each year. As a young women who sits dumbfounded each day and witnesses the corrosive rhetoric being spewed forth each day by both sides of politics, I am absolutely astounded by the lack of consideration for the future. Do we think only of today and what can satisfy us now? We have reaped and reaped from this world for far too long and for far too long we have sowed the seeds of our future in barren pastures. Thus, the next generations must content with inheriting a barren future. At a time when we should know better and behave better all that can be heard shouted across the media landscape is “what about me?” We all want a tax cut, but we need action. This has been the real failure of the prime minister and the opposition. The debate has been hijacked for political point scoring. On one hand, the government is the telling people how much they are going to get and somewhere along the line they will be doing something for the environment. And on the other hand, we have an opposition whose climate policy is dubious at best decrying any action while lambasting us with their doomsday messages about cost of living and job loss. Well doh! If human history has taught us nothing it is that a transition is never easy, but through difficulty new opportunity arises. This is why we need to invest in renewable energy and technology so that there are job creations and different alternatives. Is it too much to ask to have a leader with some vision for the future? Business cannot remain as usual. Whether or not the carbon tax can truly tackle the challenges of climate change remains to be seen. What I do know is that Australia must lead and it must lead now, climate change will not stop and wait for us to satisfy everyone.
Jozefa Sobski
A tax on carbon, or more properly, carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions produced through the burning of fossil fuels – coal, oil and gas – has been the subject of discussion by environmental think tanks since the eighties. So, why is this issue so deeply mired in factual confusion and steeped in irrational fear-mongering and simplistic debate at this time?
For the uninitiated, fossil fuels are burnt to produce energy to power individual, as well as, industrial production and consumption. We are burning too much of these to maintain climate and environmental balance.
Carbon dioxide’s contribution to global warming and consequent climate change is estimated as 63% of greenhouse gases. Methane is 24%. Most of the Earth’s atmosphere is composed of nitrogen and oxygen. These do not retain much of the sun’s heat, but CO2 does. Currently it sits at 388 parts per million in the earth’s atmosphere. The aim is to reduce it to 35Oppm.
The bulk of CO2 emissions come from coal and oil, and then natural gas. China is the top CO2 emitter, but on 2009 figures, per person it is only 6.1 tonnes of CO2. Australia is fourteenth on the list of emitters, but leads the world with 18.8 tonnes of CO2 being emitted by each person through their use of energy generated by fossil fuels. This level of per capita emission is not sustainable. We should be sourcing more of our energy from renewables, like wind, solar and geothermal. We need to change our wasteful behaviour. We need to sacrifice narrow national interest for universal global interest.
Behavioural change, however, is notoriously very difficult to achieve simply by appeal to people’s benevolence and altruism or concern for future generations and the preservation of the natural world. Indeed, such appeals conflict with the materialistic and self-interested values which are daily promoted through our focus on financial success, pleasure and comfort in our capitalist “economy”.
The Opposition party’s “toxic tax” campaign, not only ignores or implicitly denies the climate science, it appeals to self-interest and narrow national and corporate interests. Its evangelical tone predicting doom arouses people’s fears of material loss or threat to comfort and possessions and the security of a steady prosperous state. It is a campaign relying on our selfishness and obsession with the material present. It is a campaign for short-term political gain.
In 2007/2008 people worldwide were ready for action, but these same impulses, among many other factors, contributed to the perceived failure of the Copenhagen conference.
The federal Government has wisely selected to progress Australia towards the community of nations taking some action towards emissions abatement. (See Productivity Commission’s May, 2011 report on this). The tax on CO2 emissions will be imposed on the biggest emission producers. The costs to them, of course, are then distributed throughout the community. The government proposes to fix a price per tonne for 3 to 5 years and then to move to an emissions trading scheme.
This price is aimed at creating incentives to invest in renewables; to reduce pollution and energy consumption. It is a government intervention to introduce a market mechanism. It aims to change behaviour by making wasteful behavior expensive, and, even for some, unaffordable.
Of course, there will be compensation schemes and rebates, but they cannot be so great as to have the unintended consequence of not changing behaviour, at all, or only marginally. All of this seems so eminently sensible and self-evident. Why is it not bi-partisan policy?
WEL Australia developed a Climate Change policy in 2007. This can be found in our Issues at Stake document prepared for that Federal election.
Internationally, UN Women is not focused on any climate change projects at present although Women Watch does make a strong statement that the threats of climate change are not gender neutral. There was some debate also conducted on Women and the Environment in early 2010 as part of the UN Environment Programme and UN Habitat.
Its focus like the WELA policy was on women’s participation in environmental decision-making, the incorporation of gender perspectives and gender sensitive environmental research into policy making forums.
There is a need for broader feminist discussion on the possible gender differential impact of the carbon tax and how this policy measure will intersect with other tax reforms.
The rallies held on World Environment Day across Australia attracted their usual thousands of supporters from a broad range in the community. Prince Alfred Park in Sydney was ablaze with banners and sunshine. The rallies did not rate greatly in the media and there were no women’s organizations present. Climate change, like the carbon tax will affect us all. We must take them up as important women’s issues, locally and globally.
Kerry Lovering
Young Dutch trumpet player Melissa Venema aged 13 years was the trumpet soloist playing ‘Il Silenzio’ This is an Italian instrumental piece written in 1965 by trumpet player Nini Rosso - listen to her beautiful playing.
And we can celebrate a new tennis champion Ashleigh Barty, 15,who won the Wimbledon Girls championship beating Russian 16-year-old and third seed Irina Khromacheva on Court One. Ashleigh Barty had every reason to be elated as she accepted the Wimbledon girls’ championship trophy after clinching a historic junior title double for Australia. following South Australian Luke Saville who won the boys title. Having beaten third seed Russian Irina Khromacheva 7-5 7-6 (7-3) on Sunday, the unassuming 15-year-old from Ipswich in Queensland was thrilled to receive congratulations from two-time Wimbledon champion and friend Evonne Goolagong-Cawley.
