ACTU President Ged Kearney announced at the National Press Club the results of a poll of union members grandiosely labelled “The Census”. And she also talked about it yesterday on The Punch. But far from being an impartial look at the Australian workplace, the ACTU’s census is nothing but a narrow poll of self-selected participants.
Australians being productive. Pic: Mark Evans

The headlines shouted “Australian workers productive but stressed”. The findings to emerge from The Census included that respondents were working longer, finding it difficult to get by on their income, delaying dental treatment and were contacted about work outside of work hours. An overwhelming majority supported unions campaigning for better pay and conditions of workers.

The Census survey methodology is instructive.

It was primarily an online survey, open between May and July 2011. A temporary website was used. The survey was promoted by unions to their members.  The ACTU also promoted the survey through its website, blogs and social media.

The respondents totalled 42,085. They were eligible for three $1,000 prizes. The prizes’ eligibility was restricted to respondents who were over 18 and - interestingly - were union members. The ACTU commissioned a parallel public poll of 1,000 Australians using “an online public pool of people”. This allowed for comparisons between The Census and public poll results.

The overwhelming majority of Census respondents in employment, 92.9 per cent, were union members. This contrasts with union membership in the workforce now at an all-time low of 19.1 per cent. At least the public poll at 20 per cent is more representative of the Australian workforce.

This all means that caution must be applied in analysing the results of The Census. The ACTU report on The Census, “Voices from working Australia” acknowledges these limitations. Admitting that: “The Census results are intended to be a discrete study and do not constitute a random sample of either the trade union membership or the overall working population.”

Ms Kearney used the announcement to express concern that the Reserve Bank and Productivity Commission by increasingly representing narrow corporate interests risk “not only becoming aloof from the concerns of working Australians, but losing the confidence of the broader community.”

However, the institutions have a better fix on the issues of concern to Australians and their future well-being. The ACTU is in denial over the growing crisis in productivity. The unions equate productivity improvement with working harder. In contrast, most see productivity emerging from working smarter - not harder.

Data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics paints a very different picture to the hand wringing of the ACTU.

According to the ABS, the average number of hours worked per week has decreased over the last three decades. The number has fallen from 35.7 hours per week in 1979 to 32.9 hours in 2009.

At the same time, household wealth has increased over the last decade, with the real income of low income households increasing by 41 per cent between 1997-98 and 2007-08.  The increase for middle income households was 46 per cent.

The ABS has found that participation by Australians in sport and recreation has increased between 2000 and 2006. Attendance at cultural venues and sporting events has remained stable over the same period.

So according to the much more reputable data from the ABS, we’re in fact working less, earning more and recreating more than ever before.

Australians overall are not as stressed and hard worked as the ACTU “Census” suggests. A reliance on narrow union dominated surveys supported by prize inducements is unlikely to provide any meaningful insights into the attitudes of the broad Australian community.

If the ACTU really wants to get an accurate picture of Australians’ attitude to workplace issues, they should commission a genuine scientific survey conducted by a member of the Australian Market and Social Research Society.

77 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • Michael N says:

      08:51am | 20/09/11

      I’d be interested to see some details for that study also - but certainly an interesting statistic that, if true, nicely erodes the stereotype of Australians as a nation of lazy workers.

    • Jane2 says:

      10:01am | 20/09/11

      Based on my workplace I would say it voluntary over time. People deciding to use their work supplied phones and laptops intheir own time. I have regularly recieved emails from my boss sent at midnight from his home.

      This work is not stuff that must be done now or teh whole thing will fall apart its the “idea that comes from no where” that is “jotted down” (in an email) and sent to teh appropriate person to action the next day.

      Its not working harder, its working smarter. I wouldnt even really call it overtime since it was unbillable minutes taken to “jott down” an idea so it wouldnt be forgotten about.

      The other common one is if you have some policy to read to take it home where you can read it without interuption, is that over time? Not in my books.

    • Maree says:

      10:20am | 20/09/11

      JuzzyD: Agree. Just ask any pre management employee in the banking and finance industry what pressure they are under and the incidents unclaimed overtime. When your management, your expected to work at least 50 hours or more per week and if the work is not done, work on weekends.

    • Aaron says:

      10:42am | 20/09/11

      As far as I’m concerned, you want me to do work, you pay me for it. Now if we have a big project due, and we’re running behind schedule I’ll be the first to put my hand up to get the project done, but I don’t live to work, which is what a lot of bosses these days seems to expect.

    • Wynston Cruso says:

      02:44pm | 20/09/11

      Government organisations use the flexi time system, which is a rort because it’s your time to begin with and means that the employer (government) does not have to pay any overtime to anyone, ever. Therefore all overtime worked by public servants is unpaid, and a lot of it is worked, at least where I am.

    • Fiona says:

      05:27pm | 20/09/11

      Jane2, in my book that would be never being switched off from work. Don’t know about anyone else, but after dinners cooked and the kids in bed etc, I can’t do much more than stare vacantly at the tv (or go on the net). There’s no way I want to read some policy.

    • acotrel says:

      06:27am | 20/09/11

      Earning a lot of money is not much use, if you are dead !  The high incidence of mental illness, diabetes, and heart disease amongst Australian workers is a national disgrace - all related to stress !  It’s about time we effected a dramatic change in our workplace cultures, and used encouragement rather than coercion to motivate workers.  Productivity improvement involves using workers creativity to find better products and services,  and ways of producing them!  Authoritarianism stifles creativity ! The biggest change could easily be arranged by requiring all managers to be trained in the basics of people management, and the use of documented management systems as a way of training, and empowering workers to form self-managed work groups.

    • Tina says:

      07:33am | 20/09/11

      I am not sure whether I agree with that comment. Of course I would wish as well for a company that does provides me with perfect work-life-balance, offers flexible working hours and shows some care.

      But my employer has employed me to help him gain profit. Not to support me in my personal life, and give me a pat on the back and a pep talk when my husband is cheating on me and when my kids misbehave in school.

      Nowadays we have drinks on Fridays starting at 4 pm, casual dress days, playstations an TVs in the lunch room and celebrate every tiny success with sponsored team brunches. What do we actually expect from our employer?

    • Millicent says:

      07:39am | 20/09/11

      My husband is a boilermaker, we are older Australian’s ,my husband still works, no way could we afford him not to. Recently my husband had a toothache, it kept awake all night, poor man was like a bear with a sore head, so I rang around to find a dentist, the cheapest quote to remove the tooth was $300.00. We were in shock!! No wonder so many Australians have bad teeth. The cost of dental care is just out of the reach of many. Yes we got the tooth removed but both of us are hoping we have no more problems. Everything is sky high now, normal Aussie’s just can’t afford anything above living today. It is stressful and one wage just does not cover it, I lost my job in the gfc and because of my age I cannot get another one, many many are in our position or worse off, we know we are not alone, but that does not make it easier.

    • acotrel says:

      08:22am | 20/09/11

      @Millicent
      My brother is also a boilermaker.  Look after your husband, real workers are becoming much rarer these days !

    • marley says:

      09:27am | 20/09/11

      I suspect that the high levels of diabetes and heart disease have a lot more to do with Australia’s very high levels of obesity, than they do with work-related stress.  After all, workplaces are a lot less authoritarian these days than they were 50 years ago.

    • L. says:

      09:27am | 20/09/11

      Acotrel says:
      “The high incidence of mental illness, diabetes, and heart disease amongst Australian workers is a national disgrace - all related to stress !”

      WTF..??

      Are you seriously saying that 100% of all mental illness, diabetes, and heart disease amongst Australian workers is all caused by stress..??

      There’s not once instance of genetic link or poor lifestyle choices..? It’s all stress related, yeah..?? Is that really your position..??

    • Jane2 says:

      10:07am | 20/09/11

      @ Millicent, thats what private health insurance is for, to reduce the tooth extraction to $50.

    • Max, of Rocky says:

      11:31am | 20/09/11

      The diagnosis is basically OK in my book but the solution will need a little more work.

      One solution will not fill all scenarios, but trial and modifications is one way ,  so long as they are based on PROVEN modern management principals.

    • Fiona says:

      05:31pm | 20/09/11

      Jane2, did you read that Millicent had lost her job? I’d say that they can’t afford private health insurance.

    • Mattb says:

      08:15pm | 20/09/11

      Millicent

      $300!!!. Sorry to say it, but you got ripped off big time. I had an extremely difficult tooth removed earlier this year for less than half that. No private health insurance involved either. But hey, 300 bucks out of pocket, or extreme pain, I know the option I’d be taking. I would’ve paid a $1000, without questioning it, to remove the aching tooth from my mouth..

    • Kipling says:

      06:53am | 20/09/11

      More reputable data from the ABS? Yet you do not analyse its terms of reference with anything near the degree of analysis you gave the ACTU.
      Perhaps I am cynical, but in my opinion the truth is probably somewhere in the middle of the two.
      You would have us believe that we (real workers) are doing it easy… Clearly, apart from a minority, that is not the case, despite what your ABS or ACTU might say.
      As a member of the workforce, I have seen over a number of decades conditions diminish. Tell me, why are there so many places no longer paying overtime for extra work done? Why is there an expectation that people will do more work that they were contracted to do to “get the job finished”...
      It seems real workers are genuinely on their own.

    • Economist says:

      12:42pm | 20/09/11

      Agreed. John’s summary statistics on hours worked decreasing don’t necessarily show the increase in the participation rates, casualisation and increase in part-time work. Nor do they show that income distribution has widened. The issue also is that the stas would vary considerably from industry to industry and by occupation.

      I particularly like this contribution by Judith Sloan. http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/awa-system-saw-real-wage-rises/story-e6frg6zo-1226141164683. While a nice little summary, and pretty fair, she misses some obvious points. Real incomes grew in spite of AWAs, this is obvious given their coverage of only 5%. That AWAs were good for mining and the public sector, but bad for hospitality and retail and yet this claim is interesting “According to Australian Bureau of Statistics figures published in early 2005, the hourly wages of workers on AWAs was 2 per cent lower than workers on collective agreements. The figure for women was 11 per cent. But without adequate controls for the many factors that affect pay beyond method of setting pay, these figures are not very informative.” It’s interesting in that the results don’t support the claims ofr the benefits of AWAs, but this is because of a lakc of adequate controls, but hte lack of adequate controls is the problem with most data and statistical analysis.

      Of course John Lloyd would be familiar with this given that he worked for the department responsible for AWA roll outs, but also John should be given credit for increasing productivity in the construction sector while heading up the ACCC. 

      Personally it’s obvious that we need adequate controls on both unions and employers given the level of corruption in the former and the willingness of the latter to screw employees over if given the chance.

    • Mahhrat says:

      07:06am | 20/09/11

      It comes down to choices.

      There was something on news.com.au yesterday that a fellow applied for - and got - a $450,000 mortgage on $70k a year.

      How many people actually do that?  I know of a couple.  And yes, they’re stressed.

      I earn $55k, and I have a $200k mortgage.  I also have my beautiful lady who earns similar money.

      We are not stressed.

      Sure, our house is a 2 bedroom weatherboard bungalow 500 yards from the tip, but it’s comfy and it’s safe and it’s all we really need.

      What I’m noticing at work is that more and more professionals, having earned their high end degrees and getting the $100k a year jobs, are suddenly realising they can do really well working a four-day week on $80k.

      So I think both sides of the story are right - some people are stressed, some people are awake to their work/life balance and have made sacrifices for it. 

      Individual responsibility is a wonderful thing.

    • Tina says:

      07:37am | 20/09/11

      I agree. I think what we demand to have as basics in our lives has gotten a little out of control.

    • MadKat of Melbourne says:

      10:09am | 20/09/11

      Professionals with high end degrees aren’t suddenly realising the benefits part-time - its stereotypical to assume that people that go to university want to work their life away -

    • Jane2 says:

      10:14am | 20/09/11

      I agree.

      Recently I copped an earfull from someone who was saying they need a payrise because they were about to loose their house, their credit cards were maxed out and teh kids couldnt go on excursions as they hadnt paid the school fees. He didnt appreciate my response that a pay rise wouldnt help. He liked it even less when I said doubling his income wouldnt help as in 6 months time he would be precisely in the same position.

      Its all about choices and how you chose to spend your wage. This gent earns $40,000pa more than me but I have no money stress, even with a mortgage.

      Most stress is self inflicted.

    • Elizabeth1 says:

      07:29am | 20/09/11

      Individual income measures against household total income averages don’t measure the same thing. Households may have two incomes, part time work and not counting unpaid overtime are some differences that I can think of.

    • thatmosis says:

      07:40am | 20/09/11

      Anything the Unions say should be taken with a grain of salt as they are after all breeding grounds for Labor Politiians and we all know how they lie. The best way of getting productivity and good wages is contract work where you get paid for what you do, not to stand around leaning on a shovel or at the water cooler. No wage rises should be granted without rises in productivity and if people are fool enough to work long hours without pay then thats their problem.

    • Tina says:

      08:16am | 20/09/11

      I work as contractor. It is certainly a very honest way of working. But i can get made redundant with one day notice, I cannot afford to be sick and the last time I took a day off was over a year ago.

    • acotrel says:

      08:27am | 20/09/11

      @thatmosis
      ‘breeding grounds for Labor Politiians and we all know how they lie’

      Julia Gillard’s lie , happened because she didn’t follow the ‘script’, and made a ‘non-core promise’ !

    • TChong says:

      09:53am | 20/09/11

      Tina
      7:33 you work for this company which has mufti friday and pizzas , so its all good, but
      8:18 the same company will retrench you without notice, no sick leave.
      Thats good?
      Sounds deplorable.
      Either the managers are totally inept , and shouldnt run a raffle, or else you have Stockholm syndrome.

    • tina says:

      10:49am | 20/09/11

      TChong

      Its because I am a contractor. My agency can fire me as they wish and they dont pay me any kind of leave, including sick leave. The company I actually work for is the one with the nice Fridays and stuff. As I am a new resident I have just become eligible to not work as contractor and take on direct employment.

    • TChong says:

      12:57pm | 20/09/11

      Good for you Tina.
      Working should involve a fair renumeration for your labour and skills, hope you find it, so if you do get crook, or want a holiday, you aint put off their books

    • jf says:

      01:51pm | 20/09/11

      TChong says:12:57pm | 20/09/11

      It’s about choice TChong.

      One could decide to (i) take a safe job with a government department or large corporate with sick leave, annual leave and super or (ii) do that same job on contract and give up those benefits but stand to earn a better hourly rate.

      I have a young family so (ii) isn’t for me.

      But it was 15 years ago and worked very well for me. When the project was finished I move on to another after a brief period of not working.

      I then went and worked for an employee for 10 years because I need the job security and certainty of income.

      More recently I have started my own business and, once again, have given up all those benefits afforded to employees. It is risky and bloody hard work but I did it willingly and without coercion and grateful that I am able to make that choice.

      No-one is forcing anyone to contract at a higher rate than take an employed role with greater benefits.

      Choice is a great thing for employers and employees.

    • baal says:

      08:21am | 20/09/11

      All these articles are full of shit. Biased and non informative. Also I learnt in primary school that averages are not very helpfull when examining distribution of resourses across the whole population. To get a real picture you need to look in depth at medians etc and really break it down doing some real investigation.
      Both this article and Ged’s are just proof that opion pieces nolonger seem to be backed up with real argument and are just droppings from the bullshit pony of opinionville.

    • Bitten says:

      08:57am | 20/09/11

      Like! Yet you notice Ged gets so much more air time on the Punch…because she represents very few Australian workers…huh??

    • fml says:

      09:31am | 20/09/11

      Thats probably why they are called opinion pieces.

    • jf says:

      01:55pm | 20/09/11

      baal says:08:21am | 20/09/11

      “Both this article and Ged’s are just proof that opion pieces nolonger seem to be backed up with real argument and are just droppings from the bullshit pony of opinionville.”

      Do you mean apart from the supporting data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics?

    • Babe in the Woods says:

      08:22am | 20/09/11

      Not sure if I believe either of these two. I know I work the same hours.  However, as has been noted above by Tina, in my workplace we have casual Fridays with drinks from 4.  We also have “bonding” days etc.  In all, the stress level has come right down.  My pay has gone up but then again so has cost of living.  Mind you, I don’t live beyond my means so that takes a lot of stress away (cut up the credit cards folks).  I think you can manipulate any findings to say what you like.  Given enough stas I can prove eating carrots is more likely to cause cancer than smoking.

    • Tina says:

      08:41am | 20/09/11

      I read an article about increased stress levels coming from growing exposure to things. Internet at work, radio and ipod on the bus, tv screens in the gym, traffic noises at night, pushing through crowds in shoppings malls, advertising, music in every store you enter, overload of offers. Why are we more stressed considering we work in the best working conditions so far? I dont think my grandpa knew the term work-life-balance. But his focus was maybe more narrow and maybe his everyday life was simpler (not easier)

    • Babe in the Woods says:

      09:41am | 20/09/11

      I agree with you Tina.  There needs to be balance and realising what is important and what is being pushed upon us.  I travel from my lovely beach every day to the city.  No problem, I have a nice sleep in and on the way home enjoy watching the water go by or reading and relaxing.  I keep out of malls when I can.  This constant push to buy this or buy that annoys me.  It has the opposite effect.  It is a shame people don’t realise what they need to be happy as stress would be far less.  I have been offerred far more money to work elsewhere, but I like the conditions where I am and they pay for all my needs and quite a few of my wants.  Anyway, feeling happy now!  Have a great day.

    • Gus says:

      08:39am | 20/09/11

      People in the 19th century worked long hours for a lot less money,Something happened since, It is called PROGRESS .And guess what; everybody should benefit. Even the workers.I am sure that some of the bosses think we should still live in sheds and serve in their mansions

    • Gratuitous Adviser says:

      08:44am | 20/09/11

      Of course Ged Kearney’s “Census” survey was skewed.  It was like any published survey performed by consultants, including those commissioned by the Institute of Public Affairs.  The result will reflect the opinion of those that paid for the survey.
      That out of the way, the only part of John Lloyds contribution that I think was helpful or correct was his recommendation to “Commission a genuine scientific survey conducted by a member of the Australian Market and Social Research Society”, assuming that the AM and SRC are independent.  That survey result would make interesting reading.
      I can only give an opinion of someone that was working for 40 years, starting on the shop floor but spending most of the time in management, including heading a HR department.  Australians are a very hard working people who have been rewarded by ever increasing work demands by the employer in their race for the bottom.  In my experience the success of the employer in reducing the requirement for payment of overtime has been the main reason for the increase in working hours, especially for office staff.  This combined with the ever increasing salary differential between those at the high end and those further down has been caused by the governments of both persuasions allowing the free flowing use of 457 Visa’s combined with the high unemployment rate during John Howard’s Workchoice period.  During this period the great unwashed were required to negotiate their working contract under the FIFO (Fit in or F*** Off) cloud while being told by their Howard Government, they were better off.  The overwhelming majority of employees are not capable of negotiating there own contract because of their lack of skills, education and experience in this area and their complete lack of resources or time.  Anyone employee that thinks they can negotiate a better deal without a Union or equivalent is a fool.  I could continue for pages but I would ask anyone, including John Lloyd, to honestly ask themselves if they think their children are better off and/or have a better future than they had at a comparable age.  I think not.
      By the by:  I hope that the Punch and the Drum do not bring in a policy of not allowing alias’s for their contributors.  I, for one and on some issues, can only write a truthful opinion and not have to be politically correct, because of anonymity.

    • MadKat of Melbourne says:

      09:28am | 20/09/11

      “Anyone employee that thinks they can negotiate a better deal without a Union or equivalent is a fool” - office workers don’t have unions and negotiate their pay -

    • Ben C says:

      10:48am | 20/09/11

      Those working in a professional capacity, eg. lawyers and accountants, have never needed unions to negotiate their pay, and we’re some of the best paid employees around.

    • Gratuitous Adviser says:

      11:34am | 20/09/11

      Hi Madkat: Take it from a previous HR Manager that has negotiated on behalf of the employers a few EBA’s (union reps on the other side of the table) for the shop floor staff and written the employment conditions and contracts of many classes of office staff, who have no one representing them and only state and federal legislation to support them.  Office workers are the easiest to influence because they have the easily patronised belief that they are part of management.  Most of them do not understand their employment conditions.  Ultimately, they will take what they are given because, they can be and they know themselves, they can be replaced easily.  Interestingly, it is those office staff that are lowest on the totem poll that will give the best argument or anything at all, simply because they have little to lose.  Only very senior management have any leverage and in a lot of cases not as much as they think unless they directly, and it can be shown, that they add value to the company. Trust me.

      Hey Ben: Lawyers Yes, Accountants No (see above).  The reason that lawyers have a an advantage over the rest is that they have experience in contracts and advocacy .  That is why you are better having representation by people that have skills in contracts and can speak on your behalf.  For example, sportspeople have agents who will generally have a legal qualification as do a lot of union advocates or at least the recources to seek same.  Think about it.

    • L. says:

      12:19pm | 20/09/11

      “Hey Ben: Lawyers Yes, Accountants No (see above). “

      Sorry, don’t agree with this.

      Accountants can name their price as long as they have achieved their Chartered status, as there is huge demand for that qualification.

      It’s like all jobs, educate yourself, and you’ll do fine. I’m a network engineer, and everyone in my industry knows it’s a case of continuously certify..or perish.

      In real-estate it’s “position, position position.

      In the job market it’s “education, education education”.

    • MadKat of Melbourne says:

      01:20pm | 20/09/11

      Ben C - what about typists, office juniors, mail room clerks, data entry operators? They all work in offices and don’t have a union.

      Gratuitous Adviser - “Office workers are the easiest to influence because they have the easily patronised belief that they are part of management” - where did you pull that one from - I’ve never felt like a part of management when I haven’t been - the pecking-order in offices is alive and well - and for a HR Manager you sure don’t sound like you have any respect for your workers -

    • MadKat of Melbourne says:

      01:38pm | 20/09/11

      Ben C - sorry to enlighten you - accountants aren’t some of the best paid employees around - I’ve worked in the investment departments of some big accountancy practices - they get paid crap compared to other finance professionals -

    • Gratuitous Adviser says:

      08:43pm | 20/09/11

      I suppose what cheeses me is that the system is unfair when “Individual Contracts” are entered into for office workers below “Manager”.  This is a very general statement but what happens is that a Managers salary will be always above the salary of his/her sub-ordinates and he/she will have more experience and knowledge to negotiate on a more equal footing.
      Despite what is said by the likes of Peter Reith (did he ever explain his mysterious $400K laundry worker statement?) or John Lloyd, the average office person is up against it when negotiating their salary and conditions because they do not have the skills necessary to articulate their case.  It is my opinion, based on experience, that Collective Bargaining (union involvement) would give them (average office person) a better result.  This would lead to pattern bargaining, but this happens now on the employer side anyway, making a very unequal playing field. 
      I feel the Australian people will soon need to make a decision (by their vote) on whether they want to head back to living in a more egalitarian society or continue down the path of the “have” and “have nots”.  I might add that I am a “have” but after 40 years of continuous work and life experience, I feel our society is heading the wrong way in its race to the bottom.

    • Tubesteak says:

      08:53am | 20/09/11

      Median income is $55k. I suggest you pay off a mortgage in Sydney and raise a family on that and come back and tell us how well you’re doing.

      Lower work hours represent the increasing casualisation of the workforce. Many of whom would be earning below the median income.

      Other studies show we have some of the longest working hours in the world and the most unpaid overtime.

      Your article is pure bunkum. Some decent research would have proven your argument to be completely false. But that wouldn’t have helped you push the barrow you wanted to push.

    • EJ says:

      09:21am | 20/09/11

      I work 38 hrs a week and earn 41K, I am part of Gen-X, the most debt ridden generation is history (woot woot) I have a loan that I am struggling to pay off and 2 credit cards that I can’t help using, I commute 2 hours each way to work, I get home and then an hour later I go to bed, the only ‘me time’ I have is on my weekend when i don’t have the energy to do anything and my friends keep bugging me to ‘do something’ with them, they study and don’t work so they don’t get why i am so tired each and every weekend. I live with my parents because i literally can’t afford to buy a house or rent on my own

    • JT says:

      10:25am | 20/09/11

      EJ; So do something about it. Look for a better paying job or a lesser paying job closer to home and save on transport costs, pay off the bloody credit cards, consolidate your debt. There are numerous things you can do to improve your situation and really Gen-X? you were born b4 81? but live at home and all your friends still study and don’t work?

    • zhoo says:

      10:31am | 20/09/11

      EJ:
      I work 38hr per week, earn 41k and are gen Y. You say you cant rent on your own? thats bullshit, ive been renting in inner east melbourne for 3 years on less income, sure its not the nicest place, but then again i have no credit cards, phone plans or any other debt. I live within my means.

    • EJ says:

      12:32pm | 20/09/11

      wow! no need to attack personal choices, I can’t share with others as i don’t like other people and with my debt to pay off i would prefer to save money and go on holidays overseas than pay off someone else’s mortgage, seriously is there really need to attack me on that? my parents don’t mind that I am at home, I do my own laundry, I pay half the rent and grocery bills, my roommates just happen to be my folks, back off, i am paying off my bills but it takes time, I love my job why would i want to leave it?

    • AdamC says:

      09:24am | 20/09/11

      If union members are so stressed and stretched, what does that say about unions’ effectiveness in getting them better wages and conditions?

      It has, of course, become fashionable to whinge about how hard we are working and how busy we are (even when commenting on the Punch in work time). I take it all with a grain of salt. As the author notes, we are actually working about the same as or less than we did thirty years ago, but being paid much more. That is due to increased productivity over time and it is why productivity is so important.

      And it is no surprise that people are always struggling to get by. I mean, aren’t we all? I know there are some, blessed, people who manage to save all their cash and never woryy about meeting the mortgage payment, ot stress about an unexpected expense. (Hey, they probably keep a calendar for every bill!) Most of us aren’t that good with our money. It’s not an income thing; it’s just human nature.

    • James1 says:

      10:09am | 20/09/11

      Exactly.  You know you have it good when “struggling” means choosing which luxury consumer items you should buy, rather than deciding which of your children you should force to get a job, or which dump to pick over for scraps.

    • AdamC says:

      10:54am | 20/09/11

      Well, James1, your example is extreme, but the principle is correct. It seems people are so willing to believe that things are getting worse and they are ‘doing it tough’, no matter what evidence exists to the contrary. This guff about everyone working longer hours is a case in point. There is no evidence that it is actually happening, but that doesn’t stop everyone believing it.

    • Anne71 says:

      12:46pm | 20/09/11

      Exactly, AdamC. I think the increasing demand for middle class welfare is the perfect example. I find it unbelievable that a family on a combined income of $100k can describe themselves as “struggling” and therefore deserving of government assistance. I’m sorry, but no. You are not on “Struggle Street” if you are earning that kind of money. You just need some lessons in prioritising and budgeting.  And if you can’t or won’t do that, the taxpayer should not have to pick up the tab for you.

    • Economist says:

      12:48pm | 20/09/11

      @AdamC things aren’t getting worse. The size of the middle class as measured by those between the bottom 30% and top 20% of earners has actually increased, well according to the Australia Institute.

      Who are those that do well, well those that don’t consume. Personally you don’t become a millionnaire overnight unless you consume less and save. It’s pretty obvious.

      As for hours this would vary from industry to industry, but I can tell you people in my office, with their blackberries are working longer tha the 40 hour week, just not necessarily at the office. AS for evidence, previously we’ve discussed the union estimates of 100s of thousand of hours, but they are from the union afterall.

    • AdamC says:

      01:33pm | 20/09/11

      Anne71, I am not as against family tax benefits as many other Punchers are. However, I agree there need to be limits on them.

      Yes, Economist, the savers shall inherit the earth (or, rather, leave it to their kids). However, for many of us, saving money is like losing weight and keeping it off - a noble goal we fail to reach. Personally, I prefer to invest in an extravagent lifestyle! (OK, that’s kind of a joke, but also kind of serious. Does that make sense?)

      Also, having recently been inducted into the Blackberry club, I am finding it quite useful. I haven’t found myself tied to it, but it does get a little compulsive.

    • Anna C says:

      09:26am | 20/09/11

      I remember when I was in High School in the late 80’s/early 90"s being told by my teachers that when I grow up I would have so much free time because of computers that I wouldn’t know what to do with myself. I wish.

      I think we should take the ABS’s stats with a grain of salt. I don’t know many people who are working fewer hours because of choice. Most of the people I know working fewer hours are doing so because they can’t get full-time employment and so are having to make do with part-time work. Also while our incomes have supposedly gone up, so has the cost of living in this country. The ABS’s CPI figures never take into consideration the rising cost of housing/rent? Why, because if they did it would be a more accurate measure of inflation? 

      I think this is a case of lies, damned lies and statistics.

    • Steve says:

      09:46am | 20/09/11

      Simple lesson is this:  Never Trust an NGO’s Survey Results.

      NGO surveys are not there to tell the truth - the survey’s purpose are to hook the media and pursuade the public there is a problem that needs fixing.

    • Shane From Melbourne says:

      09:52am | 20/09/11

      no, no, no. Some sectors such as mining will have higher than average wages pushing up the average wage, while some sectors such as retail have increasing casualization pushing down the average working hours. Doesn’t prove that the average Australian is earning more and working less, just means that the statistics have been skewed by a couple of factors. Just proves that you can prove any old bullshit with statistics

    • Anna C says:

      10:00am | 20/09/11

      I think we should take the ABS’s stats with a grain of salt. I don’t know many people who are working fewer hours because of choice. Most of the people I know working fewer hours are doing so because they can’t get full-time employment and so are having to make do with part-time work.
      Also while our incomes have supposedly gone up, so has the cost of living in this country. The ABS’s CPI figures never take into consideration the rising cost of housing/rent? Why, because if they did it would be a more accurate measure of inflation? 

      I think this is a case of lies, damned lies and statistics.

    • Robert S McCormick says:

      10:03am | 20/09/11

      “Fill out this poll for a chance to win One of 3 $1000 Prizes”
      The Census nothing more nor less than yet another “competition”
      It was also discriminatory. It smacked of the old Unions Policy of “Closed Shops” - a policy which, because they reccomend it, one of Australia;s Major Supermarket, Liquor, Hotel & General Merchandise groups actively encourages their staff to embrace.
      Why should workers not keep demanding better “Pay’n'Perks”?
      Think about it.
      Our Federal, State & Territory politicians have set up their own cosy little equivalent of “FairWork Australia”. The difference is that workers have to really battle to get even the tiniest improvements. Our politicians don’t.
      They simply got to their Remuneration Tribunal ask for & get, because many of the increases in pay the pollies get flows through to them.
      They don’t simply get a 2,3 or even 5 per cent rise they give themselves massive rises starting a anything between 10% & 15%. They have not done a single second of more work. They have not achieved even the slightest increase in productivity. They have done nothing to deserve the massive increases they get. They don’t sit in their Parliaments any more days, They do hold out their hands for more. They get Taxpayer subsidised luxury cars for themseleve & their families. The taxpayers even pay for the fuel they use & the servicing of those luxury cars. They can use those cars, fuel, service to go on holidays! All paid for by the Taxpayers.
      Workers can’t even get Tax Deductability for the cost of getting to work by Public Transport.
      Whilst we are at it spare a thought for Old Age Pensioners - particularly those for whom Superannuation was not available until 1985. A single OAP gets $350 per week yet those politicial opportunists tell us that the “Povert Line” cuts in when a person’s income is at something like $590 + or -  per week. These same political opportunists - our politicians - refuse to Fully Index Pensions so that those less fortuante than us can at least try to keep up with the ever-increasing cost of (Government-controlled) Utilities & the profit-mad Food Retailers as represented by the major Supermarket chains. Thse latter deliberately Punish all people on Low Incomes with their discriminatory “Multiple Buy” Policies. You know them don’t you? If you buy ONE loaf of a Major Brand Bread you are charged $5 but if you buy 2 you get them both for $6. OK, some might say that it’s only $1 more to get double the quantity but it is an extra $1 which Low Income People have to spend & that comes off their available weekly spend for other food, Prescription medicines etc.
      If Woolworths & Coles etc. can sell two products for $5 & they still make a profit they can sell one for $2.50 & still make a profit!

    • Shane From Melbourne says:

      11:45am | 20/09/11

      Yeah the multibuy thing by the supermarkets gives me the shits. A single person can’t use or want a second loaf of bread. Just another example of the entrenched discrimination against singles in favor of families in this country. (official government policy in areas like welfare and handouts)

    • JS says:

      12:48pm | 20/09/11

      I agree on the multi-buy. It is discriminatory and its really strange as all the demographers agree that there will be more people living alone than any other type of household in the future, why dont the major supermarkets tap into this growing market by offering discounts for singles.

    • Jane2 says:

      10:27am | 20/09/11

      I cant help wondering what my grandfather, if he was still with us, would say when we have employers trying to get staff to work an 8 hr day. My workplace its 7hrs 21mins equals a full day.

    • Kipling says:

      06:43am | 21/09/11

      Regardless of what he might say, I reckon he would be saying it from a picket line….
      There is one of the single major differences between the (mostly) now deceased generation of workers and the modern workforce. Back in the day the workers would unite to protect each other, rather than looking out just for themselves, recognised and accepted making a small sacrifice for the greater good (i.e. loose some pay on strike in order to improve wages and conditions).
      Your workplace is a rarity or are you overlooking the “extras” for no pay? That volunteer work appears to be unmeasurable, how convenient.

    • mick says:

      10:37am | 20/09/11

      If you don’t think that the rich have had a 2 decade of large salary rises whilst working Australians have been ‘indexed’ then you will also more than likely believe in the tooth fairy and that Tony Abbott is working for you.

      The reality is that working Australians have seen cost rising significantly over a period of time whilst wages have been all but fixed.  If Australians vote Liberal in the next election then it is highly likely that the wages reform which former leader John Howard has been back in front of the cameras spruiking will come to pass.

      If you think that your wages are not enough now then wait for the revisited Work Choices…..coming to an election not far away.

    • jf says:

      02:01pm | 20/09/11

      mick says:10:37am | 20/09/11

      “the wages reform which former leader John Howard has been back in front of the cameras spruiking will come to pass.”

      You know someone has a weak argument when they have to resort to a bare-faced lie to back it up.

    • Peter says:

      11:20am | 20/09/11

      What this article also misses is that there has been a corresponding increase in wealth disparity in Australia over this same time period.

    • WorkWidow says:

      11:37am | 20/09/11

      There is better data available from the Australia @ Work study which is a longitutinal study.

      I wish that my husband worked in a unionised workplace - or even worked for a civil employer.  He works incredibly hard and do his workmates but despite the profits recorded in Aust the company is poor because of the GFC - something that was not the fault of the employees who are told that they don’t get pay increases and they have to do more with less. 

      There are some decent employers out there who are civil but one swallow doesn’t make a summer.  Much of it is the introduction of the US culture of yeehah!  Yes I believe that we work and we deserve to be paid fairly for the work - I understand that it doesn’t mean that we can just assume that work will meet our expectations of living expenses.  This survey was a snap shot of who participated - it isn’t being used to cast new laws or legislation and anyone who takes any real interest in work or the cost of living won’t be surprised with the results.  Australians are a hard working nation - and contributes unpaid hours - not on fiddlying around with emails etc as was suggested at the top - that sounds more like people don’t have other lives beyond work if they are happy doing that.

      Some people here really don’t have a contemporary experience of the private sector I suspect.

    • Tika says:

      02:20pm | 20/09/11

      I wonder how many of these hours includes our new generation of “working mothers”. Women who were once able to dedicate all of their time to raising children and looking after the house who are now, on top of this, forced to work at least part-time because of rising living costs. Working less?? Yeah right.

    • Daniel D says:

      05:02pm | 20/09/11

      Is it just me or does it look like that dudes penis coming out of the top of his shorts. Actually all of them appear to have expose genitals.

    • KRS1 says:

      06:04pm | 20/09/11

      The ACTU may have obtained their data in a dodgy, non-scientific manner, however that doesn’t mean their conclusion is not correct.

      The rise in greed and so-called entrepreneurial career-driven types means that we no longer can stay in a steady job for more than 4 years, and “long service leave” is a long extinct fossil.

      You are kidding yourself if you think that those entering the workforce today have it easy.

    • Pet Of The Month says:

      06:19pm | 20/09/11

      Work Less and earn more? Life is but sleep!
      Are Australians the smartest workers in the world ? Or just Coalition Voters?

    • Utopia Boy says:

      09:43pm | 20/09/11

      Defeating your own argument that the stats were manipulated, by manipulating your own stats is hardly fair reporting.
      What is the real story? That stats can be manipulated to show the result an organisation wants? Or is it to try and persuade us we are working less, even though we spend less time at home and see our spouse less because both contributors are now working?
      If the average working week has reduced, surely it’s because there are less full time jobs and people are forced into part time occupations; maybe two part time jobs.
      If wealth has increased 41% for low income earners, doesn’t that mean if both people are working only one of them has a full time job?
      That means one is working full time, one working part time and wealth has only increased 41%, there’s a 9% loss in net wealth increase (given a part time job is worth 50% of a full time one). 
      It also means a person who was spending all their time at home running the household is now only there 50% of the time, and that 50% is at the discretion of the employer.
      So even if Australians are spending more time at home, it may not be quality time.
      See, I’ve dazzled you with ridiculous figures, because I interpreted them to suit my argument. Ok, maybe not dazzled.
      The article is tripe.

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Lucy Kippist

@christoforpaine sorry! Actually thought I already was... Weird?

Lucy Kippist

@dreshubby you wont know until you try!

Malcolm Farr

Carbon tax?RT @danielsutton10: Terrifying number: Hewlett-Packard cutting 27,000 jobs worldwide to save $3 billion. #tennews#tenbreakfast

Malcolm Farr

@IanHanke That was indeed him.

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

Animal experiments won’t cure me from cancer

Animal experiments won’t cure me from cancer

Lying on a cold table in an unfamiliar place and undergoing a core biopsy was probably one of the most…

If you want to get promoted, laugh at the boss’s jokes

If you want to get promoted, laugh at the boss’s jokes

Red alert, ladies. Making jokes about your ability at work is not funny particularly at board level.…

Need someone to do your dirty work? Try God.

Need someone to do your dirty work? Try God.

Punishing the baddies is only fun in the movies. In real life it’s messy, expensive, and fraught…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

Michael S says:

"A teacher at Geelong Grammar had criticised her for using words that were too long, which had left her confused and had made her doubt her ability to write essays. She became ''quite distressed'' when her English marks began to fall." I can sympathise. My scholastic mentors conveyed to me a causal relationship… [read more]

From: Welfare for breeders is a bonus for everyone

Change Up! says:

I have no problem paying my taxes. As a single, childless person on a very decent income, I can afford it and not have my life severely altered. Plus I understand that my taxes paying for things like schools, childcare and infrastructure is ultimately a good thing. A better community is better for me… [read more]

Gentle jabs to the ribs

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

A private school girl’s family is sueing her elite, extremely expensive private school for not… Read more

242 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter