New push for four-day work week and more annual leave in productivity discussion
The Australian Manufacturing Workers Union and the Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation have made a fresh push for shorter working hours and more annual leave in return for productivity gains.
It comes in response to the Productivity Commission, which will inform the discussions at next month's economic reform roundtable.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese revealed to The Australian he would favour reforms that had 'broad support'.
Speaking to The Australian, The Australian Manufacturing Workers Union's national secretary Steve Murphy said, 'One of the ways that we can share in productivity, if we're more productive over the course of the week, is to work less hours. That would be a great outcome from a productivity discussion.
'Or (if) we were able to have more annual leave to spend our time with the people we love and care about.'
Murphy believes there are multiple ways of reducing working hours without cuts to pay, such as a four day working week, a nine-day fortnight or a 35-hour week.
'Where we would like it to get is that there is a much more healthy balance between time at work and time with your family and time for leisure than what it is right now.
'Productivity can't be at the expense of the wellbeing of workers.'
He also argued that a better work-life balance was more crucial than cutting income or company taxes, saying that most workers believed in the value of tax to fund government services and infrastructure.
On Monday, Minister for Social Services Tanya Plibersek joined a Sunrise panel, revealing that the government was open to listening to all views at the roundtable, though they would not be attempting to improve productivity by '(asking) people to work longer for less'.
'We want to invest in our people, boost training, invest in technologies and new ways of working, make sure that we're playing to our competitive advantages as a nation,' Plibersek revealed.
'That's how we boost productivity.'
Globally, Canadian businessman and multi-millionaire Kevin O'Leary, best known for his role as one of the investors on the program Shark Tank, last month branded the idea of a four-day work week 'stupid' on an appearance on Fox News.
'There is a big push now for a four day work week, do you think we will become like the French?' one of the presenters asked.
The four-day work week is becoming increasingly popular in France, with the country launching it's first official pilot of the program in 2024.
In 2000, the country also legally mandated a 35-hour work week, with any hours worked beyond this considered overtime.
'That's the stupidest idea I have ever heard,' he said.
'I think we should let the French go to a two-day work week and then kick their arse internationally.'
The outspoken businessman claimed that in our post-pandemic world and new digital economy, there is 'no such thing as a work week' anymore.
But this isn't to say Mr O'Leary thinks a traditional five-day work week is the answer either, with the multi-millionaire taking a more outcome focused approach.
'Look at my staff, 40 per cent of them work remotely all around the world,' he said.
For example, if a project is due by June 15, then he doesn't care how many days a week his staff work, so long as the work is done on time.
One of the common ways that companies implement a four-day week is by using the 100:80:100 model, in which staff keep 100 per cent of their pay but have their work hours reduced to 80 per cent.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Perth Now
23 minutes ago
- Perth Now
Nats 'steers' rumbling in party paddock over net zero
A powder keg has been dropped within the coalition over climate policy as dissenters push for a net zero emissions target to be dropped. Opponents of the 2050 target are ramping up pressure on their leaders to ditch the target, saying it's hurting regional Australia and driving up power bills as Australia phases out coal and boosts renewable energy investment. The debate reignited after former Nationals leader Barnaby Joyce flagged a private member's bill to scrap the legislated target. "The last two elections we went forward with a policy supporting net zero and we've been handed our political derriere on a plate," he told reporters in Canberra on Wednesday. He argued Australia should focus on economic viability with big emitters like China, India and the US not making major cuts to emissions while Australia's power prices increased. India has a net zero by 2070 target, China by 2060 and the US had a 2050 target under the Biden administration but climate action has been largely scrapped under President Donald Trump. "Even if you believe every chapter, verse, what net zero was going to achieve, it's not going to achieve it because the world's not participating in it," Mr Joyce said. "So why are we on this sort of singular crusade by ourselves that has no effect on the climate but is incredibly deleterious to the standard of living and the cost of living of the Australian people - it's insane." Opposition Leader Sussan Ley refused to say whether the target will remain coalition policy as a review into its policies continues following their May election defeat. Liberals largely want to keep the net zero emissions policy; they lost a swathe of inner city seats amid concerns they weren't taking climate change seriously enough. "The electorate has told us in multiple elections that this is what they want, and we do have an obligation to leave the planet in a better place," Liberal senator Jane Hume told AAP. Labor has seized on the split over climate policy, with Climate Change and Energy Minister Chris Bowen saying the Liberals are being held hostage by their junior coalition partner. Mr Joyce has been joined by an unlikely ally in Michael McCormack, another former Nationals leader whom he rolled for the job in 2021. But the two have broken bread over a shared disdain for current leader David Littleproud after both were dumped from his frontbench. Mr Joyce, who was rolled by Mr Littleproud after the 2022 election loss, said he'd support a leadership bid by Mr McCormack, which he hasn't ruled out but acknowledged no imminent challenge. Mr McCormack denied the duo are white-anting their leader, arguing he's standing up for regional Australians who are bearing the negative impacts of renewable energy projects on their land and near their towns. Despite the duo touting leadership troubles for Mr Littleproud, other Nationals MPs hosed down the speculation, saying the talk was from a vocal minority aggrieved over climate policy and personal snubs. Liberal frontbencher Dan Tehan compared the two Nationals MPs railing against their leader as "two steers in a paddock". Mr McCormack said he took umbrage with the comments, joking that steers had been emasculated and he was "quite virile and ready to go as far as politics is concerned".
ABC News
23 minutes ago
- ABC News
South Perth council votes to remove trees on public land after complaints about obstructed views
The City of South Perth will rip up six small trees planted last year on the Swan River foreshore parkland, after complaints they would eventually block residents' "million-dollar views" of the city skyline. The council planted the saplings in Sir James Mitchell Park last winter, but on Tuesday night voted in favour of removing the trees on behalf of residents whose homes face the park and the city skyline beyond. Speaking at the meeting, Cr Nic Coveney said residents on Jubilee Street were simply seeking to protect the value of their homes. "What these residents are asking for is consistency to maintain a similar vista as to when they purchased their property," Mr Coveney said. "They are not seeking to remove mature trees. They are seeking to move juvenile trees before they become mature and which they say were planted without any consultation. "Whilst some may disagree, I don't think it's unreasonable to buy a house or an apartment on the foreshore with a significant view and have an expectation of maintaining that view. "To do otherwise would deny the very real and direct effect of views on property values and amenities." In the council agenda documents, the council staff said views were taken into consideration when the trees were planted and were positioned in alignment with the dividing property boundaries, not directly in front of properties. It also said the species chosen would also help mitigate waterlogging, a problem that appears in the park for extended periods during winter. Most of the young trees were expected to grow to heights of four to 10 metres, and one of the trees, a corymbia calophylla, could eventually grow to 15 — 30 metres tall. Mayor Greg Milner was one of three council members to vote against the motion, telling the meeting many residents had voiced support for keeping the trees. "Cr Coveney tells us that he's been contacted by over a dozen residents on Jubilee Street who are concerned about losing their million-dollar views of the Perth CBD skyline," Mr Milner said. "But I do note that we've all received correspondence from many, many, many other residents. Bronwyn David, co-convenor of the South Perth Tree Canopy Advocates group, slammed the council's decision. "People might think, well, it's just six trees. What does six trees matter?" Ms David said. "But it's the precedent. We are preferencing the views of a very small number of people over the whole of our community, which frankly needs more tree cover to survive. Ms David was also critical of the waste of resources involved in the decision. "It may be that we have just thrown away a lot of money in the City of South Perth, both in putting these trees in the ground to begin with, and then the labour and effort to remove them, find somewhere else and put them in the ground a second time, only to have them die." The City of South Perth declined a request for comment.
ABC News
23 minutes ago
- ABC News
US Air Force hosts biggest ever exercise in Pacific territory Guam, with experts saying China the focus
The US Air Force says it is preparing to "fight and win" the "battle of tomorrow" as the US Pacific territory of Guam plays host to the biggest combat exercise the region has ever seen. In a move experts say is undoubtedly "directed at China", the US Air Force's Resolute Force Pacific (REFORPAC) exercise sees more than 400 aircraft and 12,000 personnel from the US and allies such as Australia, converge on the small US island territory, about 3,000 kilometres north of Darwin. Coinciding with the Talisman Sabre exercises in Australia, the US Air Force says REFORPAC is designed to test how quickly the US and its allies can "mobilise air power across vast distances, under pressure, in a contested environment". On the ground at Guam's Andersen Air Force Base, hundreds of jet fighters and support aircraft have been flying in and out over the past two weeks, conducting various drills. Speaking at the base, Colonel Charles Dan Cooley told the ABC it was an exercise that had never been done "on this scope and scale". "That exercise, for us, is just an opportunity to practice." However, some, including the US Air Force's own social media accounts, suggest there is a far more targeted motive. This week, the US Air Force promoted a social media post that said the exercise proved how it would "fight and win in tomorrow's battlespace (sic)". Although the enemy or conflict was not specified, experts say it is directed at one country. "There's been very little disguising the fact that this exercise is directed at China," Leland Bettis, the director of Guam-based think tank Pacific Centre for Island Security, told the ABC. The exercises in the Pacific come on the back of US Defense Undersecretary Elbridge Colby's comments last week, calling on allies, such as Australia, to make clear if they would commit troops to a conflict with China over Taiwan. Guam has been identified by US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth as the country's most important strategic base in the region. Mr Bettis said REFORPAC reflected the reality that Guam could be vulnerable in a conflict, so the US was practising how to quickly disperse its forces. "There are significant aviation assets in [nearby US territories] Tinian and in Saipan," he said. "I think what US contingency planners anticipate in the event involving conflict with an adversary in the region is that they would use a distributed and dispersed plan, which would be able to move assets around, anticipating that some assets are not going to be available, and some bases are not going to be available. "So the fact that you have significant assets in Saipan and in Tinian also signalled that they expect that Guam assets will not be available in conflict." Back on the ground at the Andersen Air Force Base, this was backed up by Colonel Matt Johnston, commander from the Eielson Air Force Base in Alaska, who is in Guam for exercises. "Our ability to take off in our fighters, which don't carry a lot of gas, go get fuel, accomplish our objectives, probably go back and get some more fuel so that we can come back and land. "So, we're learning a lot of lessons through that." The military build-up comes as the Trump administration continues to realign the US's priorities in the Pacific region, most notably through its multi-billion-dollar cuts to USAID. Mr Bettis said the absence of "soft power", such as USAID-led diplomacy in the region, would pave the way for development supporting a military purpose, instead of direct assistance to nations. "The face of America in our part of the world wears a uniform, and I think you're going to probably see that more and more throughout the region."
