Australians are working more hours in the working week than they were two years ago, and the majority are not getting paid any extra for it.
This is the result of a survey by human resources company Morgan and Banks. It found that all employees were working at least an hour more than they did two years ago, with 74 per cent putting in between five and ten extra
hours. And 87 per cent of those surveyed said they were getting no extra pay for the extra hours.
This is a disquieting trend. Australians should be working smarter, not longer. Improvements in the standard of living do not come from money alone. Nor do they come from feeling so insecure in the job that employees feel they must work more for no extra money.
Australia seems to have gone from one extreme to the other. Up to the end of the 1970s Australia had a much stronger union movement and a greater part of the economy was in primary and secondary production rather than the service industries. In that environment it was possible for employees to demand and get high penalty rates for overtime. The result, according to this survey, is that employers have been able to exert their muscle to the extent that in the 1990s many employees feel they must do unpaid overtime to secure their jobs.
Morgan and Banks director Geoff Qurban said decreasing job security was forcing people to work longer. Employees had to be prepared to put in the extra hours and do so with a smile on their faces because there always someone waiting to take the place of those not willing to do the overtime.
One of the problems seems to be that employees are making up for fewer staff. Once again, Australia seems to have gone from one extreme to the other — from over-staffing of the type exemplified in the Royal Commission on the Painters and Dockers to a situation where staff shortages seem endemic.
Of course, it is ridiculous to imagine that if the work were shared out that miraculously those on the dole would suddenly be in work. The nature of employment in a post-industrial society is not like that. A very large proportion of those on the dole are there because they are not qualified for employment in new industries or do not have the education to be able to swap easily to new employment. Education is the key to shortening dole queues; not reducing hours.
A big difficulty in reducing hours and increasing employment is the very large overheads required for each employee. It is cheaper and more efficient for an employer to have a few employees working a long week than a lot of employees working a short week.
But that may not be good for the nation as a whole or the well-being of employees. So the aim of reducing hours is still a good one and one that may increase people’s standard of living, particularly if standard of living is not measured in dollars alone. If factors like stress, sense of well-being, time with family and friends are taken into account, less dollars and more time improves the standard of living.
The pendulum should swing back towards the sensible middle. People should be paid for the hours they work, not in the framework of an overly legalistic industrial-relations system, but either a part of annual salary packaging or at their normal hourly rate. Senior executives on large salaries obviously have to make themselves available around the clock, but it is unfair to impose such regimes on lower-paid clerical and administrative staff.
At present, there are too many people run off their feet with no time to do anything. If people are staying at work longer because they feel insecure about their job, as this survey suggests, the main aims of human endeavour — a sense of well-being and the goal of a fulfilling life — are lost in the rush.