Employers argue the entitlements are no longer applicable for employees working from home
A new submission has been lodged with the Fair Work Commission seeking to remove certain allowances for employees working from home, marking the latest development in Australia's ongoing debate over penalty rates.
Business NSW lodged the submission to make changes to the Clerks - Private Sector Award 2020, which could impact 1.8 million employees in Australia.
Under the proposal, Business NSW wants to eliminate first aid allowances, clothing and footwear allowances, as well as overtime meal allowances for employees working from home.
Business NSW's proposal also seeks the removal of the required three-hour minimum engagement for part-time and casual employees.
Nigel Ward, Business NSW industrial relations practitioner and Australian Business Lawyers & Advisors CEO, said the current rules affecting working from home are "impeding flexible working arrangements" and "unfairly punishing employers."
"We need reforms," Ward told HRD in a statement. "These proposed changes would only apply at the employee's request, rather than being imposed on them."
Entitlements proposed for removal
Business NSW's submission said the changes to allowances reflect the view that these entitlements are no longer applicable when employees work outside the traditional workplace.
"Employees working from home are not physically present in an employer's workplace alongside other staff and therefore cannot render first aid assistance or respond to incidents in the workplace, even if appointed as a designated first aid officer," the submission read.
"Just as other wage-related allowances (such as leading hand or shift loadings) are not payable when the relevant duties are not performed, the same logic should apply when a Clerks Award covered employee is working from home."
In the case of clothing and footwear allowance, employers said that there is "no such expense to offset" when employees are not required to wear a uniform when working from home.
For the overtime meal allowance, the submission read that the "fundamental justification for the payment of a meal allowance is non-existent."
"The payment of a meal allowance in awards has a long-standing history. It is not a general reward for working overtime, but an expense-related allowance intended to compensate employees for the financial inconvenience of having to purchase a meal when working additional hours unexpectedly," the submission read.
But when working from home, employers pointed out that employees already have access to their kitchen and household meal arrangements.
They also do not incur out-of-pocket expenses in needing to purchase a meal, employers added.
Excuse for stripping entitlements
Unions slammed Business NSW's proposal and accused the organisation of using WFH as an excuse to strip away basic entitlements.
"We won't let them get away with this, we'll fight for all workers' rights, regardless of what big business might want to take away," said Emeline Gaske, Australian Services Union National Secretary, in a statement.
"We will not allow big business to create a two-tiered system where employees who work from home are treated as second-class citizens. Working from home should be about modernising work, not undermining it."
Penalty rates legislation
Business NSW's submission to the FWC comes after the Federal Government introduced new legislation seeking to prevent award variations from removing penalty and overtime rates.
Ward said the government wants to limit the FWC's ability to decide on the merit of individual award cases when penalty or overtime rates are involved.
According to Ward, the law will prohibit employers and employees from negotiating to incorporate penalty rates in return for a higher base salary.
"No one wants to see employees worse off," Ward said. "But this kind of one-size-fits-all approach to awards – impacting about 2.6 million employees in total across Australia – could prevent changes that deliver real benefits across entire industries."
"If even a single theoretical case of disadvantage blocks any reform, we lose the ability to make improvements that boost productivity and support business needs and often employee preferences."
