Here’s my (apparently) controversial opinion of the day: if you do the same work in the same field with the same employer, you deserve the same rate. The fact that in a lot of industries you can be paid a 40% wage because you’re 15 is absolutely disgusting, when you perform the exact same work as somebody older. And what’s even worse is that in some industries, full wage doesn’t start until you’re 21. Why is that acceptable?
I have no idea about Australian labor laws but I do know adulthood is defined as 18. What I’m about to ask is honestly ignorance so don’t take it as sarcasm, so what in the fucking fuck is going on in Australia that at ages 18 to 20 is considered 40% wage in any industry? What industries will pay 100% versus 40%? Do you guys not have laws protecting ageism? Am I too tired to be on the internet? Just kidding. I know I am. See ya’ll in the morning.
G’day! Adulthood is defined here as being 18 too. Once you turn 18, no age restrictions apply to you anymore. You can drink, smoke, vote, go to war, whatever you’d like.
In fast food specifically (unsure about others), the minimum wage increases 10% for every year over 15 you are, starting with 40% at 15 and reaching 90% when you’re 20. It’s an absolutely stupid and I’d definitely argue discriminatory rule.
It IS actually illegal to discriminate based on age, I don’t know why it’s legal to discriminate any adults based on age for anything, and I’m unsure whether that’s intentional or it actually is but just unenforced, but from my experience it’s pretty much only ageism if you discriminate against old people (at least, that’s how it’s enforced)
Some industries don’t have any age based wages. I know the community services award doesn’t, but I’m not sure about others
the minimum wage increases 10% for every year over 15 you are
Just a minor point of terminology, it doesn’t increase “10%”, it increases by 10 percentage points. The difference is quite substantial, with a 16-year-old full-time level-1 making $12.36 in reality (50% of a 21-year-old), but 10% more than the 15-year-old’s wage being $10.88.
How are the laws/regulations worded in Australia?
“Discrimination in employment based on age” or “discrimination in pay based on age” can probably be considered two separate things. (A silly distinction, but weasel words make the politics go round.) Id be surprised if anti-discrimination laws combined both of these to grant more protections to a large chunk of the workforce.
I’ve never read the legislature so I don’t know, but I’d assume it’s a bit of both, but with specific exceptions to people under 21. There would have to be pay wise, otherwise the government would be implementing illegal laws, but I’m not sure whether anybody can be discriminated against based solely on age in terms of employment
Huh. TIL. Thanks buddy!
Heya Baku. I wanted to reply to you as well just to say I fully agree with this system being really fucked up. I want to add some context though, because you’re incorrect that the legal definition of adulthood is just about being 18 in Australia. Gonna chuck these in bullet points:
- At 16 you can become emancipated from your parents if it is unreasonable for you to live at home. You can then access Youth Allowance payments, as well as sign tenancy agreements.
- The age of consent in most states is 16, otherwise 17. However, it’s still prohibited for people in positions of power over you, eg a Teacher or a Boss, until you’re 18.
- Most states allow you to get your license at 17.
- Once you turn 14, Medicare can’t tell your parents details of your medical treatments.
- Once you turn 15 you can get your own Medicare card.
- If you’re under 18, as long as you understand the advice and treatments, you have full control and consent over sexual health matters. This includes abortion & contraception, as well as things like PrEP (HIV prevention medication).
Edit: I forgot to add the point I was trying to make. The wage differences are even more fucked up when you consider there’s 16 year olds, being paid 60%, that have rent to pay. Our rules also make it a lot easier for people that age to escape abusive home situations, so it’s much more common even if the US has emancipation laws as well.
I think I’ve gotta ask, are you from the US? Because I’m Aussie, and fully agree with OP that our system is fucked up. But if you’re American, then you should be looking inwards before criticising other country’s systems. A 15yo here working fast food has a minimum wage of $12.36/hour. In contrast the US federal minimum wage is just $10.84/hour (USD$7.25) for any age.
As well, the US does have a similar-ish law. If you’re under the age of 20, you can be paid just $6.36/hour (USD$4.25) for your first 90 days of employment. That’s nearly just half as much as a 15yo here.
In what way was I criticizing Australia? I was commiserating and asking questions about the laws since I didn’t know about them.
I know Australia has a lot of dangerous wildlife, but I guess there a bunch of sensitive cunts too.
🙄
🤙
‘The exact same work’ is the part I have a problem with here. People with less experience are less productive in general, and trying to get teenagers to do anything useful is like herding cats.
I disagree. On the experience side of things, you can apply that to anybody who’s first starting work, or who’s just landed their first job in a new field. I get the other bit, but that does feel like a massive generalisation and rather disrespectful.
Perhaps a minor pay decrease can be justified - I don’t disagree that being younger you’ll probably be less productive, at least for your first year or 2 in employment. But I don’t think it’s fair to pay somebody 40% of the wage when they generate you the same amount in sales and revenue. I certainly don’t think you’d receive 60% more productivity from somebody over 21
I personally agree with you, but the counter argument is that would make it much harder for 15yo kids to get a job. Most employers would prefer to hire someone a bit more mature if it cost the same. So allowing a lower minimum wage for teenagers evens the playing field a bit.
I don’t disagree with the counter argument entirely, but I do think that the almost ‘discount’ (for lack of a better word) you receive by hiring younger people is excessive. And because it’s less than half the price to hire a 15 year old vs 21 year old, that means 2 things end up happening:
Firstly the older you get the less likely you are to be hired for an entry role (which I’m sure you can argue is justified, but if you just never started working until you were 18+, you’re pretty much SOL)
Secondly once you turn 17, or 18, or 19, a lot of people get effectively fired if they aren’t part or full time. Of course, that would be illegal, so what happens is your hours just end up getting cut, or they conveniently “run out of work” for you and stop giving you shifts
Yep I agree it’s a problem
