Michael Fox at Stuff reports:
The Government’s lowest-paid workers are being promised a $10,000-a-year pay rise under a Labour government.
Why stop at $10,000? Why not $15,000?
However, the expected cost to the taxpayer of its proposed living wage remains unclear, with Labour claiming extending it to the core public service would cost $30 million a year and National putting it at $68m.
Labour have not made clear if their policy will apply to contractors such as cleaners? They constantly highlight how the cleaners at Parliament should get the living wage. But the cleaners are not employed by Parliament, plys Parliamentary Service is not core public service. So will Labour’s policy mean a “living wage” for Parliament’s cleaners? If not, then how cynical to use them as the poster childs for your campaign – and not deliver a policy that applies to them.
Based on a 40-hour working week on the living wage, an employee would earn $38,272 before tax, compared with $28,600 on the current minimum wage.
Insane. No 16 year old in the public sector on less than $38,000 a year full-time.
Tags: living wage