National Wage Case Survey 2001 - 2002 National Results

1

Copyright © 2002 ACNielsen

National Wage Case Survey National Wage Case Survey 2001 - 20022001 - 2002

National ResultsNational Results

Co-ordinated by the

Victorian Automobile Chamber of Commerce (VACC)

2


BackgroundBackground

The Victorian Automobile Chamber of Commerce (VACC) commissioned ACNielsen to conduct a survey of the membership of the various Motor Trades Associations of Australia to enable submissions to be prepared for the National/State wage case.

This is in response to a claim filed by the Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU) to the Australian Industrial Relations Commission for a general wage increase of $25.00 per week for employees.

3


ObjectivesObjectives

The objectives of the study were to determine:

the total number of employees;

number of employees by category (ie. full-time, part-time and casual);

number of employees by category employed under a Federal award, State award, Registered Agreement (State Workplace Agreement - WA) or award free;

number of employees paid in excess of award rate and how much in excess each employee receives per week;

4


Objectives, Objectives, continuedcontinued

whether employers pass on award increases to employees who are paid in excess of the award rate;

overall level of business profitability compared to same period last year;

The impact of last year’s $13.00 to $15.00 wage increase on the profitability of members;

the impact of the GST on business profitability compared to the same period last year;

the impact of the normal business cycle on profitability compared to the same period last year;

5


Objectives, Objectives, continuedcontinued

causal effects as a consequence of overall level of profitability:

- number of employees

- employees’ wage levels

- amount of over-time

- capital expenditure towards business

- level of absorption of product or service costs

- selling price of products and services

impact on the structure and scheduling of staff employment as a result of business profitability.

6


Research DesignResearch Design

InterviewingInterviewing

All interviews were conducted from ACNielsen’s Computer Assisted Telephone Interviewing (CATI) centres in Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane.

Interviews were constantly supervised during the interview process, with validation conducted on at least 10% of interviews.

7



Sample SizeSample Size

A total of 1008 interviews were conducted nationally (this sample size provides a maximum margin of error of +/- 3.1% at the 95% confidence level).

Interviews were conducted with each of the seven motor trade associations. Each association constitutes a portion of the national sample according to its proportion of the overall combined national membership base.

8



Sample SizeSample Size

The table below details the numbers of interviews conducted for each association.

MOTOR TRADE ASSOCIATIONS SAMPLE SIZE BY LOCATION

Victorian Automobile Chamber of Commerce (includes Tasmania)

200

Service Station Association Ltd (NSW), Motor Traders Association of NSW.

105 243 } 348

Motor Trades Association ACT Ltd. 100 Motor Trades Association of Queensland 100 Motor Trades Association of Northern Territory Inc 60 Motor Trade Association of Western Australia Inc 100 Motor Trade Association of South Australia Inc 100 TOTAL 1008

9



Weighting of ResultsWeighting of Results

The final results were weighted by association and location (metro, non-metro) to ensure a result representative of the combined national associations and within each association/state. This results in each association and location representing its true proportion of an overall national result.

10


Detailed FindingsDetailed Findings

• Business EmploymentBusiness Employment

• Business ProfitabilityBusiness Profitability

11


Business EmploymentBusiness Employment

12


Number of people employed in businessNumber of people employed in business

Almost half of businesses employed 1-5 employees on site

8%

49%

36%

7%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

0 employees

1-5 employees

6-20 employees

More than 20employees

Base: all respondents (1008)

13


13%

80% 74%55%

19%21%

26%

1% 5%6%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Full-time Part-time Casual

0 employees 1-5 employees 6-20 employees >20 employees

Number of employees by categoryNumber of employees by category

Majority of businesses employ 1-5 employees across the employment categories


14


Award coverage of Full-time employeesAward coverage of Full-time employees

Six in ten Full-time employees were employed under a Federal Award

Federal Award61%

Award Free10%

Registered Agreement or

State Workplace Agreement (WA)

8%

State Award*21%

Base: businesses with full-time employees (882)

*Clerical pay rates are covered by the Sector Rates Of Pay in Victoria.

15


Award coverage of Part-time employeesAward coverage of Part-time employees

Close to half of Part-time employees were paid the Federal Award,

and slightly over a third were paid the State Award

Federal Award46%

Award Free11%



8%

State Award*35%

Base: businesses with part-time employees (196)* Clerical pay rates are covered by Sector Rates Of Pay in Victoria

16


Award coverage of Casual employeesAward coverage of Casual employees

Slightly over three-quarters of Casual employees were paid the Federal Award

Federal Award77%

Award Free2%



6%

State Award*15%

Base: businesses with casual employees (295)*Clerical pay rates are covered by Sector Rates Of Pay in Victoria

17


Employees paid in excess of award rateEmployees paid in excess of award rateThe table below details the percentage of those employees under a Federal or State award, their employment status, and whether they were paid the award rate of pay or paid in excess of the award rate. Please note that respondents who answered “don’t know” are not included in the table.

Total

The Award Rate of Pay

$1-$20 in Excess of the Award Rate




More than $81 in Excess of

the Award Rate

Tota

l

Met

ro

Rura

l

Tota

l

Met

ro

Rura

l

Tota

l

Met

ro

Rura

l

Tota

l

Met

ro

Rura

l

Tota

l

Met

ro

Rura

l

Tota

l

Met

ro

Rura

l

Federal Award Full time - % employees

10 10 9 8 7 9 17 16 18 22 19 27

7 4 12 36 43 25

Federal Award Part time - % employees

74 69 83 3 2 4 6 8 3 5 5 7 2 3 0 9 13 3

Federal Award Casual - % employees

82 80 83 7 8 6 7 8 7 1 0 1 1 1 1 2 2 2

State Award Full time - % employees

11 10 12 5 2 9 9 7 13 33 46 11 8 6 11 27 23 32

State Award Part time - % employees

70 75 63 6 1 13 12 8 19 3 2 3 2 3 0 7 10 2

State Award Casual - % employees

80 82 79 2 0 4

2 4

1

8 5 11 4 8 0 3 1 4

Total - % employees 21 18 24 7 6 9 14 13 15 22 23 19 6 4 9 29 34 22

18


42%

11%

1%

45%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Yes No Other(sometimes/depends

on circumstance)

Don't know

Pass award increase to employees paid in excess Pass award increase to employees paid in excess of award rateof award rate

Less than half of members pass on award increases to employees who are paid in excess of award rate

Base: employers who pay in excess of award rate (684)

19


Business ProfitabilityBusiness Profitability

20


3%

15%23% 26% 28%

3% 2%

18%

53%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Substantiallyincreased

Slightlyincreased

Remainedunchanged

Slightlydecreased

Substantiallydecreased

Notapplicable/notin business for

12 months

Don't know TotalIncreased

TotalDecreased

Overall level of business profitabilityOverall level of business profitability

Over half of businesses reported a decrease in profit levels compared to the same time last year


21


6% 12% 15%

44% 30%33%

49%57% 52%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Award increase GST Normal businesscycle*

Total positive No effect Total negative

Impact of factors on profitability compared to Impact of factors on profitability compared to same period last yearsame period last year

The GST caused the greatest negative impact on business profitability

*Normal business cycle is defined as the 12 month period involving any related commercial activities.

22


27%42%

22%

54% 51% 53%

57%

55%

60%

31% 38% 34%

15%2% 7%

13%7% 11%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Number ofemployees

Employees'wage levels

Amount ofover-time

Capitalexpenditure

towardsbusiness

Absorption ofproductand/or

service costs

Selling priceof products

and/orservices

Increase No change Decrease

Effect of change as a result of an overall Effect of change as a result of an overall increaseincrease on business profitabilityon business profitability

Increase in business profitability compared to the same period last year, was attributable to increases in capital expenditure towards business

Please note: respondents who answered “don’t know” or “not applicable” were not included in the above chart.

23


4%24%

6%

33%

65%

32%

57%

67%

52%

31%

20%

41%

39%

8%

31% 35%

13%26%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Number ofemployees

Employees'wage levels

Amount ofover-time

Capitalexpenditure

towardsbusiness

Absorption ofproductand/or

service costs

Selling priceof products

and/orservices

Increase No change Decrease

Effect of change as result of an overall Effect of change as result of an overall decreasedecrease on business profitability on business profitability

Businesses who experienced a decrease in profitability compared to the same period last year, indicated a higher level in the absorption of product and/or service costs

Please note: respondents who answered “don’t know” or “not applicable” were not included in the above chart.

24


10%

59%

30%

1%0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Positive change No change Negative change Don't know

Effect of change in profitability on the Effect of change in profitability on the structure and scheduling of staff employmentstructure and scheduling of staff employmentMajority of members claimed changes in the level of profitability had no impact

on the structure and scheduling of staff employment

Base: company with employees and been in business over 12 months (899)

25


National Wage Case Survey 2001 - 2002 National Results

Documents

Transcript of National Wage Case Survey 2001 - 2002 National Results