The Fair Work Commission's decision to increase the minimum wage by 5.2 per cent from July 1 could not have come at a better time for millions of workers now guaranteed $812 a week or $21.38 an hour.
While the percentage has been criticised by employers, the quantum is quite small. It is just one dollar an hour more or an extra $40 a week.
For most Australians, including the bosses arguing for any increase to be kept in the 2.5 to three per cent range, this is not much.
It is the price of a pub meal or a good bottle of red. It wouldn't even buy a packet of cigarettes or a rump roast.
But it means a lot for those individuals and families on struggle street who will start receiving the money a fortnight from now.
It is almost half a tank of fuel for a small car.
It could be the difference between leaving the heater off or being able to turn it on.
While the Prime Minister was slammed by his predecessor during the election for supporting a minimum wage increase that kept pace with inflation, he was the one who was smiling on Wednesday.
There is no doubt his government's submission asking that the FWC "ensure that the real wages of low-paid workers do not go backwards" had an influence on this outcome. So too did the ACTU's push for a 5.5 per cent increase in both the minimum wage and modern award minimum wages.
These were in stark contrast to the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry and the Australian Industry Group. The ACCI thought a three per cent increase - a cut in real wages of more than two per cent - would have been "balanced and responsible".
While both the AIG the ACCI are correct when they say the increases are an additional burden for businesses still recovering from two years of COVID, and which are also battling rising interest, energy and materiel costs, many industries have bounced back strongly with profit increases far in excess of the rate of inflation.
Wednesday's wage ruling was very much in the spirit of the 1907 Harvester Decision. The Arbitration Court, taking into account the cost of living, ruled that the minimum or basic wage for an unskilled worker should be sufficient for him to house, clothe and feed a wife and three children.
That principle has not changed in the 115 years that have passed since then.
ISSUE: 39,897
