The Black Vault

"rathIt sounds like a scam to me Medusa.


Ill take the minimum federal award any day.


the standard ( AUSTRALIAN ) Federal Minimum Wage (FMW) is $14.31 per hour.
($543.78 per week);

or $28,276.56

not bad if you work at KFC or Subway ............ ect ect.

& keep in mind, thats the Minimum Wage.

It only goes up from there.

The Government has announced the national minimum wage rate for 2009/2010 (external website). With effect from 1 October 2009, the national minimum wage adult rate (paid to workers aged 22 and over) will rise from its current level of £5.73 per hour to £5.80 per hour, an increase of 1.2%.

•What can we expect from the 2010/2011 national minimum wage increase?
This is in line with the increase recommended by the Low Pay Commission (LPC) in its 2009 report (PDF format, 5MB) (on the LPC website).

The Government has also announced that, with effect from 1 October 2009:

•the national minimum wage development rate (for workers aged 18 to 21) will rise from £4.77 per hour to £4.83 per hour (an increase of 1.3%); and
•the national minimum wage youth rate (for workers aged 16 and 17) will rise from £3.53 per hour to £3.57 per hour (an increase of 1.1%).
Additionally, the adult rate of the minimum wage will be extended to 21 year-old workers from October 2010.

As Mark Crail notes on the website of CELRE (part of the XpertHR group):

The increase is the lowest since a statutory minimum wage was introduced in April 1999, and is likely to significantly influence pay settlements across the wider economy during the final months of 2009.

LPC chairman George Bain comments:

These are very challenging times for the UK and unprecedented economic circumstances for the minimum wage. We believe that the Low Pay Commission's recommendations are appropriate for this economic climate. They reflect the need to protect low-paid workers' jobs as well as their earnings.

CBI director-general John Cridland immediately issued a supportive statement (external website), praising what he termed the latest national minimum wage increases. According to Cridland:

This moderate increase recognises that many businesses are struggling, and helps protect jobs at a time of rising unemployment. The inflation-busting rise some unions had called for would have hit firms hard and put many lower paid workers on the dole.

The increases announced today are below consumer prices index (CPI) inflation - the Government's preferred measure - which currently stands at 2.9%. But they are significantly above the rate of retail prices index (RPI) inflation, which is currently languishing in negative territory, running at -0.4% in March 2009 (subscription required).

However, latest inflation forecasts published to XpertHR show that RPI is expected to rebound quickly (subscription required), moving back into positive figures in the first quarter of 2010.

The TUC takes this account in its response to today's announcement, emphasising the need for a much higher national minimum wage increase for 2010, in order to prevent earnings growth for the lowest paid workers falling behind that for the rest of the economy. TUC general secretary Brendan Barber comments:

The LPC was right to withstand pressure from business to freeze the minimum wage. [...] But this increase is a very slender one. The LPC must be much more generous when the economy recovers next year.

As we have noted, discussions surrounding the 2009 national minimum wage decision have been heated. And this lively state of affairs looks set to continue now that the Government's decision on the 2009/2010 national minimum wage rate is known.

The CIPD, for example, argues that the decision to increase rather than freeze the national minimum wage is likely to have a negative effect on those hardest hit by the recession (external website). According to CIPD reward advisor Charles Cotton:

While we support the LPC, we are concerned that this decision will increase the risk of job losses in low paid sectors. This should have been avoided at a time when deflation on the RPI measure of inflation [would] limit the impact of a national minimum wage freeze on people's real living standards. Our greatest concern at the moment is for younger workers and job seekers.

•What can we expect from the 2010/2011 national minimum wage increase?
Tags:low paylow pay commissionlpcnational minimum wage

Medusa wrote:

"rathIt sounds like a scam to me Medusa.


Ill take the minimum federal award any day.


the standard ( AUSTRALIAN ) Federal Minimum Wage (FMW) is $14.31 per hour.
($543.78 per week);

or $28,276.56

not bad if you work at KFC or Subway ............ ect ect.

& keep in mind, thats the Minimum Wage.

It only goes up from there.

Thats not a bad mim wage over there in the US hun................

Sadly here the min wage is even lower .................

The Government has announced the national minimum wage rate for 2009/2010 (external website). With effect from 1 October 2009, the national minimum wage adult rate (paid to workers aged 22 and over) will rise from its current level of £5.73 per hour to £5.80 per hour, an increase of 1.2%.

Thats not a bad mim wage over there in the US hun................

rath wrote:USA .........

Try Australia.

In the USA they get paid worse then everybody, ..... I think they get like 7 Pasos a week, & a bucket of KFC.

rath wrote::D

It's all good.

Continuing to divert more food to fuel, as is now mandated by the US federal government in its renewable fuel standard, will likely only reinforce the disturbing rise in world hunger. By subsidising the production of ethanol to the tune of some $6bn each year, US taxpayers are in effect subsidising rising food bills at home and around the world," said Brown.

"The worst economic crisis since the great depression has recently brought food prices down from their peak, but they still remain well above their long-term average levels."

The US is by far the world's leading grain exporter, exporting more than Argentina, Australia, Canada, and Russia combined. In 2008, the UN called for a comprehensive review of biofuel production from food crops.

"There is a direct link between biofuels and food prices. The needs of the hungry must come before the needs of cars," said Meredith Alexander, biofuels campaigner at ActionAid in London. As well as the effect on food, campaigners also argue that many scientists question whether biofuels made from food crops actually save any greenhouse gas emissions.

sandra wrote:Wow rath that really isn't a bad minimum wage there.

One of the foods Us has on you Aussies rath, is grains. We got mad grains.

Continuing to divert more food to fuel, as is now mandated by the US federal government in its renewable fuel standard, will likely only reinforce the disturbing rise in world hunger. By subsidising the production of ethanol to the tune of some $6bn each year

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/jan/22/quarter-us-grain-biofuels-food

Medusa, somehow missed his Australian Signature?
You'll come to see how much of an aussie he is.

rath wrote:Dont know about US grain being any better of abundant than in Australia.

I mean if US grain was better' why do they need to use it for bio-fuel.

Bio fuel is just a means of keeping the US farmers from going bust.

"Wheat is the largest crop grown globally, with approximately 223 million hectares planted annually, and Australia is the third largest exporter of wheat behind only the US and Canada. However, with grain supplies near historic lows, and global population expected to exceed 8 billion by the year 2025 (approximately a 33% increase), it is an imperative to boost productivity through environmentally sustainable methods. Nonetheless, development and commercialisation would take a number of years, as there is currently no GM wheat available in the market."

Australia is the world's leading mineral rich resources nations.

But minerals are not the same as grains, they are not subject to the enviroment.

Floods, drought, ect ect.

I agree with what you said sandra in that its no a food shortage ... But rather a food access issue

Government allocations to military, rather than social, expenditures have led to national societies characterized by limited basic skills, food insecurity, malnutrition, and ill health as well as discontent, violence, and despair (Sivard 1994; Stewart 1993; Smith 1994). Military preparedness in this way creates conflict potential and constitutes one of the underlying causes of food insecurity that can lead to war.2