The Australian Industrial Relations Commission (AIRC) brought down the first stage of the ‘Living Wage’ Case decisions on 22 April 1997. For the first time in nearly 30 years the decision was split. This article analyses the economic rationale for both majority and minority decisions and argues that the majority decision was overly cautious and conservative in its assessment of the economic constraints on the Commission's capacity to award a pay increase to low paid workers.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ACTU (1996) ‘Living Wage Case - Submissions, Exhibits and Submissions in Reply’, ACTU, Melbourne
2.
AIRC (1997) Safety Net Review - Wages, April 22, 1997 (Print P1997), Majority Decision and Decision of Vice President Ross, Australian Industrial Relations Commission, Sydney
3.
Bankers Trust Australia (1997) ‘Should we Worry About the Living Wage Claim?’BT Economics, 1 April 1997, Sydney
4.
Commonwealth of Australia (1996) ‘Living Wage Case Submissions and Exhibits’ Canberra
5.
CoombsH. C. (1981) Trial Balance, Sun Books, Melbourne
6.
HarcourtT. (1997) ‘The Economics of the Living Wage’, Australian Economic Review, Vol. 30, No. 2, pp. 194–203
7.
JohnsonD.HellwigO. (1997) ‘Evaluation of the Distributional Impact of the 1996–97 Budget on Australian Households’, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, Melbourne
