Super slash will leave some retirees up to $270,000 worse off

Individual retirees could lose as much as $270,000 as a result of super wipeout.

match burning hundred dollar note

Australians will be $100 billion collectively worse-off as companies slash wages and reneg on enterprise agreements in order to deliver better returns for shareholders.

The Australia Institute’s Centre for Future Work report, Consequences of Wage Suppression for Australia's Superannuation System, revealed that it’s not only Australian retirement funds being stripped of funds. The Federal Government will also suffer losses equivalent to around $37 billion in lost taxes due to lower super contributions and the resulting higher Age Pension payouts.

Individual retirees could lose up to $270,000 as a result of the super slash.

The lost super will result from wage freezes, reduced penalty rates, abandoned workplace and enterprise agreements and wages theft.

Unions are calling on superannuation funds not to invest in companies that are suppressing wages.

Among companies being accused of the superannuation wipe-out that will affect millions of Australians are Qantas, Aerocare, Streets Ice Cream, Dominos, 7-Eleven, Caltex, Aurizon, Griffin Coal and Murdoch University.

"The Federal Government is standing by and allowing this to happen, even supporting companies which rip their workers off," said Transport Workers Union National Secretary Tony Sheldon.

Interestingly, the report revealed that employee-friendly companies actually outperformed hostile employers by 6.6 per cent annually.

Will you boycott products and services from these companies? Does your super fund invest in any of these companies or their subsidiaries?



    To make a comment, please register or login

    18th Sep 2017
    I find it ironic that unions are complaining about wage suppression. Only last week we read that an EBA was struck between the union and McDonalds that reduced the penalty rates for weekend work which was supposed to be compensated by a higher hourly rate mid-week. Unions are playing around with pay scales that are not always an advantage for everybody.

    When FWA ruled that penalty rates for weekend work were to be reduced the screaming from unions and Labor was deafening with claims that 700.000 workers would be affected. The truth is that around 100,000 workers only will be affected as unions have played with penalty rates and have EBA's in place which won't be affected by the FWA ruling.

    Unions have also claimed that wages haven't risen in recent times and, again, they are not telling the whole story. Wages have risen as those who have followed the various wage cases will know but those decisions don't affect workers on EBA's. When the next round of EBA's comes around, wages will rise and the wages cases will be a part of those negotiations.
    18th Sep 2017
    A bit unfair to blame unions in an era where workers are being turned into 4 hour a day employees with no conditions of any sort.
    You would be aware that since the world economy picked up a number of years ago the top ahs creamed off money whilst the same people have been screwing workers, having been permitted to turn full time jobs into part time nightmares at the same time. And now the same bastards have managed to get themselves tax relief. As though they do not already have more outs than a pregnant nun to lower their taxable income.
    I don't know why you have a vendetta against unions OM. They are a shadow of their former self and, like the ABC, are a target for destruction from the current big business owned government which is 'taking care of business'..........whilst turning workers into serfs.
    What has been happening in our once fair society over the past 10 years is a disgrace. You have a government spruiking 'unions' every day whilst the corruption at the top is ignored and let go, and this corruption involves many multiples of whatever unions ever got away with but not topical because you do not attack your political master.
    Your post is very disappointing OM. I thought that at the very least you had perseepctive and were not a right wing mule but when I read this sort of (unbalanced) stuff I have to wonder.
    18th Sep 2017
    Thanks MICK, you may be interested to know that all of my working life I was a union member although my union was never classed as militant. I don't agree with unions which feel they are above the laws of the land and threaten violence to get their point across where most unions choose to negotiate and accept rulings of tribunals.

    In fairness, not all jobs have been turned into "part time nightmares" but I agree that there are more now than ever before. The reasons for this are not necessarily connected with a wage structure as one of the reasons put to me was the unfair dismissal laws. A lot of employers have chosen to start employees on a part time basis or as a casual to see if they are right for the position. It's easier to stop calling a casual in to work than pay out for unfair dismissal.

    In saying that, I agree that we need an unfair dismissal law to protect those workers who get exploited by a very small number of employers who game the system. I vividly recall a workmate who was sacked because he wouldn't have a beer with the boss who liked to gather his employees around him at his favourite watering hole. Of course, the reason given was a lot different but that was the real reason.
    18th Sep 2017
    BTW MICK, we're just about to fly out for a well earned break. Thanks for your comments. We are not always that far apart in our thinking in a lot of topics. We may disagree on ideologies but we seem to agree on where people have been wronged by government or the public service. We'll take up the sparring at a later time.
    18th Sep 2017
    Old man, I don't know where you get your info from but I am in a union & this article makes sense to me, pay freezes & low increases have been standard for the last 3 or 4 years & current EBA's are effected-company I work for is trying to bully us into 0 pay rise for first year of our upcoming EBA & when we ask for conditions the answer is to blackmail us into losing other conditions. I would believe the accuracy/credibility of this as it is very real for me at present & super would be lost if wages are lower or not increasing..
    18th Sep 2017
    OM - compare the behaviour of unions to the behaviour of big business. Its chalk and cheese although the big end of town is normally protected whilst unions are demonised with any minor issue blown way out of proportion. That is what happens when the government, media and big business are in cahoots. That should be clear to you.
    Enjoy the trip. Helps to get away from damned reality and the mentally challenged who do not get it despite having their faces rubbed in it regularly. Vive la Revolution!
    18th Sep 2017
    Can we get a full list of the companies involved, it is hard to boycott if we don't know who they are.
    18th Sep 2017
    I am happy to boycott any company which is crooked. I NEVER buy my fuel from a 7-Eleven servo and will start to avoid others which operate on the same model.
    18th Sep 2017
    That list will be too large I suspect.
    Not surprised Qantas is in the list - the CEO was reported to get $24.5 Mill remuneration for the last FY - after he sacked thousands of Aussies from their jobs, destroyed the profitability initially of an airline which never had losses before he took over, shut down the airline for a day (surprised he wasn't immediately sacked), made profits since the previous FY by not removing Fuel surcharges after prices came down, and has made it into a poor quality airline.

    The only real solution is to limit salaries of CEOs to max $1Mill per year + max 20% Bonus, and remove the current greed at the top. Then, staff may end up earning better as well, and more taxes to the Govt. And, sack nasty performers immediately when they misbehave!
    19th Sep 2017
    No. Make CEO, directors and senior executives pay relative to the pay of the lowest employee. I forget which country but one nation in Europe does not allow anyone in any organization to earn more than X times the wage of the lowest paid in the organization. I think X was 10 but I'm not certain. If we introduced that in Australia, the nation would prosper. At the same time, we should declare that pensioners are part of the organization of the Federal Government, so no bureaucrat or politician can ever earn more than 10 times the pension. Now wouldn't that work a treat to stop pollies rorting the system and screwing pensioners?

    The theory in the nation that introduced this is that if an organization is functioning well, EVERY person in that organization is contributing and deserves to share the benefits. A CEO cannot be worth $26.5 million if his staff isn't performing. It means he is failing. So why should he get $26.5 million why those who contribute to his success are underpaid? Everything should remain in proportion. Similarly, a politician can't be worth $500,000 if the nation is struggling to pay decent pensions. He's obviously failing, so he should suffer pay cuts accordingly.

    What really irks me is that CEOs are paid millions to leave when they stuff up so badly that the company wants to replace them. And pollies that get kicked out because they are inept get huge pensions. How can anyone justify this nonsense?
    18th Sep 2017
    Who knows what to believe anymore, when a lie can spread around the world in a flash. Its wise to see some proof before acting on anything.
    john no
    18th Sep 2017
    Old Man always seems to have a huge amount of data available, can he explain who supplies it, is he paid to supply these posts?
    18th Sep 2017
    Read my post above. WHilst I have respected some of OM's comments in the past this one is reprehensible. Australia used to be a place where a 'fair go' was the norm but now the top ruthlessly pillages everything and demands average citizens become their slaves. I am angry when I read the normal right wing propaganda about 'unions' when the truth is anything but.!
    Poppa Bear
    18th Sep 2017
    Mick, how do you explain the fact that one of the largest union which services the fast food industry and the big 2 grocery retailers has been instrumental in bringing in EBA's where penalty rates are lower than what the awards provided for. This started in 2014 and has as yet not fixed by the Fair Work Commission.
    Don't try to tell me its a ', I experienced it firsthand at Coles.load of cod's wallop
    18th Sep 2017
    This alarmist reporting is a concern.
    If you read the article it says a 40 year old could be up to $270K worse off by the time they use their super.
    Not as is implied, current super annuitants.
    Not a Bludger
    18th Sep 2017
    What an entirely misleading load of rubbish - all based upon assumptions not facts.

    Again, an attempt to whitewash thug, crooked unions and demonise business.

    Reporting this type of drivel is irresponsible in the extreme.
    18th Sep 2017
    What do you expect Not a Bludger from this forum? We will never see the castigation of Mr Shorten for ripping off the very workers he was meant to represent in favour of payments to the union now will we?
    19th Sep 2017
    And where are your facts, Not a Bludger?
    18th Sep 2017
    Why would anyone take notice of what the so-called Australia Institute says. They are an extension of the Greens have have been caught out on a number of occasions making incorrect statements, even in government submissions. Don't bother reading anything they say.
    18th Sep 2017
    I usually read the heading and first sentence and give up
    Usual leftie rubbish

    18th Sep 2017
    There is no "lost" pension
    You cannot save it if you dont earn it first
    God I'm a genius
    21st Sep 2017
    That's right! :)
    18th Sep 2017
    I glad to be out of the work force as the way some workers are treated is beyond belief as union membership goes down it so do wages . Present day workers take their conditions for granted little do they know it took some hundred years to get where they are now,you have to fight if you want a better life for you and your family and I don't think the have the guts. Globalisation is good for the C.EOs disaster for the workers if you are not in a strong union.
    18th Sep 2017
    Um.... its unions that are lowering wages with the agreements they reach for their workers. Like that of the cleaners under Mr Shorten's watch when he traded their wages for 'training' contributions to the union.
    18th Sep 2017
    Some respondents seem to forget that no matter what agreement a union may or may not reach with an employer it is up to the individual affected employees to vote whether to accept. A simple majority (ie 50% +1 of votes received) is needed for an agreement to be accepted. Also be reminded that agreement with employee representatives (usually a union but not necessarily so) is not needed for an employer to put a proposed agreement to a vote. This happened in Defence when the Minister for Industrial Relations, a Mr Abbott, bulldozed the department into holding a vote on the governments preferred agreement. The Minister expected that with only about 40% of the workforce in a union the non-unionised 60% would vote yes. When the vote was over 90% NO the Minister backed off and the employee reps were able to negotiate a reasonable agreement.
    18th Sep 2017
    If lost super is due to wage freeze then the individual will not need that $270K. Inflation and wage increase does not serve the retiree in fact the last two years has made money seem value less.
    I am actually perplexed as to how families are surviving the massive increase in utility costs, housing, rates and even just getting a car insured each year.
    It is rather unfair that the unions did help people out of oppression early last century just to have the power of numbers disassembled with contract and part time work because the unions abused their power.

    Join YOURLifeChoices, it’s free

    • Receive our daily enewsletter
    • Enter competitions
    • Comment on articles

    You May Like