In 1907, the Harvester case determined that working men should be paid a wage that would allow them to support a family of five. This ruling became the basis for setting Australia’s minimum wage standard until the 1970s.
And then, women entered the workforce.
Women’s labour has more than doubled the Australian workforce since the Harvester ruling, creating new industries and expanding existing ones.
But in 2024, the idea of women being paid a wage that would enable them to support a family of five is nothing short of utopian. Today’s reality is that most working poor households include couples with children, according to the Australian Institute of Family Studies.
Someone is profiting from the introduction of female labour, and it’s not women or their families.
Worse, labour laws have evolved over the years to suit the needs of a male worker. A typical workday revolves around a testosterone rise in the morning and a dip in the afternoon as the workday winds up. Women’s hormonal cycles look quite different and don’t fit so neatly into a traditional workday, with an average 28-day cycle during their menstruating years, which can generally see four distinct changes in energy levels, mood and general wellbeing during that time. Menopause then brings with it uncertainty, which the recent Federal Senate Inquiry uncovered even our country’s best doctors don’t yet understand. This isn’t to say that women are less productive workers; rather, we are given far less scope to care for our health while maintaining a strong career trajectory.
The Fair Work Act also doesn’t adequately address the significant physiological and mental challenge that is pregnancy, a condition that women are expected to work through with little to no concessions.
Forcing women to rely on their ten days of personal leave that year, which an expectant father also receives in equal measure despite not being physically impacted by pregnancy. Once the baby is born, a mother can receive 26 weeks of minimum wage payments ($900 per week), which keeps them in the working poor category and is insufficient to live off without savings or a second income.
A further pain point is that it has taken over 30 years to convince the government to pay superannuation on maternity leave, why it was ever excluded in the first place should forever be remembered as misogynistic policy. When (or if) she returns to the workforce, women are again provided with the same number of personal leave entitlements despite women overwhelmingly remaining the primary caregivers for children.
It’s clear that female labour isn’t valued, though female dominated industries can be highly profitable (looking at you, $10 billion childcare industry). It’s also clear that our contribution as mothers and caregivers is not valued and instead comes with fear of discrimination when we reintegrate back into the workforce due to our family responsibilities. Of course, that discrimination is compounded for women from minority groups.
Last week, the country’s most influential unions were in Canberra, pressing to introduce reproductive health leave in our National Employment Standards. This is a good first start to turn things around. It will ensure that women’s health throughout their working lives is recognised by the Fair Work Act in the form of additional entitlements to allow women to deal with reproductive health concerns that can arise at each stage of a woman’s life. Entitlements such as additional leave days and access to flexible work should be the bare minimum of recognition.
The Australian economy needs female labour, and mothers, so its high time we stop compromising on our health and economic needs just for a seat at a table that would be half empty without us.