Minimum wage increases and other changes affecting workplaces from 1 July

Services: Intellectual Property & Technology, People & Workplace, Real Estate & Construction
Industry Focus: Financial Services, Insurance, Life Sciences & Healthcare, Real Estate & Construction
Date: 30 June 2017
Author: Mei-Lim Smith, Associate and Maree Skinner, Partner
T +61 2 8233 9803
M +61 427 229 971
T +61 2 8233 9624
T +61 2 8233 9605
M +61 456 780 671
T +61 2 8233 9617
M +61 417 426 039

Key changes affecting Australian workplaces are about to take effect, impacting minimum wages, unfair dismissal, penalties for breaches of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (Fair Work Act) and superannuation contributions.

From 1 July 2017:

  • The national minimum wage will increase by 3.3% to $694.90 per week or $18.29 per hour.

  • Minimum wage rates in modern awards will also increase by 3.3%.

  • Junior employees and apprentices will receive a proportionate increase to these adult minimum wage rates.

  • The high income threshold used to determine whether an award/agreement-free employee is eligible to make an application for unfair dismissal will increase to $142,000.

  • The maximum amount of compensation that the Fair Work Commission can order an employer to pay to an employee who brings a successful unfair dismissal claim will be capped at $71,000, being half of the high income threshold.

  • Civil penalties for breaches of the Fair Work Act will increase to $63,000 per contravention for corporations and $12,600 per contravention for individuals.

  • The concessional (before tax) superannuation contributions cap will be cut to $25,000. The after tax non-concessional superannuation contributions cap will also be cut to $100,000.

Another important development for businesses to follow is the progress of the Fair Work Amendment (Protecting Vulnerable Workers) Bill. The Bill has passed through the House of Representatives and is currently under review by the Senate, which means that the Federal Government’s proposal to hold franchisors and holding companies responsible for contraventions of the Fair Work Act by their franchisees or subsidiaries is one step closer to taking effect.

The changes proposed in the Bill include:

  • the introduction of new offences that capture franchisors and parent companies who fail to take reasonable steps to prevent non-compliance within their networks

  • a tenfold increase in the maximum penalty for serious contraventions of the to $630,000 for a corporation and $126,000 for an individual.

For more information, please contact:

Maree Skinner | Partner

T +61 2 8233 9803 | M +61 427 229 971


Fay Calderone | Partner

T +61 2 8233 9605 | M +61 456 780 671


Leonard Lozina | Partner

T +61 2 8233 9617 | M +61 417 426 039


The information in this document, broadcast or communication is provided for general guidance only. It is not legal advice, and should not be used as a substitute for consultation with professional legal or other advisors. No warranty is given to the correctness of the information contained in this document, broadcast or communication or its suitability for use by you. To the fullest extent permitted by law, no liability is accepted by DibbsBarker for any statement or opinion, or for an error or omission or for any loss or damage suffered as a result of reliance on or use by any person of any material in the document, broadcast or communication.
This publication is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, it may only be reproduced for internal business purposes, and may not otherwise be copied, adapted, amended, published, communicated or otherwise made available to third parties, in whole or in part, in any form or by any means, without the prior written consent of DibbsBarker.
Recent Publications
22 Sep 2017
What do investors consider most closely when evaluating an opportunity to invest in an initial public offering (IPO)? Do institutional and retail investors place different weight on different sources of information? How well do retail investors really understand prospectuses?
14 Sep 2017
When shareholders in a company fall out, they sometimes allege that the company’s affairs have been managed in an unfair or oppressive way. Parties to a joint venture gone sour, warring directors, or families mired in disputes over the direction, management, succession and future control of a business are the typical parties to a shareholder dispute, commonly known as an ‘oppression proceeding’.
13 Sep 2017
An Australian business might contemplate litigation against an overseas party for a wide variety of reasons, such as a claim arising from a breach of contract with a foreign-based supplier or manufacturer.