Top Menu

New union for retail workers



A new union for retail and fast food workers has launched with a campaign to bring back penalty rates.

The Retail and Fast Food Workers Union (RAFFWU) was founded in the wake of several wage scandals, including one that RAFFWU secretary Josh Cullinan helped unearth.

According to RAFFWU, enterprise agreements struck between major retailers and the Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees’ Association (more commonly known as the Shoppies) are collectively stripping 500,000 workers of over $300 million each year.

“Every day retail and fast food workers have over one million dollars taken from their pay packets,” said Cullinan in a statement. “The dodgy Coles Agreement was quashed 175 days ago. Since then more than $175 million has been taken from retail and fast food workers and nothing has been done to stop it.”

The traditional union for retail workers, the Shoppies, has been representing employees for over a century and hit back at the new union in a statement.



“The so-called ‘Retail and Fast Food Workers Union’ is nothing more than an alliance of political activists an d lawyers with a stated desire to undermine the SDA and its coverage of the sector,” a spokesperson said.

Cullinan said the RAFFWU is determined to help workers it sees as underpaid. “These workers don’t have anyone in their corner. Everyone, the employers and the SDA, is lined up to stop them getting their penalty rates back.

“That ends today. We will take back our penalty rates.”


Want the latest retail news delivered straight to your inbox? Click here to sign up to the retailbiz newsletter.

, , , , , , , ,

  • Michael Ratner

    Just what the world doesn’t need….. another comedian and or another union.
    Tongue in cheek ….. Employers are a greedy lot of bastards … that’s why everything is stacked against being an employer.
    As seen even water seems to find it’s own level – in the employer – employee relationship, can we firstly accept the premise that good workers are a business’s most valuable asset? This brings up the subject of unfair dismissal.
    As an employer would I be allowed to get a signature from a future employee to the question:
    Is there anything you feel I should know about your past that is of consequence?
    Pragmatically, yes employees must be considered an asset until they become an annoyance, reduce themselves to the lowest common denominator ( and yes for this there are plenty employees to blame), but the minute an employee is perceived as a liability, surely the employer should have the ability to make a decision without over justifying their reasons. After all business owners actually do spend an inordinate amount of time trying to work around future employee claims usually without justification.