<P> The standard was criticised by the ACTU on the grounds that the Australian Fair Pay Commission was not as independent as the Australian Industrial Relations Commission . According to the ACTU, the Howard Government wanted to reduce the minimum wage and it claimed that it would appoint people to the Fair Pay Commission who would carry out its agenda . This argument was based partially on the Howard Government's previous opposition to minimum wage increases . </P> <P> The ACTU claimed the five minimum conditions was not sufficiently comprehensive . They argued employees could lose entitlements they previously had, including wage rates based on skill levels, standard hours of work, work - related allowances, annual leave loading, redundancy pay, overtime pay, and weekend and shift work rates of pay . Employees who previously had these entitlements under an industrial instrument would retain them . However, because they were not covered by the Standard, they could be subject to negotiation between employers and employees in an Australian Workplace Agreement . </P> <P> During a Senate Estimates hearing on 29 May 2006, Peter McIlwain, Head of the Office of the Employment Advocate detailed that from a sample of 4 per cent, or 250, of the total 6,263 AWAs lodged during April 2006 after WorkChoices was introduced: </P> <Ul> <Li> 100% of AWAs removed at least one protected award condition </Li> <Li> 64% of AWAs removed annual leave loadings </Li> <Li> 63% of AWAs removed penalty rates </Li> <Li> 52% of AWAs cut out shift loadings </Li> <Li> 40% of AWAs dropped gazetted public holidays </Li> <Li> 16% of AWAs removed all award conditions and only met the five minimum conditions of the Standard . </Li> </Ul>

When did personal leave change from 8 days to 10 days