Consulting and actuarial firm Rice Warner has increased super contributions for female employees by 2 per cent of salary as a way to address the gender gap in retirement savings.
It follows on from consultation Rice Warner undertook with the Australian Human Rights Commission to ensure the measures did not discriminate against male employees.
The package of benefits which were implemented at the start of this month, also includes flexible working conditions, paid parental leave, superannuation payments and long service leave accrued during parental leave, as well as an educational package.
Rice Warner deputy chief executive Melissa Fuller said her interest in finding a way to resolve the discrepancies between male and female retirement savings was sparked by the firm's research.
Underlying data and statistical evidence clearly showed that most females fell behind their male counterparts in their level of retirement savings, Fuller said.
A Rice Warner report released in November found that many challenges including lower pay, workforce patterns and a longer life span meant most women retired with approximately 50 per cent less superannuation than men.
"From the outset Rice Warner saw an opportunity to tackle a systemic issue that has a broad impact on Australian females and society, but which also directly impacts our own female employees," said Fuller.
The firm said the total female savings gap today was $383 billion, with 65-year-old females retiring with on average $40,000 less than 65-year-old men.
Jim Chalmers has defended changes to the Future Fund’s mandate, referring to himself as a “big supporter” of the sovereign wealth fund, amid fierce opposition from the Coalition, which has pledged to reverse any changes if it wins next year’s election.
In a new review of the country’s largest fund, a research house says it’s well placed to deliver attractive returns despite challenges.
Chant West analysis suggests super could be well placed to deliver a double-digit result by the end of the calendar year.
Specific valuation decisions made by the $88 billion fund at the beginning of the pandemic were “not adequate for the deteriorating market conditions”, according to the prudential regulator.