The unions say the government should have done more to stop what it sees as an attack on the country's lowest-paid workers, and are calling on the Prime Minister to intervene.
But proponents of the cut, say businesses will now be able to afford to open longer and employ more people.
Last year, the Productivity Commission argued Sundays were not the sacred day of leisure they once were. Akansha Bhardwaj who works in retail and has also been hit by this cut differs to this and says that weekend is still 'Weekend'.
She adds that it has affected her as though she just finished a degree but had plans to further her education. "With this dramatic decrease in my pay, I will have to now spend additional years of working to get required money" she adds.
Sonia Nagpaul who used to work on weekends in an supermarket chain feels the pain. She says, " this is not right. Low income earners would suffer the most"
Anita Mahajan who is a community support worker, works on weekends and also on shifts too. Though her salary in any case is governed by some other rules, but she is concerned about International students. She says, "They work on weekends to arrange for their fee and also try to help their family too. This should not have been done."
She also adds that people who work on weekends, sacrifice their valuable time with family and friends to get extra dollars. One should consider it.
When the changes come into effect, those working full and part-time will be paid time-and-a-half on Sundays - or a rate of 150 per cent - while casuals will receive a rate of 175 per cent, or time and three quarters.
There will be no changes for casual hospitality workers.
But part- and full-time hospitality staff will move from 175 to 150 per cent penalties.
Casual fast-food workers will move from 175 per cent to 150.
While the unions are already holding protests, business organisations are welcoming the decision.
They argue the money they save on Sunday wages will be reinvested in new workers, and a higher proportion of full-time workers.
Aakansha says," to look at the positive side, yes, few people would be benefited but at what cost?."
***
