Former Director still liable to pay penalties with his new wages

FWO First

March 29, 2016

The Director of Sona Peaks Pty Ltd (in liquidation) which traded as an Indian food restaurant in Victoria was recently ordered by the Federal Circuit Court of Australia to pay a total of $26,715 (plus interest) by way of an Attachment of Earnings Order to his wages with his new employer Metro Trains Melbourne Pty Ltd.

Fair Work Ombudsman v Sona Peaks Pty Ltd and David Anderson MLG 933/2013

The Director of Sona Peaks Pty Ltd (in liquidation) (the Company) which traded as an Indian food restaurant in Victoria was recently ordered by the Federal Circuit Court of Australia (FCCA) to pay a total of $26,715 (plus interest) by way of an Attachment of Earnings Order to his wages with his new employer Metro Trains Melbourne Pty Ltd (Metro Trains).

In January 2015, the Fair Work Ombudsman (FWO) was successful in its proceedings against the Company for a penalty to be ordered against the Company and the Director for failing to comply with a Compliance Notice issued by the FWO for the payment of $5,037.34 to the employee for underpayment of wages. At the time, the FCCA imposed a penalty of $3,000.00 on the Director.

Later that same year, the FWO was again successful in proceedings against the Company and the Director for the underpayment of employees a total of $11,201.17. The FCCA ordered the Director to pay a penalty of $23,715 for his involvement in the contraventions of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (FW Act).

The FWO applied for an “Attachment of Earnings Order” against the Director for the repayment of the two penalties amounts. Earlier this month, the FCCA made the orders sought by the FWO. Accordingly, Metro Trains will be required to deduct $500.00 (together with $3.00 for its administrations fees) from the Director’s wages each pay period as payment for the total penalty.

In the past, the FWO has signalled its intention to hold directors and other relevant personnel who are involved in contraventions, such as underpayments, accountable. This matter serves as a warning to all directors and other relevant personnel that the FWO will pursue directors for outstanding penalties even if they are no longer connected with the business involved in the original contravention.

Information provided in this blog is not legal advice and should not be relied upon as such. Workplace Law does not accept liability for any loss or damage arising from reliance on the content of this blog, or from links on this website to any external website. Where applicable, liability is limited by a scheme approved under Professional Standards Legislation.

$15.3 million in penalties imposed on sushi restaurants and director for serious contraventions

Put your records on

The director and Chief Executive Officer of a group of four sushi restaurants which operated in NSW, the Australian Capital Territory and the Northern Territory was recently ordered to pay $1.6 million for her involvement in contraventions of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) by the Federal Court of Australia.

September 19, 2024

Blogs

FWO secures penalties against bar operator and external accounting firm

Closing time

The Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) requires employers to keep certain employee records for a period of 7 years. These records are necessary to ensure that employees have been paid their minimum entitlements should an underpayment claim be made.

March 18, 2024

Blogs

Underpaying employer ordered to pay $475,200 in penalties

Pecuniary penalties no longer a matter of degrees

The Federal Court of Australia has issued one of its first penalty decisions since the High Court of Australia’s decision earlier this year of Australian Building and Construction Commissioner v Pattinson [2022] HCA 13.

December 20, 2022

Commission finds no objective or rational connection between an employee’s age and his flexible working request to work from home

The age of flexibility

An employee will only be eligible to request a flexible working arrangement if they are able to demonstrate that there is a sufficient nexus between one of the prescribed circumstances under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) and the request itself.

December 11, 2024

Blogs

Employer’s “tick and flick” training on workplace policies rendered dismissal unfair

Not just the what, but also the why

When relying on a workplace policy as grounds for dismissal, employers must be able to clearly demonstrate that the employee is aware of the policy and has undergone meaningful training on the policy.

December 10, 2024

Blogs

Commission finds employer’s unsubstantiated allegations rendered dismissal unfair

Not mushroom for error

Where there is a factual dispute about allegations made against an employee, employers must ensure that the allegations are properly tested before proceeding to a disciplinary process. This will ensure that the employee has been provided with procedural fairness and any reasons relied on by the employer as grounds for dismissal are valid.

November 19, 2024

Resources: Blogs

FWO First