Resources: Blogs

Working hard for the money

Blogs
|

FWO sends out warnings about payment and pay methods

The FWO has stressed that workers (i.e. labour hire and employees) must be paid the correct wage in accordance with the Horticulture Award. It is likely that the FWO will be closely monitoring the horticulture industry (and other industries where visa holders are predominately employed) given the high incidences of exploitation that have recently been reported in the media.

As harvest season is fast approaching, the Fair Work Ombudsman (FWO) has reminded growers that they need to be familiar with their obligations under the Horticulture Award 2010 (Horticulture Award). The reminder has been issued in response to claims that labour hire contractors are approaching growers and offering workers at very low rates of pay.

The FWO has stressed that workers (i.e. labour hire and employees) must be paid the correct wage in accordance with the Horticulture Award. It is likely that the FWO will be closely monitoring the horticulture industry (and other industries where visa holders are predominately employed) given the high incidences of exploitation that have recently been reported in the media.

The attraction to “picking” is common amongst backpackers and short stay visa holders (who usually have no right to work in Australia) because they receive “cash in the hand” or free food and accommodation in exchange for work whilst enjoying their stay in Australia. The practice of paying “cash in hand” without keeping any records (or deducting any tax) or “paying” employees with food and accommodation is illegal under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (FW Act) and applicable immigration and taxation laws.

In 2014, the FWO conducted six “unannounced visits” to farms and found that 2 employers had underpaid 22 employees. The FWO also found 4 employers had record keeping and pay slip contraventions. Given this latest media release from the FWO, employers in the horticulture industry should make sure they are prepared for an unannounced visit by the FWO.

The arrangement of working “for food and/or accommodation” is not exclusive to the horticulture industry. In 2015, a large poultry processing employer was found to have underpaid its employees, forced them to work extremely long hours and required them to pay high rents for overcrowded and unsafe accommodation.

Employers have an obligation under the FW Act to pay an employee “in relation to the performance of work” in money whether it be by cash, cheque, money order or EFT. To clarify, employees who are on the books can be paid in “cash”; however, they must still be issued payslips and paid in accordance with the applicable modern award. Employers are strongly reminded that it is a breach of the FW Act to “pay” an employee wholly in food and/or accommodation or other creative means.

Employers should seek legal advice if they are uncertain of their obligations with respect to payments and/or deductions where employees are required to live on an employer’s premises or in employer provided accommodation.

 

Similar articles

$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.

Read more...

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.

Read more...

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.

Read more...

FWC finds employer’s assumptions about employee’s capacity rendered dismissal unfair

You need to chill out

If an employer is questioning the capacity of an ill or injured worker’s ability to fulfil the inherent requirements of their position, they may consider testing the legitimacy of an employee’s prognoses and medical advice. In these circumstances, the employer should be aware of their obligations to the employee and the potential consequences of failing to satisfy them.

Read more...

FWC finds dismissal harsh and unreasonable given employer’s communication blunder of policy changes

Sliding into your DM’s

It is best practice for employers to ensure that their policies and procedures are properly communicated and understood by employees, especially in circumstances where the policy relates to important topics such as the health and safety of employees.

Read more...

Poor redundancy process results in successful workers compensation claim

Coffee catastrophe

There are a number of legal obligations and risks that an employer must consider when implementing any form of disciplinary or dismissal process. These are not limited to claims made under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) but can also include the risk of claims made under anti-discrimination or workers compensation legislation.

Read more...

Let's talk

please contact our directors to discuss how ouR expertise can help your business.

We're here to help

Contact Us
Let Workplace Law become your partner in workplace law and sports law.

Sign up to receive the latest industry updates with commentary from the Workplace Law team direct to your inbox.

Subscribe

* indicates required