Wage theft becomes a criminal offence

Wage theft becomes a criminal offence

Latest News & Events

Wage theft becomes a criminal offence

money changing hands

The next element of the Albanese Government’s Closing Loopholes changes to the Fair Work Act substantially up the penalties for underpayment of wages and entitlements with a new criminal offence of wage theft.

What’s changing?

From 1 January 2025, “wage theft” will become a criminal offence.

The penalties for a corporation found to have engaged in wage theft will be:

  • if the court can determine the underpayment, the greater of 3 times the amount of the underpayment and $7.825 million, or
  • if the court can’t determine the underpayment, $7.825 million. 

And for an individual, they will be:

  • up to 10 years’ imprisonment and
  • if the court can determine the underpayment, the greater of 3 times the amount of the underpayment and $$1.565 million, or
  • if the court can’t determine the underpayment, $$1.565 million. 

Cases of criminal prosecution for wage theft will be referred to the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions or the Australian Federal Police for consideration and prosecution where appropriate.

Why is this happening?

Over the past decade, there have been numerous high profile cases of organisations from multi-nationals to micro businesses underpaying wages and entitlements, in some cases deliberately and in some negligently and systematically.

Earlier this year, the Fair Work Ombudsman secured record penalties amounting to $10.34 million against the Commonwealth Bank of Australia.  The presiding judge, Justice Bromwich stated:

“The simple fact is that the obligations were readily able to be complied with, and proper checks to ensure that was taking place were not hard to implement. That did not happen, and the message needs to be loud and clear that this is not good enough and will not be tolerated, most significantly for other would-be contraveners, but also as an ongoing warning for CBA and therefore the CBA Group of which it is the dominant member.”

That probably says it all.

What constitutes wage theft?

According to the Fair Work Ombudsman, employers will commit an offence if:

  • they’re required to pay an amount to an employee (such as wages), or on behalf of or for the benefit of an employee (such as superannuation) under the Fair Work Act, or an industrial instrument
  • they intentionally engage in conduct that results in their failure to pay those amounts to or for the employee on or before the day they’re due to be paid.

They note that this only applies to intentional underpayments that occur after the new provisions take effect but include ones where they are part of a course of conduct that started before the provisions take effect.

What happens if underpayments are accidental or unintentional?

Firstly, employers are liable for rectifying underpayments of wages and other entitlements for up to 6 years retrospectively.

The Fair Work Ombudsman might also require your company to enter into an Enforceable Undertaking (EU).

Typically an EU contains additional obligations. These include:

  • an acknowledgement by the employer that the law has not been followed
  • an agreement by the employer to do certain actions to fix the breach (for example, remedying an underpayment, apologising, printing a public notice)
  • a commitment by the employer to future compliance measures (for example, regular internal audits, training for managers and staff, future reporting to the Fair Work Ombudsman).

Each EU is published on the Fair Work Ombudsman website as a matter of public record and so can be a source of ongoing embarrassment and damage to company brand and reputation.

If you do not comply with a Compliance Notice issued by the Fair Work Ombudsman requiring you to correct breaches and make good on underpayments, they can take you to court to get notices enforced and that can result in significant fines as follows:

  • $18,780 per contravention for an individual
  • $93,900 per contravention for a company with less than 15 employees
  • $469,500 per contravention for a company with 15 or more employees.

And for serious contraventions:

  • $187,800 per contravention for an individual
  • $939,000 per contravention for a company with less than 15 employees
  • $4,695,000 per contravention for a company with 15 or more employees.

Infringement Notices

These are essentially on the spot fines for minor record keeping breaches.

Inspectors can issue infringement notices to an employer for:

  • not making and keeping employee records for 7 years
  • not issuing pay slips within one working day of paying employees
  • not including the required information on a pay slip and/or in an employee record
  • advertising a job with pay rates that are less than an employee’s minimum entitlements, where there is no reasonable excuse for not complying.

The infringement amount (fine) is up to:

  • $1,980 per breach for an individual
  • $9,900 per breach for a company.

So, even a very minor offence can be very costly plus, if your business is found not to be complying with record keeping requirements, it might lead to the Fair Work Ombudsman investigating for other breaches and potential underpayment of wages.

How can we help?

At Ridgeline HR. we have a long history of assisting clients with navigating the intricacies of the Fair Work Act and Modern Awards and we can help businesses large and small and of any sector to assure their Fair Work compliance. We have been doing that since 2000.

When you look at the serious costs of getting this stuff wrong, the $1500 plus GST investment in our Workplace Relations Compliance Assessment is a really good investment.

If you need someone to audit your payroll to make sure that you have things set up properly or to calculate underpayments, we can help with that too.

Plus, if you have accidentally got yourself into strife with the Fair Work Ombudsman, we can help you with both getting your compliance sorted and working with the regulator to support you.

If any of that is or interest or you have some other HR issue that you need help with, give us on 1300 108 488 to arrange your free first consultation.

CONTACT US

Ridgeline Human Resources Pty Ltd
ABN : 24 091 644 094

enquiries@ridgelinehr.com.au

6 Ellesmere Ave, Croydon Victoria 3136

1300 108 488

PARTNER LINKS

TELL US WHAT YOU NEED HELP WITH

Industry Specific Redundancy Schemes 1

Industry Specific Redundancy Schemes 1

Latest News & Events

Industry Specific Redundancy Schemes 1

money changing hands

There are some unusual provisions in modern awards and these can deliver unexpected differences in entitlements for employees than what you might expect. For employers in the building and construction and plumbing and fire sprinkler industries, one such surprise is the industry specific redundancy schemes that apply in lieu of the National Employment Standard on redundancy. Here we unpack that.

Most employees in the country have their redundancy entitlements determined by the National Employment Standards which provides for up to 16 weeks of payment depending on how long the employee has been with the company for.

There are, however some exceptions to this; they are employees who receive their entitlements via an external fund that their employers make regular contributions to, like Incolink, or employees whose work is covered by an Industry Specific Redundancy Scheme provided for in a modern award. This is the first of a series of blogs about these exceptions and, in this one, we deal with those applying under the Building and Construction General On-site Award 2020 and the Plumbing and Fire Sprinklers Award 2020.

What is an Industry Specific Redundancy Scheme?

The Fair Work Act 2009 provides that the National Employment Standard on redundancy is displaced by an industry specific redundancy scheme where that is provided for in a modern award or an enterprise agreement. These schemes existed prior to creation of the relevant modern awards and have just been carried over into modern awards. They can have different rules and different levels of entitlement to those prescribed in the National Employment Standard.

What is different about the scheme in the building and plumbing awards?

The particular type of industry specific redundancy scheme that is in the building and plumbing awards was ostensibly created on the basis that employees in the industry typically worked from project to project and therefore were unlikely to accumulate sufficient continuous service with one employer to qualify for redundancy in the normal way. This is certainly not the case with the building and construction businesses which we service as they engage most employees on a continuing basis because they need them on that basis. 

There are three primary differences that apply under this industry specific redundancy scheme as compared to the National Employment Standard:

  • There is a different definition of redundancy and
  • There is a different set of entitlements to redundancy pay and
  • There is no small business exemption

The normal definition of a genuine redundancy is “when the employer or business no longer requires the job to be performed by anyone” as prescribed in the National Employment Standard which provides for up to 16 weeks redundancy pay based on length of continuous service. There is no entitlement in the first year of service.

In contrast, the definition of redundancy in the building and plumbing awards is “an employee who ceases to be employed by the employer for reasons other than those of misconduct or refusal of duty”. That industry specific redundancy scheme provides for a lesser maximum amount of redundancy pay (capped at 8 weeks after 4 years’ service) but also provides for pro rata payment in the first and subsequent years for each completed week of service.

There is also no small business exemption so that employers with less than 15 employees are also up for redundancy payments (unlike under the National Employment Standard).

On face value, you might think that employees covered under these awards are worse off than they would be under the National Employment Standard and, for an employee with more than 5 years service who is genuinely made redundant in the normal way, that would be true.

However, the different definition of redundancy in this industry specific redundancy scheme means that it is not just that genuine redundancy that attracts a redundancy payment.

The building and plumbing awards also state:“Provided that an employee employed for less than 12 months will be entitled to a redundancy/severance payment of 1.75 hours per week of service if, and only if, redundancy is occasioned otherwise than by the employee.”  

So what does all of that mean?

It means that any employee whose employment terminates for any reason other than “misconduct or refusal of duty”  is entitled to a redundancy payment:

  • In the first 12 months of employment and thereafter, if the employer initiates the termination eg if an employee is terminated due to genuine redundancy or on performance grounds or on incapacity grounds or due to loss of an essential qualification or any other reason except: misconduct or refusal of duty” plus
  • After the first 12 months of employment, if the employee initiates the termination eg if the employee resigns, retires or dies.

So, for example, if you have an employee who resigns after completing 4 or more years of service, you are up for 8 weeks in redundancy pay on top of their other final entitlements. 

What can employers do?

There are a few options.

The first is to make contributions to a redundancy fund like Incolink. They fund then manages any claims made by the employee for redundancy payments. The downside to this is that the costs can be quite high.

Another alternative is to have your own enterprise agreement. Through an enterprise agreement you can alter or replace Award terms with ones that align more closely with how your company operates this would allow you to replace the Industry Specific Redundancy Scheme with the NES term which has the more defined meaning to redundancy.

It is also possible for employers who pay their employees significantly above the minimum rates specified in the Award to offset an employee’s entitlement to redundancy payments. Any attempt to do so should be spelt out in an employment contract and the employee affected should be made aware of what they are agreeing to in that contract. You, of course, also need to verify that you are actually paying sufficiently above award to set off the redundancy payment.

How can we help?

At Ridgeline HR we have a long history of assisting clients with navigating the intricacies of the Fair Work Act and Modern Awards and we can help businesses to manage their obligations to employees in any of the ways we have mentioned in this blog.

If you need assistance with understanding your obligations to your employees or changing how you meet your obligations to employees regarding the Industry Specific Redundancy Scheme or any other HR related matter please don’t hesitate to contact us on 1300 108 488 or at enquiries@ridgelinehr.com.au

In subsequent blogs, we will deal with other Industry Specific Redundancy Schemes applying in other industries, some of which provide for higher redundancy pay than the National Employment Standard and some that provide redundancy pay for small business employers who would otherwise be exempt under the National Employment Standard.

 

CONTACT US

Ridgeline Human Resources Pty Ltd
ABN : 24 091 644 094

enquiries@ridgelinehr.com.au

6 Ellesmere Ave, Croydon Victoria 3136

1300 108 488

PARTNER LINKS

TELL US WHAT YOU NEED HELP WITH

Offshore worker’s unfair dismissal claim allowed

Offshore worker’s unfair dismissal claim allowed

Latest News & Events

Offshore worker’s unfair dismissal claim allowed

example flexible working arrangement

Are you using offshore workers in the belief that they are not covered by Australia’s Fair Work system? Well, you might be right….but then again, you might not.

What has happened?

Deputy President Slevin at the Fair Work Commission has determined that an offshore worker in the Philippines deemed by her contract to be an independent contractor is actually an Australian National System Employee with access to our unfair dismissal jurisdiction.

The case of Ms Joanna Pascua v Doessel Group Pty Ltd involves a worker engaged to do paralegal work for a Queensland law firm which terminated her contract due to alleged breach of contract which was disputed by the worker and resulted in her lodging an unfair dismissal claim.

That led to a jurisdictional hearing as the respondent alleged (among other things) that she wasn’t an employee and so couldn’t be dismissed.

Here is the decision.

Why did the FWC make that determination?

In his decision, the Deputy President goes into quite a bit of detail on the terms set out in the written contract between the parties as well as the duties and working arrangements for the applicant and relevant case law.

One problem for the respondent was that, in parts, the contract referred to the other party as an employee or had provisions which would typically be associated with an employment arrangement.

The Deputy President also made note that the worker was more likely to be an employee because she worked inside the respondent’s business rather than providing services to the business from outside it. That perspective might be a bit of a red flag for the validity of many nominal independent contracting arrangements, whether local or overseas.

Reference was also made to KPIs that were set for the worker and to potential award coverage under the Legal Services Award 2020 with commentary that what the worker was getting paid ($18 per hour) was significantly below the award rate for the classification of work that she was performing as he saw it. Another red flag perhaps given the current federal government’s legislative changes to protect “employee-like workers” and provide the Fair Work Commission with the power to deal with complaints of unfair contractual terms from independent contractors.

The Deputy President concluded: “For the foregoing reasons I find that the relationship was an employment relationship. Accordingly, the Respondent’s objection is dismissed.” I would note that the foregoing reasoning was a lot more extensive than what I have set out above but hopefully my summary gives you the gist of the factors in play. 

What does it mean?

One of the things that has been repeatedly emphasised in the extraordinary range and number of changes that we are experiencing in our workplace relations system is that the focus going forward will be on the true nature of the relationship rather than just what is written in a contract

Another is to provide some level of security and protection and complaints jurisdictions for what have been called “employee-like workers”, those who might not be classified as National System employees because they are nominally not employees.

While we might not have expected that this would extend to offshore workers, this decision brings a whole new rage of considerations to bear in entering into offshore engagement arrangements.

One thing that is very clear from this case is that the poor drafting of the contract between the parties was a significant factor in the Deputy President’s considerations – he literally pulled it to pieces.

So any business entering into independent contractor arrangements whether locally or overseas needs to get professionally drafted contracts that don’t leave any doubt as to the relationship between the parties.

Another issue to consider which has been on our mind. Is one of the potential outcomes of a complaint to the Fair Work Commission re unfair contract terms by an independent contractor, a determination that the worker is a National System employee rather than a contractor? We reckon that might be on the cards. What do you think?

If you need any assistance with this or any other employment or related matter, please contact us on 1300 108 488 or by emailing us at enquiries@ridgelinehr.com.au

CONTACT US

Ridgeline Human Resources Pty Ltd
ABN : 24 091 644 094

enquiries@ridgelinehr.com.au

6 Ellesmere Ave, Croydon Victoria 3136

1300 108 488

PARTNER LINKS

TELL US WHAT YOU NEED HELP WITH

Are your contracts current, compliant and complete?

Are your contracts current, compliant and complete?

Latest News & Events

Are your contracts current, compliant and complete?

example flexible working arrangement

As we go through the biggest era of change in employment laws and modern awards that we have ever seen, it is becoming increasingly important to have written contracts that clearly set out the pay and conditions applying to each individual employee or contractor. Do yours? And are they current, compliant and complete? 

Why do you need written contracts?

When you engage someone to work for you, whether as an employee or a contractor, it brings into play a host of legal obligations covered by the Fair Work Act and a variety of other legislation and, in the case of employees, modern awards and, where applicable, enterprise agreements. 

There are many purposes that contracts serve:

  1.  They educate you about your legal obligations and can be a source of information for decision-making on issues that arise in the relationship with the employee or contractor.
  2. They clearly set out the nature of the relationship between you and the employee (be it full-time, part-time, casual or fixed term) or contractor.
  3. They provide details on any duties or obligations that the employee or contractor is required to satisfy in the relationship with you.
  4. They provide evidence of the employee or contractor acceptance of the pay and conditions as set out in the contract and, assuming the fairness of the contract, can be used in defence of any claim that might be made against you or your business.
  5. There have been around 70 changes in employment law and modern awards and the rules around employment and contracting have undergone an overhaul recently.

The gap between employee and contractor is progressively becoming more blurred so you also want clarity, especially if the individual is not covered by a company (Pty Ltd) structure.

What are the changes that affect contracts? 

Some of the significant changes that need to be considered in contracts are:

  1. New definitions of employee, casual employee and contractor
  2. Prohibition of pay secrecy provisions
  3. A new jurisdiction at the Fair Work Commission for disputes in relation to unfair contract claims
  4. New jursidictions for road transport contractors and gig workers
  5. The “right to disconnect” and associated award provisions
  6. Changes to rules in relation to annual shutdowns
  7. Revised casual conversion provisions
  8. New jurisdictions for dispute resolution at the Fair Work Commission regarding sexual harassment, requests for flexible working arrangements, requests for extension of parental leave and complaints regarding the right to disconnect

These are just a few of the issues that need to be considered in constructing contracts and their relevance may well vary according to the industry, business setting, occupation and seniority of the role in question. 

Other considerations

While under the changes that we are currently seeing, we are moving back to multi-factorial assessment of the true nature of a relationship (eg contractor or employee), the contract is still an important piece of evidence in determining such questions.

Remember that one size does not fit all and don’t just adopt a template that you got from somewhere else or that is the standard on the HR compliance system that you use. It is imperative that the contract is a fit with your business arrangements and with the individual concerned – ie ensure that they reflect the reality.

We have also seen a number of prosecutions of corporations in recent years for underpayment of wages related to employees being put on contracts with fixed salaries which did not provide adequate remuneration for the hours that those employees actually worked.

So, if you do want to put people on salaries or you wish to set off any award entitlements that might apply to an employee, you need to both be very specific in the contract about exactly which award provisions are being set off and compensated for by the remuneration provided for in the contract and you have to make sure that the employee is actually better off than they would be if the award was literally applied to their employment, pay and conditions.

Also a heads up if you have restraint provisions that the ACCC is currently considering whether restraint provisions should be regulated or, in some cases, abolished – so watch this space.

How we can help

We have been helping clients with employment contracts for over 20 years.

We can advise you on award coverage, terms in awards that affect remuneration or impose certain conditions and help you in structuring remuneration and benefits so that your offer is compliant.

We can help you to navigate all of the changes that are coming in so that your contracts are current.

And we can help you to decide the style of contract that you want in each case and what needs to go into them to make them complete for that particular circumstance.

If you would like to explore how we can assist you with employment contracts, call us on 1300 108 488 or email enquiries@ridgelinehr.com.au to arrange your free first consultation.

CONTACT US

Ridgeline Human Resources Pty Ltd
ABN : 24 091 644 094

enquiries@ridgelinehr.com.au

6 Ellesmere Ave, Croydon Victoria 3136

1300 108 488

PARTNER LINKS

TELL US WHAT YOU NEED HELP WITH

Why we call it people business

Why we call it people business

Latest News & Events

Why we call it people business

example flexible working arrangement

Human Resources Management is a business function developed in large organisations with large work forces where scale is important and, in most of those organisations,  policy, process and risk management are the priority. So does that work for SMBs? We don’t think so (in fact, we don’t think it works well in most organisations).      

A story from long ago

Early in my career as what was then called a Personnel Management practitioner, a very wise and loved boss of mine taught me a life lesson. Let’s call him Mike. It was that, if you are going to be successful in the field, you had to earn people’s trust. Mike spent a lot of time getting to know people and letting them get to know him. People came to Mike with all sorts of issues with confidence and he showed them that he was there for them by acting on them or advising them. They would even accept a “no” from him because it was Mike and they trusted him to be honest with them. From an organisational perspective, being informed about things happening out in the business equipped Mike to strategically deal with emerging issues before they became a problem and to lean in and provide support if someone was struggling with something at work or otherwise in life.

That is a lesson that I have used repeatedly in the work that I do.

When Mike moved on, the organisation’s first HR Manager replaced him and he liaised with senior management and issued instructions and policies from his office. People then came to me with their issues, saying “you’re not Mike but we trust you and you are all we’ve got”.

What is Human Resources Management?

According to Wikipedia:

  • “Human Resources Management is the strategic and coherent approach to the effective and efficient management of people in a company or organisation such that they help their business gain a competitive advantage”; and
  • HR professionals manage the human capital of an organisation and focus on implementing policies and processes.”

Not very inspiring, is it?

And the language is hardly engaging, is it?

And not very people focused either?

The concept that people are human resources to be managed is perhaps, in itself, dehumanising, don’t you think?

In too many organisations, HR is seen as the enforcer of corporate risk management via policies and procedures. That approach really sends a message that, rather than people being an organisation’s greatest assets in truth, they are seen as the organisation’s greatest risks.

And that is one of the reasons why HR doesn’t work as it was perhaps intended to – that, in the pursuit of risk management and legal compliance, organisations placed those above people.

What is people business?

In small to medium businesses, the primary driver of success is the quality of the people and the relationships between them and with other key stakeholders like customers and suppliers.

So, unlike traditional HRM, it is very human-centred and that is why we call it “PEOPLE BUSINESS” – it about how we get the right people in the right roles doing the right stuff in the right way so that they and the business flourish together.

Of course, we need some policy and procedures but they are designed to help people to perform and behave to the standards expected so that work is enjoyable and productive for everyone…..and of course there are legal compliance requirements that need to be dealt with and actions that need to occur in the event of non-compliances but they are the footnote rather than the headline.

We use our 4c model to help our clients with their PEOPLE BUSINESS:

  • Commitment – the fundamentals that deliver purpose and compliance
  • Capability – the tools and systems that enable good people practice
  • Competency – the skills and knowledge that deliver positive outcomes for businesses and people
  • Culture – the integration of all of that to deliver everyday employee engagement and high performance.

That is what PEOPLE BUSINESS looks like.

Conclusion

If you are an SMB, you need to assure your compliance with legal requirements but the way that you do that sends messages to your people and you want these to be the right ones.

It isn’t just about making people follow rules – it is about how you get them engaged and happy to follow the rules because they know that the rules are right and they want to be successful in their role and relationships at work.

If you would like to learn more about ways that we can help you with your PEOPLE BUSINESS, please call us on 1300 108 488 or email us at enquiries@ridgelinehr.com.au.

CONTACT US

Ridgeline Human Resources Pty Ltd
ABN : 24 091 644 094

enquiries@ridgelinehr.com.au

6 Ellesmere Ave, Croydon Victoria 3136

1300 108 488

PARTNER LINKS

TELL US WHAT YOU NEED HELP WITH