General news

Thanks to new legislation passed by the Albanese Government and pushed by the union movement, employers found to have intentionally underpaid staff could face up to $8 million in fines and possible jail time. 

FSU member and former Commonwealth Bank employee Andy Swift knows all too well the consequences of big corporations exploiting their workers. He was ripped off thousands of dollars in wage theft and was one of 7000 employees at the bank who fought to win their money back.  

“When I started working at CBA, I defaulted onto an individual agreement (IA),” said Andy.   

“I didn’t have any experience to know that that was unusual, I didn’t even really know what the enterprise agreement (EA) was, and the bank didn’t go to great lengths to explain it.” 

It turned out that this IA, which was much weaker than the EA and was only supposed to be allowed in very specific circumstances, was being rolled out more broadly.  

“They told us that the IA was a better deal because of the increased salary, but there was no real deep discussion or information provided, and it was presented to us as the default option, not something we could opt for.”  

After the FSU took CBA to task and the Federal Court found the bank guilty of these practices, Andy received backpay totaling thousands of dollars.   

“While it was never explained how that figure was calculated, they said there had been mistakes made to the ‘better off overall test’,” Andy explained.  

“I’m guessing it was mostly to do with overtime – I did a lot of overtime when I first started, I was doing 60 hours a week, and while I was still getting paid for it, I suspect it wasn’t enough.” 

Ultimately, these new wage theft laws are about balancing the scales of fairness. The Federal Government argues it has always been the case that workers face criminal charges if they steal from their employer, so it is only fair that employers who deliberately steal from their workers also face criminal charges. 

Disappointingly, Peter Dutton and the LNP voted against the changes. 

Andy said he was pleased to see these changes, but did wonder how high the bar would be set for a company to be found guilty of this criminal behaviour.  

“It’s a step in the right direction at the very least. 

“I do think it will make big corporations think twice, and I’m guessing there will likely be some precedents set early on showing that claiming ignorance is not necessarily a get out of jail free card.”