Catryna Bilyk (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I just want to take a few minutes today to talk about the same issue as Senator Cameron did. And Senator Cameron, I would like to thank you for leading this inquiry. He's just outlined the conclusions and the recommendations of the report more generally. I also want to focus on some of the issues outlined in chapter 3. Chapter 3 really relates to the Fair Work Ombudsman. The fact that this issue happened in Tasmania, my home state, is of quite some concern to me. A Fair Work Ombudsman investigation was commenced in November 2014 into the compliance of cleaning contractors engaged by supermarkets in Tasmania. The Ombudsman's report released in February 2018 found noncompliance with legal obligations by cleaning contractors at 90 per cent of Woolworths sites in Tasmania. The Fair Work Ombudsman's report highlighted that the majority of cleaners who were interviewed by inspectors during the site visits in Tasmania were unable to provide details of the nature of their engagement, were unwilling to advise how much they were being paid, hadn't received payslips, were paid a flat rate for all ours hours worked, were unaware of the applicable penalty rates under the award and were unable to provide a clear indication of the business that employed them, except for a first name and sometimes a mobile number of the person they reported to—and that's because, as Senator Cameron spoke about, there's a 'chain of uncommand', if you like, whereby Woolworths basically subcontracts the work out and it keeps going on down the line until nobody wants to take responsibility—and a majority of them were from overseas or of a non-English-speaking background.

The Fair Work Ombudsman uncovered underpayments of around $64,000 as well as multiple breaches relating to rostering, payslips and record keeping. They estimate that the underpayment was greater than $64,000, but they were unable to fully quantify the workers' entitlements because of poor record keeping, false and inaccurate records and a lack of cooperation from the workers, possibly owing to the fact that they were worried that if they cooperated they would probably lose their job. So, while it was the contractors who were primarily responsible for these breaches, the Fair Work Ombudsman also observed that Woolworths contributed through the cost and time pressures they placed on contractors. That inquiry also found that Woolworths had contributed to the culture of noncompliance through deficiencies in procurement and oversight of its cleaning contractors. They failed to ensure that cleaners complied with their visitors-book protocol and often signed in and out with a different contractor's name. They also failed to issue identification cards. So, who knows who would have been in there doing what in the supermarkets. Some cleaners advised Fair Work Ombudsman inspectors that they'd not completed any sort of induction. This led to difficulties identifying which cleaners were on which sites, which obviously contributed to the difficulty in quantifying their workers entitlements, and exposed workers to unacceptable health and safety risks as well.

On 24 August 2018 Woolworths entered into a proactive compliance deed with the Fair Work Ombudsman. A proactive compliance deed is a mechanism used by the FWO to formalise compliance partnerships with businesses to ensure that their systems and processes are working effectively to build a culture of compliance. Through the inquiry we heard from the law firm Maurice Blackburn and the cleaners union United Voice that there were significant limitations in the compliance deed.

Firstly, the deed only required Woolworths to ensure that employees receive their full entitlements from 1 July 2014, so, if you hadn't been paid properly previous to that, too bad. The time limit was pretty arbitrary, and we did note that a similar deed for 7-Eleven was not time limited. The committee noted that the language in advertising material promoting Woolworths's Speak Up service—that's where workers can report suspected misconduct—was complex, particularly for workers from non-English-speaking backgrounds. The deed also put the onus on workers to come forward and claim entitlements instead of Woolworths proactively determining repayments. The deed also had inadequate processes to ensure responsible contracting, going forward, such as safeguards to minimise the risk of noncompliance and maintaining safe productivity levels to avoid risk of occupational injury. United Voice and Maurice Blackburn referred to the deed as 'a missed opportunity to reset the relationship between Woolworths and the cleaning workforce and initiate new arrangements to ensure that the cleaners that work in these stores are employed on fair and lawful terms in the future'.

I was pretty disturbed about this exploitation happening in Woolworths stores. Tasmanians pride themselves on being a fair and decent type of people, and for it to happen in my beautiful home state of Tasmania was quite disturbing. In the absence of any nationwide investigation, I do wonder whether there are not similar scenarios playing out across the country. As far as I'm aware, no management staff in Woolworths have been disciplined over the shortcomings in their contracting processes. As the report notes:

… the committee views the actions of Woolworths in managing its cleaning arrangements for its Tasmanian stores as a highly indicative case study highlighting the 'all power, no responsibility' mindset that plagues some businesses under the current legislative framework.

The committee, as Senator Cameron said, made a number of recommendations to improve future compliance deeds negotiated by the Fair Work Ombudsman, and I hope the ombudsman gives these serious consideration.

The poor treatment of cleaners by Woolworths contractors in my home state of Tasmania is symptomatic of the high rates of exploitation in this industry, and we must do more to ensure that vulnerable workers, such as those in the cleaning industry, are protected from exploitation and that they receive their full pay and entitlements. I seek leave to continue my remarks later.

Leave granted.