Eleven Sunshine Coast truck drivers will share a $34,000 windfall after the Workplace Ombudsman uncovered underpayments of overtime and penalty rates.
Eleven Sunshine Coast truck drivers will share a $34,000 windfall after the Workplace Ombudsman uncovered underpayments of overtime and penalty rates.
Workplace Ombudsman Nicholas Wilson said the underpayments, by a company he refused to name, justified his organisation's targeting of the trucking industry.
He said investigations found the small company had underpaid 11 of its 14 drivers a total of $34,458.
"We have found that the company was not paying correct penalty rates or overtime," Mr Wilson said.
"We also discovered it had wrongly deducted mobile phone charges, which in some weeks, left drivers with little or no pay at all."
Mr Wilson said road transport was at "high risk" of breaching the Workplace Relations Act, given his office had received more than 2,500 claims about it over the past two years.
Workplace Ombudsman inspectors began auditing the company's books in February following a confidential complaint.
Mr Wilson said the company had cooperated fully and was voluntarily reimbursing employees amounts from $241 to $9,454.
The underpayments date back to March, 2006.
Mr Wilson said while legal action would not be taken against the company over its mistakes, he warned there would be no excuse for it failing to comply with workplace laws in future.
Letters have been sent to 9,500 businesses around the country advising that up to 700 would be randomly selected for audit.
In Queensland, inspectors will focus on checking short distance freight companies to ensure they are complying with minimum rates, minimum shifts, split shift provisions and allowances, pay slips and time sheets.
A spokesman for the Workplace Ombudsman said employers were only named if a matter went to court.
Transport Workers Union state secretary Hughie Williams said companies caught underpaying workers should be named regardless.
"If they're prepared to commit an offence by underpaying their workers, prospective workers should know who they are," he said.
"They could have been prosecuted, so they should be named."
aap 7 Jul 2008
Always this veil of secrecy, when it comes to corporations. When an individual 'steals' a $0.50 item from a department store, a criminal conviction IS recorded against their name.
11 workers $34,000 total, therefore approx $3,100 per worker average.
Telstra is responsible for a fraud that is worth approx $6.5 million per annum.
Telstra defrauded its workers approx $6,600 each on average.
Lets see if the Workplace Ombudsman will give a similar victory to those workers.
The answer will be NO.
Stay tuned here for further results.
Update : 13 AUG 2008 - Letter has been sent to the Workplace Ombudsman.
I now believe that Telstra/KAZ just don't care for their staff.
I have been issued a new contract also.
Conditions of employment were just extremely "less" than 2003 contract.
I put together a list of items to discuss for ammendment inclussion and assist both KAZ and myself to find an agreement
I was advised by KAZ HR in conference calls with KAZ staff, that the current contract will no longer be changed except for those changes agreed as per the “Contract Re-Issue Q&A”.
I tried to provide HR with an alternate option of adding of a “Schedule and/or Amendment” as part of my contract.
This approach is in line to the "Resolving Disagreements” policies at KAZ. That is discussing the issues internally within KAZ.
The items I suggested were:
Adding the company holding the salary continuance arrangement applicable to the my employment.
-> This was denied by KAZ HR
Adding that KAZ accepts my home business as no impact to my current KAZ duties and approves me working under this contract.
-> This was denied by KAZ HR
Adding that copyright ownership does not include those created under my home business. KAZ states that copyrights, intelectual of otherwise, are those items created during KAZ's business hours (Mon-Fri 7am 8pm and SAT 7am to 12noon)
-> This was denied by KAZ HR
Adding that that changes in legislation regarding the Minimum Superannuation Guarantee contributions will not affect the employee base salary under this contract. KAZ new contract leaves the Minimum Super Guarantee to be handled any way they want when they want.... no choice to the employee... as this is now part of the contract, if you do not agree, and an ammendment like the one in this paragraph is not accepted by KAZ, then "NO JOB"..
-> This was denied by KAZ HR
Adding that any alternate role will not be permanent partime, nor will reduce my salary due to such change. KAZ wants to hold the right to change your full time job to part time if so they please...
-> This was denied by KAZ HR
Adding that On-Call payments will stay. New contract says it is now included in my salary
-> This was denied by KAZ HR
Adding that KAZ will provide redundancy should I be relocated to another state permanently and Should I not agree.
-> This was denied by KAZ HR
Adding that any variations to my specific job role will require review and agreement of my current contract. With non-agreement equating to KAZ providing redundancy.
-> This was denied by KAZ HR
Adding that KAZ business hours, applicable to this contract, do not include public holidays nor state holidays, and requires employee agreement and consent to work on public holidays. New contract states business hours do not EXCLUDE HOLIDAYS of any sort, and are to be adheared to, however they are part of the business policies, and can change from time to time without prior notification, nor employee agreement.
-> This was denied by KAZ HR
Adding that personal/sick/carer’s is of 10 working days, instead of 10 days. As per business hours policies, 10 days would count weekends, and holidays.
-> This was denied by KAZ HR
Adding that "Actual Overtime" will be paid when KAZ asks to work on public holidays or Weekends.
-> This was denied by KAZ HR
Adding that “reasonable overtime” is no more than 3 to 5 hours over the 7.6 hours standard hours. and any excess should be paid as "Actual Overtime"
-> This was denied by KAZ HR
Adding that for working hours calculation purposes, KAZ standard 38 hour week on average over a 52 week includes “Standard business hours” and “Reasonable overtime” only.
-> This was denied by KAZ HR
Adding that my “fixed remuneration” will not be decreased if goverment should increase the Minimum Goverment Super Guarantee. KAZ wants to have the Super increases to come out of my base salary, or left up to the Remuneration team to do as they please.
-> This was denied by KAZ HR
Adding that entitlements and redundancy will be applicable as per Australian Industrial Relations legislation applicable at the time should KAZ terminate my employment.
-> This was denied by KAZ HR
Adding that confidentiality of information works both ways, and that upon KAZ request of employment termination, my personal and confidential information held by KAZ, will not be used in any way, internal or external to KAZ, with exceptions covered by applicable legislation.
-> This was denied by KAZ HR
As most of the contract is based on KAZ policies, which can change at any time, I requested to add that KAZ or Telstra policies will have no impact to any of the items in the requested changes above.
-> This was denied by KAZ HR
What I see here is quite plain:
- Telstra wants to change contracts to reduce the job conditions, but not the job itself.
- I don't see any need for contracts to be "reduced/changed" and still do the same work, for the same customers, from the same location, for the same managers, EXCEPT if KAZ wants to reduce their contract conditions, as they cannot change current contracts.
It is not IR, it is just an excuse to reduce employee work conditions and grip on contract amendemnts.