iscover
The Fair Work Ombudsman (FWO) has secured $25,740 in penalties in court against the operators of a Melbourne-based transport services business.
In a recent case, the Federal Circuit and Family Court imposed a $21,450 penalty against Express Cars Direct Australia Wide.
The company, based in Melbourne and operating as “Express Cars Direct” business nationally, had penalties imposed on them in response to failing to comply with a compliance notice from the FWO, requiring it to calculate and back pay entitlements owing to a worker it employed as a driver between April 2019 and May 2021.
A $4,290 penalty was also imposed against the company’s sole director, Billy Petrevski, who was deemed to have been directly involved in the contravention.
The FWO investigated after receiving a request for assistance from the affected worker.
A Fair Work inspector issued the compliance notice to the company in August 2022 after forming a belief the worker had been underpaid wages, owed under the Road Transport and Distribution Award 2020, and annual leave entitlements, owed under the Fair Work Act’s National Employment Standards.
It’s a common reality for the FWO, which often imposes such penalties against employers who fail to comply with the notice. Fair Work Ombudsman Anna Booth expressed that employers must be aware that a failure to act on compliance notices could result in heavy penalties through the courts.
“When compliance notices are not followed, we will continue to take legal action to protect employees. Employers who fail to act on these notices risk substantial penalties,” said Booth
“Any employees with concerns about their pay or entitlements should contact us for free advice and assistance.”
Judge Catherine Symons, who oversaw the case, found that there was “nothing redeeming in the conduct or attitude” of Express Cars Direct Australia Wide and Petrevski that would justify a discount on penalty.
“The attitude demonstrated by the respondents in this proceeding gives me little confidence that lessons have been learned,” Judge Symons said.
Judge Symons found there was a need to impose penalties that would deter them and other employers from following through on similar conduct.
“It does not seem to me appropriate that an employer who essentially thumbs their nose at a compliance notice without taking any affirmative action should be afforded more leniency, both in terms of their own need for deterrence and the optics this would convey to the putative like-minded employer,” said Judge Symons.
RELATED TERMS
Compliance often refers to a company's and its workers' adherence to corporate rules, laws, and codes of conduct.
Kace O'Neill
Kace O'Neill is a Graduate Journalist for HR Leader. Kace studied Media Communications and Maori studies at the University of Otago, he has a passion for sports and storytelling.
