Archive, Industry News

Court rejects firms $110K back-pay appeal

FWO compliance notice against Hana Express upheld after review

 

The Fair Work Ombudsman (FWO) reports a compliance notice it issued to a New South Wales-based transport company to back-pay three employees $110,359 has been reinforced by the Federal Circuit Court following an appeal.

This marks the third publicised action against a transport and logistics firm in as many months by the ombudsman.

The compliance notice to Hana Express Group Pty Ltd (Hana Express) applied to three employees who were involved in loading and delivering tyres at various locations in Sydney and Newcastle.

Hana Express applied to have the notice, which rules the company must now back pay the employees in full, reviewed by the court.

FWO explains the notice was issued in April 2018 after an inspector believed Hana Express had contravened the Road Transport and Distribution Award 2010, following requests for assistance from the employees.

In response, Hana Express paid the employees $1,716 in relation to overtime, but sought to review alleged contraventions that it had failed to provide the employees with an opportunity to take breaks and did not pay the relevant penalty when meal breaks were delayed.


Last month a Gold Coast firm faced FWO action for pay compliance inaction 


In seeking a review by the court, Hana Express argued that the business did allow the employees to take breaks, but the court rejected this, FWO explains, adding that Judge Stuart Driver also found particular criticisms made by Hana Express about the inspector’s investigation were “unwarranted and inconsistent”.

“Employers have a right to seek a review of our enforcement tools but then the onus is on the employer to convince the court that they have not contravened workplace laws,” Fair Work Ombudsman Sandra Parker says.

“Hana Express is now required to pay back the lawful entitlements owed to their employees.

“Under the Fair Work Act, inspectors can issue a compliance notice if they form a belief that an employer has breached certain workplace laws.

“They are an important tool to recover unpaid wages for workers and resolve pay issues without the time and expense involved with court proceedings.”

In response, the Queensland Trucking Association (QTA) advises members to check and ensure that the Award and relevant clause is well understood.

“A Federal Court has recently upheld a Fair Work Ombudsman (FWO) Compliance Notice that a transport company was obliged to ensure that their employees observed work breaks under the Road Transport and Distribution Award 2010,” it states.

“The FWO had originally issued the compliance notice which obliged the company to pay almost $109,000 in unpaid penalties to three truck drivers who were denied the right to a 30 minute break, as set out in Clause 26.1 of the Award.

“That Clause requires employers to pay a ‘delayed meal break penalty’ if employees do not get the opportunity to take a regular 30 minute unpaid meal break. 

“If the break is not taken 3.5 hours to 5.5 hours into the shift, then the employer is required to pay double the minimum hourly rate from the time the break was due, until it is provided.

“This case underscores the importance of ensuring that work breaks are scheduled and taken.”

 

Previous ArticleNext Article
Send this to a friend