The workers, aged between 21 and 30, were from Hong Kong and Taiwan in Australia on 417 working holiday visas when they were engaged by the contractor to work at a NSW poultry processing plant.

Complaints from the employees that they were being paid as little as A$11.50 an hour and sometimes required to work up to 20-hour shifts were assessed by the Fair Work Ombudsman’s specialist Overseas Worker’s Team (OWT).

They employees told OWT inspectors that:
• Female workers were paid A$11.50 an hour to wrap, label and pack trays of meat, while males received A$12.50 an hour.
• Those staff using the mincer were paid $A13.50 an hour.
• Payments were made in cash, with neither tax nor superannuation deducted.
• Workers were advised by text message of their shifts for the following day.
• Shifts varied from eight to 16 hours, but sometimes lasted up to 20 hours.

Fair Work inspectors were also told that workers were directed by their supervisor to live in crowded share houses with up to 30 employees, with sometimes two or more people sharing a single mattress.

Employees claimed that A$100 a week was deducted from their wages to cover the accommodation, and they were told they would not receive work if they chose to live elsewhere.

The Fair Work Ombudsman found that the 10 employees had been underpaid a total of A$20,250 between May and October, 2013. The amounts for individual workers ranged from A$500 to A$4300.

Inspectors found they should have been paid between A$16.50 and A$39 an hour, depending on the day, time and the number of hours worked in the shift.

An agreement was reached with the labour-hire contractor to reimburse all outstanding entitlements.

Concerns about other practices raised by the employees which were outside the jurisdiction of the Fair Work Ombudsman have been raised with relevant authorities.

The Fair Work Ombudsman is also concerned about sub-contracting arrangements it identified during the course of its investigations which it believes contributed to poor record-keeping practices and underpayment of minimum entitlements.

For example, it found connections between companies in the contracting line beneath the principal sub-contractor whereby they shared the same accountant, interchanged directors, listed individuals as signatories on bank accounts and transferred supervisors from one company to another as labour hire contracts were signed.

Fair Work Ombudsman Natalie James says these observations now form part of a broader review of labour supply chain practices in the meat industry to identify the drivers of non-compliance with workplace laws.

“Our inquiry is conducting an analysis of how contracting supply arrangements are made and whether there has been a growth of contracting supply chains within this industry, and if so, why?” she said.

“This includes a study of the economic drivers behind the supply chain practices and the engagement of overseas workers in the meat industry.

“This analysis will include identifying impacts these practices have on local employment and social trends (eg housing) in geographical locations in which the meat industry is located.”

Ms James said the Fair Work Ombudsman review will also include other areas of impact on the broader Australian economy, such as the ‘cash economy’.

The OWT is working with unions, other Commonwealth departments and relevant stakeholders.

A report detailing its findings, enforcement activities and broader recommendations will be made public at the conclusion of the review.