DOCSLIB.ORG

Fair Work Ombudsman Case Studies

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Fair Work Ombudsman Case Studies Fair Work Ombudsman Case Studies Table of Contents Overseas Workers and Working Holiday Makers ..................................... 2 FWO vs Bricklane British Curry House ........................................................................................ 2 FWC vs United Consulting Services for Ignoring Compliance Notice .......................................... 3 Hallmark Computers Darwin ........................................................................................................ 4 Fair Work Orders and Compensations ................................................. 5 FWO v Complete Windscreens (SA) Pty Ltd ................................................................................ 5 Stewart v Next Residential Pty Ltd: Annual Salary Precedent ...................................................... 9 FWO for the Cleaners ................................................................................................................ 10 Penalised for Sham Courier Contracts ....................................................................................... 11 Lycamobile vs Fair Work ............................................................................................................ 12 Fair Work vs Peter Jones ........................................................................................................... 13 Serious Misconduct ...................................................................... 14 Ms. Heidi Cannon v Poultry Harvesting Pty Ltd ......................................................................... 14 Payroll Concerns – Accessory .......................................................... 16 FWO v Oz Staff Career Services Pty Ltd & Ors [2016] .............................................................. 16 PAY- Fair Work Ombudsman Case Studies (December 2017) © The Institute of Certified Bookkeepers Page 1 Overseas Workers and Working Holiday Makers FWO vs Bricklane British Curry House Curry house operator faces Court over alleged unlawful, cash-back exploitation A former Perth restaurant operator is facing Court for allegedly requiring a Bangladeshi worker to repay thousands of dollars of his wages, and then dismissing him because he lodged a workers' compensation claim after injuring his back at work. The Fair Work Ombudsman has commenced legal action in the Federal Court against Perth man Sushil Kumar, who formerly owned and ran the Bricklane British Curry House in Leederville. Bricklane British Curry House and its director, Sushil Kumar, are suspected to have paid cook Khondker Riyadh Hasan a flat rate of $1634 a fortnight, before making him withdraw cash and pay back $434. The allegedly underpaid worker is a Bangladeshi man who was sponsored by Mr Kumar's company to work as a cook at the Bricklane British Curry House on a 457 skilled worker visa. Apparently, the cook, aged in his late 30s, was contracted on an annual salary of $54,000 when he was recruited from Bangladesh in 2015. The cook generally, worked six or seven days a week, often performing more than 50 hours work per week. Mr Hasan was unable to work from February 10 because of a back injury sustained at work, and was prevented from returning on April 4, after he recovered. It is further alleged that the cook sent a workers' compensation claim to Mr Kumar in June last year, and Mr Kumar responded by dismissing him the following day. Mr Kumar allegedly then contacted the Department of Immigration and Border Protection to inform them that the cook's employment had been terminated. After being dismissed, the cook lodged a request for assistance with the Fair Work Ombudsman and an investigation was commenced. It is alleged the dismissal contravened the Fair Work Act because it amounted to adverse action against the cook for exercising his workplace right to lodge a workers' compensation claim. Apparently the unlawful cashback arrangement and the underpayment of contractual and other minimum entitlements led to the worker being short-changed a total of $38,822. Update on Case The Ombudsman claims Mr Kumar dismissed him for exercising his workplace right. The Ombudsman also claims Mr Kumar, the director of parent company Bikaner India which is also facing the Federal Court, was aware of Mr Hasan's roster and rates of pay. The Ombudsman has asked Mr Kumar to pay Mr Hasan $38,822 plus superannuation within 28 days. Mr Kumar faces penalties of up to $10,800 for each of the 13 contraventions and Bikaner India faces a fine of up to $54,000 per contravention. References . Bikaner India Litigation Article . Fair Work Ombudsmen – Visa Holders and Workplace Rights and Entitlements . ICB – Employing Overseas Workers PAY- Fair Work Ombudsman Case Studies (December 2017) © The Institute of Certified Bookkeepers Page 2 FWC vs United Consulting Services for Ignoring Compliance Notice Labour-hire operator, United Consulting Services, has been fined after paying car debt instead of paying apprentice. Melbourne labour-hire operator Leonard Greenan has been referred to the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions and fined $10,800 after failing to repay three months' worth of wages to an apprentice mechanic after being ordered to do so by the Fair Work Ombudsman. Federal Court Judge, Joshua Wilson, found that instead of paying the worker his wages, Mr Greenan issued invoices to the dealership “allegedly for the worker's wages but in reality was for the progressive down payment of the purchase price for an expensive Peugeot motor vehicle.” Following its initial investigation, the Fair Work Ombudsman issued a Compliance Notice requiring Mr Greenan and his companies, United Consulting and United Consulting Services, to back-pay the worker a total of $7,066 in outstanding wages – but this notice was not complied with. Under the Fair Work Act, business operators must adhere to Compliance Notices or make a court application for a review if they are seeking to challenge a notice. Failure to comply with a Compliance Notice can result in financial penalties of up to $27,000 for a company and $5,400 for an individual. Bridging Visa The employee, aged 29, was in Australia on a bridging visa and had also obtained loans to pay $9,500 to Mr Greenan for a visa sponsorship service that he offered, but did not progress. Mr Greenan supplied the Pakistani employee to work as a mechanic at a car dealership in Richmond between January and March 2016, but failed to pay the worker any wages during this time. Judge Wilson said Mr Greenan, “personally benefitted out of the worker's service, rather than paying the worker, wholly antithetical to his role in placing the worker and his obligations under the Fair Work Act.” He said Mr Greenan's “brazen attitude” and “appalling conduct” warranted the imposition of penalties. “The respondent could have but failed to offer a repayment regime. He could have but failed to make any payments to the worker. “The only contrition exhibited by the respondent lay in his being caught. In my view, there was no real contrition in this case.” he said. PAY- Fair Work Ombudsman Case Studies (December 2017) © The Institute of Certified Bookkeepers Page 3 Hallmark Computers Darwin Hallmark Computers has been slapped with a $516,000 fine by the Federal Court for underpaying workers. In June, the Federal Court found the company had engaged in “deliberate, deceptive and systematic” abuse of workers employed under the 457 skilled visa scheme. The court heard that the Hallmark owner Ashok Alexander coerced employees from India and the Philippines into returning a significant pay packet every fortnight in cash under threat of losing their job and deportation. This meant that employees' annual salaries were pushed below the minimum threshold for 457 visa holders, while appearing to the Immigration Department to be making legitimate wage payments. Alexander previously claimed to CRN's sister title, iTnews that he had reached an agreement with the workers to pay them $45,000 per annum – under the 457 threshold, but in line with the salaries earned by the organisation's local staff. The company and its owner were hit with fines at the top end of the sentencing threshold, which Judge Robert Buchanan said would ensure the risk of being caught breaking 457 rules is "not seen by those who commit civil penalty offences as an acceptable cost of doing business". Alongside the $516,000 fine, Hallmark and Alexander were also told to pay back the three 457 visa workers, still employed at the company, a combined $66,000, and the Commonwealth another $17,500 in taxes. The Judgment The court found that the breaches involved “calculated, systematic, repeated and callous infringements of the sponsorship conditions and the rights of the employees” and were “a cynical misuse and exploitation” of the company's position. Hallmark was also ordered to pay more than $83,000 in restitution to the workers and its sole director, Ashok Alexander, was also personally penalised $86,000. The court found that from October 2012 to November 2014, the company underpaid the 457 workers and also illegally recovered costs from them by requiring them to repay some of their monthly salary. One of the employees was also being told to work in a different role from the position he had been sponsored to fill. The court action followed an investigation into the company by the Department of Immigration and Border Protection. References . Workforce Guardian – Fine for Underpaying Workers . ARN News – 457 Workers Breach . CRN News – Fine for Underpaying Workers PAY- Fair
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Wage Theft: the Exploitation of Workers Is Widespread and Has
    Wage Theft: The exploitation of workers is widespread and has become a business model Submission by the Australian Council of Trade Unions to the Senate Economics Committee of the Australian Parliament Inquiry into the Unlawful Underpayment of Employees’ Remuneration ACTU Submission, 6 March 2020 ACTU D. No 11/2020 1 Contents Contents ................................................................................................................................................ 2 Definitions and Abbreviations .............................................................................................................. 4 Executive Summary .............................................................................................................................. 4 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 8 About the ACTU ................................................................................................................................. 8 Why we have a wage theft problem. ................................................................................................ 8 The many forms of wage theft........................................................................................................ 10 The normalisation and prevalence of wage theft ......................................................................... 11 The wage theft problem: The exploitation of workers has become a business model ............
    [Show full text]
  • Workplace Ombudsman Annual Report 2008–09 Readers
    Workplace Ombudsman Annual Report 2008–09 Creating fairer Australian workplaces © Commonwealth of Australia 2009 ISSN: 1834-1462 This work is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced by any process without prior written permission from the Australian Government, available from the Attorney-General’s Department. Requests and enquiries concerning reproduction and rights should be addressed to the Commonwealth Copyright Administration, Copyright Law Branch, Attorney-General’s Department, National Circuit, Barton, ACT 2601, or posted at http://www.ag.gov.au/cca. Produced by the Fair Work Ombudsman. Acknowledgements Printed by Bluestar IQ (02) 6230 6200 Written and edited by Refresh Communications (03) 9836 3916 Designed by CRE8IVE (02) 6162 1888 Photos by Cole Bennetts 0415 982 662, Boardroom Photography 0402 941 564 and Mark Chew (03) 9529 4055 Workplace Ombudsman Annual Report 2008–09 Creating fairer Australian workplaces GPO Box 9887 Melbourne VIC 3001 | 414 LaTrobe Street Melbourne VIC 3000 P: (03) 9954 2611 F: (02) 6264 5367 E: [email protected] Hon. Julia Gillard MP Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Education, Employment and Workplace Relations Parliament House CANBERRA ACT 2600 Dear Deputy Prime Minister I have pleasure in submitting to you the annual report of the Office of the Workplace Ombudsman, covering the period 1 July 2008 to 30 June 2009. Section 70 of the Public Service Act 1999 requires me to provide you with a report to present to Parliament. This report has been prepared in accordance with the guidelines approved on behalf of the Parliament by the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit.
    [Show full text]
  • Phoenix Activity: Sizing the Problem and Matching Solutions
    pwc.com.au Fair Work Ombudsman June 2012 Disclaimer This report has been prepared by PwC at the request of the Fair Work Ombudsman (FWO) in our capacity as advisors in accordance with the Terms of Reference and the Terms and Conditions contained in the Consultant Agreement between FWO and PwC. The information, statements, statistics and commentary (together the “Information”) contained in this report have been prepared by PwC from publicly available material and from discussions held with stakeholders. The Consultants may in their absolute discretion, but without being under any obligation to do so, update, amend or supplement this document. PwC have based this report on information received or obtained, on the basis that such information is accurate and, where it is represented by the client and other stakeholders as such, complete. The Information contained in this report has not been subject to an Audit. The information must not be relied on by third parties, copied, reproduced, distributed, or used, in whole or in part, for any purpose other than detailed in our Consultant Agreement without the written permission of the FWO and PwC.1 1 Liability is limited by a scheme approved under Professional Standards Legislation. Fair Work Ombudsman PwC i This report presents the analysis and recommendations resulting from a project investigating phoenix activity undertaken by PwC for the Fair Work Ombudsman (FWO). The project involved three stages of analysis: Defining phoenix activity: a key challenge in understanding mitigating phoenix activity is accurately defining it. Quantifying phoenix activity: to ensure that the options for addressing phoenix activity are proportional to the scale of the problem, the impact of phoenix activity was quantified.
    [Show full text]
  • Trivial to Troubling: the Evolution of Enforcement Under the Fair Work Act
    This article has been published in: (2020) 33(1) Australian Journal of Labour Law, 87-106 Trivial to Troubling: The Evolution of Enforcement under the Fair Work Act Tess Hardy* When the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) was first introduced, compliance issues were viewed as somewhat trifling and the enforcement framework generated very little discussion, let alone debate. Early reviews of the Office of the Fair Work Ombudsman (FWO) generally reached positive conclusions about the level of employer non-compliance and the FWO’s overall response. However, the tide turned in 2015 following the 7-Eleven underpayment scandal. Since this time, there has been, and continues to be, a sense that there is now an enforcement crisis. While the Fair Work Amendment (Protecting Vulnerable Workers) Act 2017 (Cth) introduced a number of far-reaching reforms, many believe more needs to be done. This article charts some of the most critical forces which have shaped compliance promotion and enforcement processes over the past 10 years and reflects on how this response may continue to evolve into the future. Introduction The Work Choices legislation1 was controversial in many respects, and ultimately condemned in many quarters. However, one enduring legacy of this tumultuous time was the elevation of the federal labour inspectorate. Instead of dismantling the agency, now known as the Office of the Fair Work Ombudsman (FWO), the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (FW Act) effectively sought to strengthen its position and powers. This article will consider the establishment and evolution of the federal statutory body predominantly responsible for overseeing and enforcing employment standards regulation under the FW Act.2 It will begin by surveying various historical, legal and political forces that have shaped the strategy, resourcing and approach of the FWO over the past decade.
    [Show full text]
  • Statement of Findings in Relation to the Fair Work Ombudsman‟S Investigation of Entities Related to the Church of Scientology, Narconon and Get Off Drugs Naturally
    Statement of Findings in relation to the Fair Work Ombudsman‟s investigation of entities related to the Church of Scientology, Narconon and Get Off Drugs Naturally Contents Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 2 Summary of Key Findings and Next Steps ............................................................................ 2 Key Findings ......................................................................................................................... 2 Next Steps ............................................................................................................................ 3 Background to this investigation ............................................................................................ 4 Who is the subject of this investigation? ................................................................................ 4 What has led to this investigation? ........................................................................................ 4 What are the questions involved in this investigation?........................................................... 5 The functions of the Fair Work Ombudsman ......................................................................... 5 Witnesses involved in the investigation ................................................................................. 7 Questions for resolution .......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Migrants Looking for Work
    Migrants Looking for Work Information for migrants looking for work in the Northern Territory Migrants looking for work in the Northern Territory Page 2 Who this book can help Most of the information in this book is helpful for anybody looking for work, especially if you are new to Australia. But not all visas allow you to work: the people this book is mainly targeting are migrants and refugees who are legally eligible to work. To find out if you are eligible to work, you might like to visit this useful website: www.homeaffairs.gov.au/busi/visas-and-migration/visa- entitlement-verification-online-(vevo). When you fill out the online enquiry form, you will be able to see your current visa details and entitlements . You can save and print your visa entitlement details as well as email them to employers , migration agents and other organisations as proof of your entitlements . This publication is the copyright of the Northern Territory Government. The Office of Multicultural Affairs acknowledges the: • Funded/ Commissioned work undertaken by the Northern Institute, Charles Darwin University • Update of the previous (2013) version by the Multicultural Council of the Northern Territory. • Organisations which have contributed to the update of this publication. Reproduction of information or parts of the publication by not for profit community groups, or parts of the publication, with acknowledgement of NTG is permitted. June 2018 Page 2 Migrants looking for work in the Northern Territory Page 3 Contents Who this book can help ......................................................................................................... 2 The Australian Workplace ......................................................................................................... 4 Getting Ready to Look for Work ................................................................................................. 5 General Skills to Help You Find Work ......................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Fair Work Ombudsman Operations Manual (August 2013)
    Fair Work Ombudsman Operations Manual (August 2013) 1. General Principles 1.1 Introduction The FWO Operations Manual (the Manual) provides a framework for the conduct of formal dispute resolution and compliance activity undertaken by staff of the Office of the Fair Work Ombudsman (FWO), including its Fair Work Inspectors. In accord with the business imperatives of the FWO Strategic Plan 2012-2016, the Manual details the key principles that underlie the dispute resolution and compliance activity of the FWO, and updates the content contained in previous versions of the Manual. The Manual is to be read in conjunction with public agency documents such as the FWO Guidance Notes. 1.2 Purpose of the Manual In describing certain features applicable to all dispute resolution and compliance activities conducted by FWO staff, and Fair Work Inspectors in particular, the Manual seeks to provide an overview of the principles that reinforce key concepts and techniques held in common. To ensure best practice and national consistency in all of the FWO’s formal dispute resolution and compliance activities, the Manual contains links to internal Guides and other material contained on the FWO intranet. The integrity and transparency of the decision making process in all its formal dispute resolution and compliance activities is critical to both the efficacy and reputation of the FWO. For this reason, the Manual provides clear boundaries within which Fair Work Inspectors are expected to operate while at the same time deliberately empowering Fair Work Inspectors to exercise discretion based upon their experience and knowledge. The Manual does not map a step-by-step approach for Fair Work Inspectors to follow strictly, but is intended to provide best practice standards for responding to all matters.
    [Show full text]
  • Reconsidering the Notion of Employer in the Era of the Fissured Workplace: Traversing the Legislative Landscape in Australia
    Reconsidering the Notion of Employer in the Era of the Fissured Workplace: Traversing the Legislative Landscape in Australia Tess Hardy University of Melbourne 1. Introduction The concept of the employer has been receiving renewed attention in Australia following a raft of media and government investigations into the working conditions of temporary foreign workers in the past 12 months.1 In particular, these recent inquiries have highlighted that certain sectors of the Australian labour market most notably the horticulture and food processing industries,2 and the convenience store franchise sector3 may be riddled with exploitation .4 While it is generally now accepted that employer non- compliance with workplace laws is a pressing problem in Australia, there is far less consensus about what can be done and who should be held responsible. These issues are undeniably complicated by the fissuring of work described by David Weil.5 Indeed, the labour market in Australia reflects many of the structural shifts which have occurred in the US and elsewhere.6 Like many advanced economies, Australia has also witnessed a move away from manufacturing towards services, a decline in trade unionism, greater competition in capital and product markets and increased commercialisation of work relationships. Particular management techniques and organisational forms such as sub-contracting, outsourcing and franchising have grown 1 These investigations have prompted a number of ongoing government inquiries at both federal and state levels. See, e.g., Australian Government, Senate Education and Employment References Committee, Inquiry into the Impact of Australia s Temporary Work Visa Programs on the Australian Labour Market and on the Temporary Work Visa Holders (Final Report, March 2016); Victorian Government, Inquiry into Labour Hire and Insecure Work (due to report by 31 July 2016); South Australian Government, Economic and Finance Committee, Inquiry into Labour Hire Industry (established on 11 June 2015, submissions closed on 27 July 2015).
    [Show full text]
  • APS4 and APS5 Fair Work Inspectors
    Position description Job Reference No: TBA Position Title: Fair Work Inspector Branch: Compliance and Enforcement Branches Adelaide, Canberra, Hobart, Melbourne, Mount Gambier, Orange, Locations: Sydney, Toowoomba, Traralgon, Wagga Wagga Employment Status: Full-time or Part-time Employment Type: Non-ongoing (up to 12 months) / Ongoing Classification: APS Level 4 or 5 Salary Range: $72 022 to $85 014 plus 15.4% superannuation Closing Date: TBA The Fair Work Ombudsman (FWO) is an independent statutory office established by the Fair Work Act 2009. Our role is to promote harmonious, productive and cooperative workplace relations and ensure compliance with Australian workplace laws. We are valued by the community for supporting compliant, productive and inclusive Australian workplaces and we deliver practical workplace relations advice and assistance. We are seeking exceptional team-oriented candidates for the role of Fair Work Inspector across the Compliance and the Enforcement Branches. The Compliance and Enforcement Branches are responsible for ensuring compliance with the Fair Work Act 2009. This involves conducting investigations to determine compliance with Australian workplace laws. Roles are being offered at the APS 4 and 5 levels. To be considered for an APS level 5 role, you must satisfy the additional selection criteria requirements set out in this position description. You may apply for an APS 4 or 5 level role, or both. Roles may be offered for a non-ongoing period of 12 months initially, with the possibility of becoming ongoing. Depending on your level of experience and background, there may be an initial training period before you are officially appointed as a Fair Work Inspector.
    [Show full text]
  • Fair Work Ombudsman / Annual Report / 2013 – 14 / B
    FAIR WORK OMBUDSMAN / ANNUAL REPORT / 2013 – 14 / B Performance highlights The Fair Work Ombudsman (FWO) is a statutory office responsible for ensuring compliance with Australian workplace laws and educating employers and employees about their rights and responsibilities at work. For 2013–14, we met all of our deliverables, key Advice performance indicators, service standards and specific commitments to government. › Responded to more than 595,000 enquiries received through Fair Work Infoline services. Across our core functions of advice, assistance and enforcement we: › Resolved 99% of call enquiries at first contact. › Answered almost 90,000 Small Business Helpline calls in seven months. › Received more than 11 million visits to fairwork.gov.au and more than two million fact sheet, best practice guide and template downloads. › Introduced our transformed website offering increased accessibility and customisation including tailored industry information. › Received more than 1.57 million visits to pay tools. › Expanded and updated our suite of online self-service resources, including developing ‘starting a new job’ and ‘hiring an employee’ guides. › Implemented strategies to educate areas, industries and workers most in need of our assistance, including young hospitality workers, overseas Harvest Trail workers and small business operators. YEAR IN ABOUT THE PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT AND APPENDICES FINANCIAL REFERENCES REVIEW FWO REPORTING ACCOUNTABILITY STATEMENTS 1 Assistance Enforcement › Finalised 25,650 complaints and recovered more › Commenced 37 civil penalty litigations to address than $23 million for 15,483 workers. serious, wilful and repeated non-compliance. › Finalised 94% of complaints within 90 days. › Achieved court ordered penalties of more than $3 million in 39 cases decided. › Finalised 4,567 targeted campaign audits recovering more than $4 million for 7,541 workers.
    [Show full text]
  • Inquiry Into the Victorian on Demand Workforce
    GPO Box 9887 Melbourne VIC 3001 | 414 La Trobe Street Melbourne VIC 3000 P: (03) 9954 2611 F: (02) 6276 8063 E: [email protected] 5 February 2019 Ms Natalie James Chair Inquiry into the Victorian on-demand workforce By email: [email protected] Dear Chair Thank you for the opportunity to make a submission to the Inquiry into the Victorian on-demand workforce (the Inquiry). About the Fair Work Ombudsman The Fair Work Ombudsman (the FWO) is Australia’s national workplace relations regulator. Our jurisdiction is primarily set out in the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (FW Act). The FWO’s role is to provide education, assistance and advice about the Commonwealth workplace relations system and to enforce compliance with workplace laws, and our services are free to the community. In fulfilling our role under the FW Act, the FWO adopts a compliance model built on a mix of risk-based regulation and strategic enforcement, which is set out in our publicly available Compliance and Enforcement Policy1 and Litigation Policy2. FWO interface with the on-demand workforce The FWO closely monitors developments in its jurisdiction, including the emergence of the ‘on- demand’ economy and workforce that is the focus of this Inquiry. The FWO’s approach to resolving issues arising in the on-demand workforce is necessarily consistent with our approach to any dispute requiring our intervention, namely to apply and enforce Australian workplace law as it stands. However, as an innovative and agile regulator, the FWO is also committed to ensuring that our regulatory tools of trade evolve with the needs of the community.
    [Show full text]
  • ANNUAL REPORT the Fair Work Ombudsman and Registered
    The Fair Work Ombudsman and Registered Organisations Commission Entity ANNUAL REPORT 18 – 19 Year in review Entity overview FWO performance report ROC performance report Management and accountability Financial statements Reference materials The Fair Work Ombudsman and Registered Organisations Commission Entity Annual Report 2018–19 4 The Hon Christian Porter MP Attorney-General and Minister for Industrial Relations Parliament House CANBERRA ACT 2600 20 September 2019 Dear Minister In accordance with section 686 of the Fair Work Act 2009, section 329FC of the Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Act 2009 and section 46 of the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability (PGPA) Act 2013, I am pleased to submit the Fair Work Ombudsman (FWO) and Registered Organisations Commission (ROC) Entity annual report for the financial year ending 30 June 2019. It includes information on the Entity’s general organisation, administration and performance. As the accountable authority for the FWO and ROC Entity, pursuant to section 17AG of the PGPA Rule 2014, I certify that we have: • fraud risk assessments and fraud control plans • appropriate fraud prevention, detection, investigation and reporting mechanisms that meet the FWO’s and ROC’s specific needs • taken all reasonable measures to appropriately deal with fraud. Yours sincerely, Sandra Parker Fair Work Ombudsman 5 Year in review Entity overview FWO performance report ROC performance report Management and accountability Financial statements Reference materials Contents Letter of transmittal
    [Show full text]