Monday 26 September - Creating Confidence In How Australians Are Paid
Creating Confidence In How People Are People

Monday 26 September - Creating Confidence In How Australians Are Paid

Newsbite: Former IGA franchisee penalised

“When Compliance Notices are not followed, we are prepared to take legal action to ensure workers receive their lawful entitlements,”

Fair Work Ombudsman Sandra Parker

The Fair Work Ombudsman has secured a $21,450 penalty in court against the former operator of an IGA supermarket in Perth.

The Federal Circuit and Family Court has imposed the penalty against S & L Lenz Pty Ltd, which was formerly the franchisee of the IGA supermarket in Byford.

The penalty was imposed in response to S & L Lenz Pty Ltd failing to comply with a Compliance Notice requiring it to back-pay entitlements to a worker who was employed on a full-time basis as a manager at the supermarket between April 2013 and January 2020.

The Court has also ordered the company to take the steps required under the Compliance Notice by back-paying entitlements to the worker, plus superannuation and interest. The Court found that the outstanding underpayment was approximately $35,000.

Fair Work Ombudsman Sandra Parker said business operators that fail to act on Compliance Notices need to be aware they can face court-imposed penalties on top of having to back-pay workers.

“When Compliance Notices are not followed, we are prepared to take legal action to ensure workers receive their lawful entitlements,” Ms Parker said.

“Any employees with concerns about their pay or entitlements should contact us for free advice and assistance.”

The FWO investigated after receiving a request for assistance from the affected worker.

The Compliance Notice was issued in August 2020 after a Fair Work inspector formed a belief that the worker had not been paid the accrued annual leave and pay-in-lieu-of-notice entitlements she was entitled to under the National Employment Standards when her employment ended.

Judge Antoni Lucev found that the non-compliance with the Compliance Notice was deliberate and there had been no expression of regret or remorse.

Judge Lucev said the penalty should act “as a warning to other employers generally, and in the relevant industry particularly, not to engage in the conduct of contravening Compliance Notices”.

Free Training Course - Compliance notices

No alt text provided for this image

Have you received a compliance notice from Fair Work? Need help?

Learn what a compliance notice is and how to respond if you get one.

Course overview

A compliance notice is a formal document issued by a Fair Work Inspector requiring an employer to fix a contravention of workplace laws.

This online course will help you understand what a compliance notice is and how to respond if you get one.

It includes:

  • information about compliance notices and why they are issued
  • step-by-step guidance for responding to a compliance notice
  • video scenarios and real-life case studies about the consequences of ignoring a compliance notice
  • activities to step learners through how to calculate an underpayment and make back-payments
  • tips to help you avoid common compliance mistakes in your workplace
  • links to free calculators and resources to help you meet the requirements of a compliance notice and prevent future workplace problems.

Click here to access - free online training session.

Free Online Payroll Health Check

No alt text provided for this image

  • The tool is specifically designed to identify areas of risk or underperformance in your payroll operation.
  • The tool will assist you to optimise and reduce the risk in your payroll function before any issues become expensive to fix problems.
  • Answer 22 simple questions about your payroll.
  • Receive your custom report with tailored recommendations.

Click here - to access.

No alt text provided for this image

Backpays

Did you know that backpays that relate to a period more than 12 months ago, and are above $1,200, are reported as Lump Sum E?

Newsbite: AMP fined $14.5m over fees for no service

Five AMP companies will pay $14.5 million for charging close to 1500 superannuation members fees for no service over the course of about three years.

The Federal Court handed the fine to AMP Superannuation, AMP Financial Planning, Charter Financial Planning, Hillross Financial Services and AMP Life, which has since been acquired by Resolution Life. All five companies admitted to the misconduct.

The fees for no service were charged to 1452 Flexible Super members who had access to general advice through their employer. Despite moving on from that employer and no longer having access to the services, they continued to be automatically charged the advice fee.

Between July 2015 and September 2018, AMP deducted more than $350,000 in fees even though it was aware these members had ceased their employment. While the institution remediated almost $700,000, the court found AMP didn’t investigate whether it was a systemic issue or not, even though a significant number of complaints were received.

“Put simply, the advice licensees took money to which they were not entitled from the superannuation accounts of the affected members, and continued to do so for a long period of time after many complaints had been made. AMP Superannuation and AMP Life were knowingly concerned in those contraventions. While the conduct was not deliberate, it was extremely serious,” the judge said.

“AMP was aware it was charging fees for no service to these members but did not take the proper steps to prevent it from continuing. AMP admitted liability regarding these failures and admitted it did not have the proper systems and compliance arrangements in place to ensure the payments ceased when members left their employer,” says ASIC deputy chair Sarah Court.

“Superannuation trustees should treat the penalty imposed today as an important reminder to maintain robust internal governance and assurance arrangements. Trustees are responsible for ensuring they only deduct fees from member accounts for services actually provided. If they fail in this obligation, they could face significant penalties.”

AMP was also found to have breached its obligation to act efficiently, honestly and fairly and to comply with financial services laws.

In handing down his decision, Justice Moshinsky said the failure to investigate the issue reflected poorly, particularly on AMP Life, calling into question its corporate culture.

“It is surprising and concerning that repeated complaints that the [fee] had been wrongly debited from the superannuation accounts of members who had ceased employment with their employer-sponsor did not lead anyone within the defendants (in particular, within AMP Life) to question whether there was a systemic issue,” he said.

“While it is not suggested that senior management were involved in the contraventions, in my opinion it reflects very poorly on the organisational culture that this type of questioning did not occur.”

Responding to the action, AMP said: “In 2018, AMP became aware that some AMP Flexible Super members continued to be charged a Plan Service Fee after transferring from their corporate super plan into a retail account. AMP took action to rectify the issue, self-reported it to ASIC, apologised to customers and subsequently completed the remediation of affected members.”

“The remediation was completed in November 2019, with approximately 2500 customers being remediated a total sum of approximately $900,000 covering fees charged and lost earnings.”

It added that the $14.5 million penalty has already been provisioned for in its half-year financial statements.

No alt text provided for this image

Click here to find out more.

Have a great week.

No alt text provided for this image

www.austpayroll.com.au

要查看或添加评论,请登录

Australian Payroll Association的更多文章

社区洞察

其他会员也浏览了