The Fair Work Ombudsman has secured $17,982 in penalties in court against the operators of a café in regional Victoria.
The Federal Circuit and Family Court has imposed a $14,985 penalty against Hospitality 3564 Pty Ltd, which operates ‘Café 3564’ in Echuca, and a $2,997 penalty against the company’s sole director David Bowman.
The penalties were imposed in response to Hospitality 3564 failing to comply with a Compliance Notice requiring it to back-pay entitlements to a Chinese visa holder it employed as a cook at the café between July 2017 and September 2019. Mr Bowman was involved in the contravention.
Hospitality 3564 back-paid the worker more than $48,000 in entitlements only after the Fair Work Ombudsman commenced legal action.
Fair Work Ombudsman Sandra Parker said business operators that fail to act on Compliance Notices need to be aware they can face penalties in court 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.
“Employers also need to be aware that taking action to protect vulnerable employees, such as migrant workers, and improve compliance in the fast food, restaurant and café sector continue to be for the FWO. Any workers with concerns about their pay or entitlements should contact us for advice and assistance.”
The FWO investigated after receiving a request for assistance from the affected worker.
The Compliance Notice was issued in October 2020 after a Fair Work Inspector formed a belief that the worker had been underpaid minimum wage rates, overtime, penalty rates, meal break penalties, a split-shift allowance and annual leave entitlements under the Restaurant Industry Award 2010 and the Fair Work Act’s ³Ô¹ÏÍøÕ¾ Employment Standards.
Judge Jonathan Forbes found that the affected worker had suffered substantial loss and accepted that Mr Bowman had admitted they had no reasonable excuse for not complying with the Compliance notice.
Judge Forbes found there was a need to impose penalties to deter others from similar conduct.
“Employers who receive Compliance Notices should be under no misapprehension about what is required of them. Non-compliance must attract a sufficient sanction to meet the objectives of general and specific deterrence,” Judge Forbes said.
