Source document: https://docs-lawep.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/1697641953642.pdf (Australia)
Submission into the Senate Enquiry into the Underpayment of Cleaners in the Retail Sector Senators, My name is Robert Vertigan, I am a former Spotless Employee, effected by the Despicable Deal, done between Spotless & the AWU.

I sent a Submission to the Enquiry into Penalty Rates.

If needed, I can email it over, it will give background, to what happened.
This Submission, is to show, that system of Government, in relation to these matters (& if not changed for the Cleaners, in Retail) Simply Does Not Work.

Why, you may ask?

Well.

1.

Fairwork Ombudsman: The following, will give an idea what the worker in Australia is dealing with, The Taxpayer spends a reported $85 Million on a Royal Commission, into Union Corruption.

Written evidence in that Commission, is, that Spotless had a “ bonus” of $2 Million per year, because of this Despicable Theft.
This Deal lasts for almost 5 years, so there has been essentially a $10 Million Wage Theft ( & more, when you consider Spotless, went back for more Eg Site Allowances, “Public Holiday Allowances etc, effecting hundreds of people over the time).

With all the Written Damming Evidence, Three years on & we are still battling the FWO to prosecute!

Questions to be Asked: Does the FWO consider this to be theft, if not, why not?
The requirements, in their Standard Operating Procedures in relation to triggering an Investigation, are tiny in comparison, to the scale of this theft.

Why has this not been prosecuted?

If the FWO are unable to Prosecute, then why has it not been handed to the police ?

We would like answers to, Why is Spotless being protected?
The exploitation of general and specialist cleaners working in retail chains for contracting or subcontractingcleaning companiesSubmission 22 On a Separate Matter, on attending, the Fairwork Offices, I was asked by a very Senior Fairwork Executive .

In a day’s work: Did you open a door for someone?

Answer – Yes Did you point out, where the toilets are?

Answer – Yes Did you point out where the ATM is?

Answer – Yes Did you fetch (or remove) a dinning chair if requested?
Answer – Yes These “Duties”, will effect the Award you should have been paid, I was told.

The eventual award determined, was, contrary to the Decision made by The Federal Court in 2015 , for the same work done, if Spotless still held the contract.

A cost, of around $100 per Saturday 11hr Shift.

The Senior Fairwork Executive has still not had the courage to put his” Decision” in Writing.
Viewing Senate Estimates, late last year, the Case of Cleaners for a Supermarket in Tasmania, it appears almost, 4 years after the Complaint is made, the FWO, is now just staring to negotiate with the Supermarket..

The Office of the FWO, must now be Under Serious question The exploitation of general and specialist cleaners working in retail chains for contracting or subcontractingcleaning companiesSubmission 22 2.
Section 206 of the Fairwork Act, is a very convenient “Get Out Clause” for the Companies & (they know this !

).

If a Company is found to Underpay, Section 206 is invoked meaning, the Base Rate of the Applicable Award can only be paid.

So a worker misses out on any Penalty Rates.

So there is actually an” incentive” for a Company with the “Despicable Culture” of a Spotless, to underpay because, if caught, they know, Penalty Rates will not have to be paid ( a bonus for them).
The writer of this Legislation, did not know much about IR.

These large Companies know all this & they have no fear & just go on their merry way.

3.

Consistent Strong Decisive Determinations, for those involved, (including, perhaps, jail time for Executives, Board Members, of Companies, prosecuted, for Theft).

It will be remarkable, how quickly this mess throughout the Economy, is cleaned up.
It will “Straighten Up” the thinking of a Company, thinking, they can outsmart the system Senators, you may thinking we could not potentially Jail so & so, they are an Eminent Person.

Well, they are not, Eminence is 100%, 100% of the time & their “ Brand Name” does not excuse this behaviour.
If, as one, Chairperson did recently, award themselves a $170 000 annual pay rise to “Keep up with Market”, then they need, as by Law, except Personal, Responsibility for the Behaviour of the Company & its ramifications.

It appears now in our case, a Theft of $10 Million, is now quite acceptable in Australia This is the best we can do?

–Really!

This is the message being sent to us.

mmm- so much for honesty & decency !

Our society is in deep trouble !


Theft has been Theft, since the beginning of time Many Thanks for your time Robert Vertigan The exploitation of general and specialist cleaners working in retail chains for contracting or subcontractingcleaning companiesSubmission 22 The exploitation of general and specialist cleaners working in retail chains for contracting or subcontractingcleaning companiesSubmission 22