logo
Breaks forbidden, food instead of pay: one third of young Australian workers exploited by employers, study shows

Breaks forbidden, food instead of pay: one third of young Australian workers exploited by employers, study shows

The Guardian14-07-2025
More than one-third of young workers are exploited by their employers, according to a new study, with many paid less than the minimum wage, forbidden to take entitled breaks, compelled to pay for work-related items, or given food and products instead of money.
Young people are seen as especially vulnerable to wage theft due to inexperience in the workplace and a lack of awareness of their rights. They are also more likely to be employed in insecure roles than experienced workers, raising fears of retaliation.
Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email
The Melbourne Law School's survey of 2,814 workers aged under 30 found that one-third were paid $15 an hour or less, far less than the minimum wage of $24.95, while one-in-four workers reported not being paid superannuation.
The exploitation extended beyond underpayments, with more than one-third not paid for work conducted during a trial period, and almost 10% given food or products in lieu of pay.
The study's lead, Prof John Howe from the University of Melbourne, said wage exploitation was 'rife' among employers.
'Young people don't have much industrial knowledge or experience, so are easy to take advantage of,' said Howe.
'They are also unlikely to challenge an employer, as many of them are in insecure work and they worry about losing their jobs.'
While the official unemployment rate is 4.1%, the youth unemployment rate is 9.2%, increasing the pressure on younger people to keep their jobs.
The report notes that the burden falls on young people to report exploitation, when there should be more resourcing for proactive detection by regulators. Underpayment disproportionately affects those on lower wages, overseas students, migrant workers and women.
Survey respondents also reported numerous instances of being compelled to pay for work-related items, including training and uniforms. The Fair Work Act prohibits employers from 'unreasonable' requirements to purchase goods and services related to work.
The report notes that young workers are the 'most likely to acquiesce to employer demands and the least able to accommodate additional expenses relating to their work'.
Yolanda Robson, the director of the Victorian-based Young Workers Centre, said the report's findings were 'damning but not surprising', and that high living costs were exacerbating the problem.
Sign up to Breaking News Australia
Get the most important news as it breaks
after newsletter promotion
'I can hardly imagine, in today's world, having to pay out-of-pocket to show up ready for work with a uniform, given the cost-of-living pressures we're experiencing now,' Robson said.
'Young people are at the sharp edge of exploitation.'
The centre, which offers free legal representation to young workers, routinely advises apprentices with bosses who have skipped out on paying their tuition and other fees.
While employers are usually required to pay Tafe costs for apprentices, the student often bears the consequences, according to Robson, which can include being chased for debts.
Robson said until there is system reform, policymakers should adopt a strategy of educating young people on their rights, and funding regulators to be more proactive in their pursuit of bad employers.
Have you experienced financial exploitation at work? Contact jonathan.barrett@theguardian.com
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Emmerdale John Sugden clues tease villain will finally be exposed very soon
Emmerdale John Sugden clues tease villain will finally be exposed very soon

Daily Mirror

time14 minutes ago

  • Daily Mirror

Emmerdale John Sugden clues tease villain will finally be exposed very soon

Emmerdale's latest episodes appear to be gearing towards the end of killer John Sugden, almost a year on from his debut on the ITV soap with some hints to his downfall It can only be a matter of time before Emmerdale villain John Sugden is finally exposed to the village. ‌ Nate Robinson's murderer has managed to remain undetected despite a number of mistakes and some shifty behaviour. John killed Nate by accident before dumping his body in the lake and then using Nate's phone to pretend he'd simply moved on, cutting his family out of his life. ‌ As well as almost framing Nate's wife Tracy for the death when his body was found, John said nothing and acted like he hadn't just murdered someone for months. While the guilt is slowly eating away at him now, he's allowed another person, Owen, to die instead of saving him. ‌ This week he framed patient Owen with a faked confession regarding Nate's demise. He filled the confession and suicide note with so much detail only the killer would know, while spoilers have teased an alibi could jeopardise John's dark plan. Amid this he's struggling to cope with his actions, confiding in a volunteer at an online helpline about his guilt. He has no idea though that it's Paddy Kirk, father figure of John's husband Aaron Dingle, that he is speaking with. ‌ John's also sparked suspicion with his brother Robert Sugden, who is onto him as it is. But new information about John being at Owen's house before he died has sent Robert's mind whirling. Robert has no idea just how far John's crimes go though, with him orchestrating a harassment campaign against Chas Dingle and Liam Cavanagh all to get closer to them and be the hero, framing Ella Forster in the process. John also triggered a number of events, while also being in the right place at the right time too. He left Cain Dingle in serious danger recently with everyone thinking he'd simply drunk too much alcohol and collapsed, with John actually to blame. He deliberately caused Jacob Gallagher to have an allergic reaction by switching their coffees, all so he could save Jacob and again be the hero. ‌ He attacked Liam believing it was Mack Boyd before then saving him, while his feud with Mack also led to him deliberately causing the slurry leak at the farm to frame his enemy. This worked, and Mack's sister Moira is still at risk of losing her home and the farm, due to fines and losses in finances. John spiked Chas at one point before saving her, also rescuing Ruby Miligan from the barn fire and saving Moira then too just moments after killing Nate. Each time he has done something, his actions have alarmed fans given how careless he can be with the "clean-up" whether that be covering his tracks, disposing of evidence or framing someone. ‌ Robert learns about the Jacob incident next week, already onto John about Nate and Owen's apparent crime. Whether anyone listens to Robert remains to be seen though, but fans believe John's husband Aaron is now onto him after catching him burning his medical supplies. Mack was also onto John at one point and has refused to get involved since. But this hasn't stopped fans thinking Mack and Robert will soon join forces to expose John, with Mack's mystery flashforward still not aired. Claudette Anderson also knows about John visiting Owen, so perhaps she may look into matters, and then there's Liam who wasn't John's biggest fan previously. All it's going to take is a current ally to turn on John, whether they work with Robert or not. ‌ Get the latest drama from the Dales by joining our Emmerdale WhatsApp group As drama continues to unfold in the Yorkshire Dales, the Mirror has launched its very own Emmerdale WhatsApp community where you'll get all the latest breaking news, secrets, and spoilers delivered straight to your phone. Users must download or already have WhatsApp on their phones to join in. All you have to do to join is click on this link, select 'Join Chat' and you're in! We may also send you stories from other titles across the Reach group. We will also treat our community members to special offers, promotions, and adverts from us and our partners. If you don't like our community, you can check out any time you like. To leave our community click on the name at the top of your screen and choose Exit group. If you're curious, you can read our Privacy Notice. John's own clumsiness could be his ultimate downfall, leaving behind evidence or accidentally giving away his crimes or a crime he's yet to commit. Then there's Paddy who we now know is John's mystery confidant - so will John get a little too vocal and end up giving away what he's done to Paddy? What if Ella was to return and find a way to prove her innocence? Will they ever question who really attacked Liam all those weeks ago, and will Aidan awake from his coma again and finally expose what John did to him? With there being such a focus on a huge September plot and new characters Kev, Celia and Ray, all tipped to be baddies, surely the currently village baddie John is on his way out. With so many people now questioning him and Robert keen to expose him for once and for all, not to mention John's lies so close to unraveling in more ways than one, it's certainly paving the way for him to be rumbled and a comeuppance could be imminent.

Eighty traffic cones stolen from A47 at North Burlingham
Eighty traffic cones stolen from A47 at North Burlingham

BBC News

time4 hours ago

  • BBC News

Eighty traffic cones stolen from A47 at North Burlingham

Eighty traffic cones have been stolen from a stretch of a major A-road which is due to undergo roadworks. Norfolk Police said the cones were taken from the A47 at North Burlingham, where they had been put out in preparation for planned construction later that day. It is believed they were stolen between 06:55 BST and 07:30 on Tuesday. The force said the cones were grouped together rather than laid out in a line. National Highways has been carrying out works to upgrade parts of the A47 to dual carriageway. Seven nights of road closures are expected from 4 August as the single-lane section between Blofield and North Burlingham is replaced to improve safety and reduce collisions and delays. National Highways said: "Theft of highways equipment can be costly, and removal potentially poses a safety risk to everyone. "We ask anyone to contact the police if they have any further details/dashcam footage from around that time."Norfolk Police is appealing for anyone who witnessed the theft or who was travelling along the road at the time to contact them. Follow Norfolk news on BBC Sounds, Facebook, Instagram and X.

Australians lost $1bn through collapsed investment funds. What happened and how can workers keep their super safe?
Australians lost $1bn through collapsed investment funds. What happened and how can workers keep their super safe?

The Guardian

time5 hours ago

  • The Guardian

Australians lost $1bn through collapsed investment funds. What happened and how can workers keep their super safe?

Thousands of Australians recently lost more than $1bn in retirement savings after the collapse of funds linked to their superannuation platforms, sparking warnings from the corporate regulator about risky investment schemes. While only a small share of the population has been affected, some investors have seen their entire super balances wiped. Here is how the collapses happened, and what Australian workers can do to avoid a similar situation. Over the past year or so, more than 12,000 Australians have been exposed to three major collapsed or frozen investment schemes: First Guardian, Shield Master Fund and Australian Fiduciaries. The failures have so far led to collective losses of up to $1.2bn. The Australian Securities and Investments Commission (Asic) blocked investment in Shield in February 2024 and froze the assets of First Guardian in February 2025 after its managers blocked most investors from accessing their funds in May the previous year. The corporate regulator is also investigating concerns about Australian Fiduciaries including alleged inadequate management of conflicts of interest. First Guardian, which held $505m for about 6,000 investors, described its investments as focused on shares, property, private equity and fixed income, according to federal court-appointed liquidators. The liquidators found the company had put nearly $70m into businesses connected to its directors while more than $240m was invested offshore. One director also allegedly bought a Lamborghini with nearly $550,000 of company money. Investors have been warned they will probably only get a portion of an outstanding $446m back, and not until 2027 at the earliest, after liquidators said they expected to conclude directors breached their duties, the value of investments may have been overstated and funds may not have been properly recorded. The fund's May 2024 balance sheet indicated it had grown that to $525m but more than half of that was in question and investors were not likely to recover their entire investment, receivers for Shield reported in November 2024. They found managers had overstated the value of investments in a real estate fund and nearly $7m had been spent on a former director's personal expenses. Some investments would not be recovered for more than two years, the receivers said in December. In these cases, investors switched to superannuation products that would let them invest in First Guardian or in Shield with financial advisers' help, after being cold-called by salespeople, Asic says. The corporate regulator has put the spotlight on salespeople pressuring customers to invest in specific products. Red flags for consumers include cold calling and high-pressure sales tactics, or offers of prizes, free superannuation health checks, or free consolidation of lost super, according to Asic's deputy chair, Sarah Court. 'These calls don't have the hallmarks of a typical scam. The caller will seemingly have your best interests at heart, and they say they want to help you find a better super product or locate lost super for free,' she says. 'If you are unsure or are feeling pressured, just hang up.' Customers and financial advisers reached the products through superannuation platforms, including one operated by an arm of Macquarie Group, that temporarily chose to offer one or both products, Asic says. Super funds are highly regulated and they are discouraged from investing in schemes that are risky or opaque, according to Xavier O'Halloran, the chief executive of advocacy group Super Consumers Australia. Nearly 15 million among the 18 million accounts in Australia are in MySuper products, default super funds that employers offer workers, which did not invest in the collapsed schemes, he says. While all investment carries risk, MySuper products are diversified, and so not reliant on a single investment or asset class. Some Australians invest in less scrutinised schemes, especially through self-managed super funds. Asic recently warned it had growing concerns that peoplewere being encouraged by salespeople and cold-callers to switch from safe investments into complex and risky schemes. Phil Anderson, the general manager of policy, advocacy and standards at the Financial Advice Association Australia, encourages people to research their investments and check details with their financial advisers if they're worried they might be in an inappropriate investment. 'It is quite evident that there's failings in the system,' Anderson says. 'Don't be rushed into doing something. Challenge the adviser: Why is this the right thing for me? … What track record do these investment options have?' Investors can also spread their superannuation between different investment options within or across funds to limit the chance of a single collapse knocking out their entire savings, Anderson says. Customers can check what assets their super is invested in and how it is performing when superannuation funds release their annual statements for 2024-25 in coming months. People who have been told to swap from a MySuper product can also ask their adviser if their prospective fund has been checked by the regulator, the Australian Prudential Regulatory Authority. Asic has encouraged those who have lost money in a collapse to make a complaint about their adviser to the sector's independent ombudsman, the Australian Financial Complaints Authority. If a customer has lost money but their advice firm has gone into liquidation or insolvency, they may be able to appeal to the sector's compensation scheme of last resort. However, not all of the losses may be recompensed. Last resort compensation payouts are capped at $150,000 per individual and would only cover any clients who accessed the products under the guidance of an adviser, meaning any customer who made the decision without advice would not be eligible. The compensator is expecting claims against advisers linked to the funds but has received no claims for Shield and only one for First Guardian, according to the scheme's chief executive, David Berry. That has made it impossible to determine how many investors will be eligible, how much they might be paid or when they might be compensated, he said. This shortfall has led to calls for increased regulation of the products responsible for the losses, known as managed investment schemes, but also for reform of the compensation scheme of last resort so it covers those who invested without advice. Guardian Australia attempted to reach representatives of the funds Shield, First Guardian and Australian Fiduciaries, including through the firms' liquidators or administrators where applicable. Financial advice firm Interprac and superannuation platform trustees Macquarie, Equity Trustees, Diversa and Netwealth each declined to comment.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store