Is your business compliant?
The decision includes a number of key takeaways for employers on award compliance, record keeping, overtime, and set-off clauses. While the supermarket giants are likely to appeal, the ruling signals a potential increase in underpayment claims for salaried employees.
The decision by Justice Perram of the Federal Court of Australia is the judgment for four separate proceedings – two regulatory enforcement proceedings commenced by the Fair Work Ombudsman (FWO) against Woolworths and Coles, and two class actions commenced by employees working for Woolworths and Coles.
In short, all of the proceedings alleged that salaried managers employed by the retailers were paid an annualised salary that was not sufficient to satisfy their entitlements under the General Retail Industry Award 2010 (Award).
The lengthy, 201-page decision makes a number of findings for which employers and insureds should take urgent action. We have set a summary of some of the most critical findings from an underpayments compliance perspective below. Note that the table is not intended as an exhaustive summary of all the findings made by Justice Perram, and the majority of findings concerned technical interpretation issues specific to the Award.
| Issue | Finding | Implications | What do employers need to do? |
| Offsets and annual salaries | Employment entitlements must be paid in full within each... |
Your support helps us to tell the story From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financi...