NOT ONE employer of foreign workers under the 457 visa scheme has faced civil penalties despite more than 100 being formally reprimanded by immigration authorities over the past year, the
Herald can reveal.
In 2010-2011, 137 sponsors of workers employed under the scheme were ''formally sanctioned'', which includes banning them, at least 50 of which were in NSW.
Despite the government trumpeting the introduction of civil penalties in September 2009 of up to $6600 for individual employers and $33,000 for companies abusing the 457 visa scheme, no one has ever been prosecuted under the laws.
Further, the department has issued just five infringement notices since then.
The notices are an alternative to the civil penalties but the amount can be no more than one-fifth of the civil penalties.
Meanwhile, the department has quietly halved its monitoring of sponsors.
Along with a 52 per cent drop in the number of 457 sponsors ''monitored'' by the department, there has also been a 29 per cent drop in the number of sites visited by immigration since 2007-2008, according to a
Herald analysis of the department's figures.
Yesterday, the
Herald revealed that dozens of Sydney construction companies routinely exploit foreign labour to keep costs down.
Construction has the second-highest growth in 457 visa holders, with 5920 granted in 2010-2011 - a massive 78 per cent jump from the previous year.
The CFMEU NSW is negotiating a claim with a construction company which hired dozens of workers, mostly on 457 visas, and paid them a flat rate with no entitlements for up to 60 hours' work a week.
''If the workers complain about this treatment they are threatened with the sack, which means they have four weeks to find new employment or they are deported,'' a CFMEU NSW spokesman said.
The federal government announced $10 million of additional funding for the 457 program and aims to halve the processing time from the current median of 22 days.
A spokeswoman for the Department of Immigration said among the most ''common reasons'' for sanctions was failing to pay employees properly, but she defended the lack of civil prosecutions.
''No civil prosecutions have been made before the courts. To date, the department has determined that administrative action [i.e. bar or cancellation action] and/or the issuing of an infringement notice, has been the most appropriate sanction,'' she said in a statement.
Sanctions include barring the sponsor from sponsoring more people or cancelling the approval of the sponsor, serving infringement notices or applying for a civil penalty order through the Federal Court.
The reduction in monitoring was because the new laws ''have created better defined and enforceable sponsorship obligations for employers'', the spokeswoman said. ''This has resulted in an overall increase in sponsorship compliance.''
The Department of Immigration has refused to say who the sanctioned employers are..
Professor Mary Crock, from the University of Sydney law faculty, said ''the whole area of immigration is totally driven by politics, polls and an agenda that is totally opaque''.
''They're playing to the public that's why and they want to make it look like they're being tough [by introducing penalties] but they don't want to offend the employers,'' she said.
The director of employment, education and training at the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Jenny Lambert, said that was simply not true.
''It creates unfair competition, so the employer community do not support or wish to sanction illegal practice,'' Ms Lambert said.
No comments:
Post a Comment