Fair Work Ombudsman v Yarraville Business Pty Ltd
[2023] FedCFamC2G 1088
•24 November 2023
FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
(DIVISION 2)
Fair Work Ombudsman v Yarraville Business Pty Ltd [2023] FedCFamC2G 1088
File number(s): MLG 360 of 2022 Judgment of: JUDGE MANSINI Date of judgment: 24 November 2023 Catchwords: INDUSTRIAL LAW – Fair Work – failure to comply with a statutory compliance notice – non-appearance of Respondent – declaration of contravention of s.716(5) of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) – further relief (if any) to be determined separately. Legislation: Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) ss.12, 14, 539, 545, 546, 687, 700, 701, 716, 717
Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (General Federal Law) Rules 2021 r.13.06
Banking, Finance and Insurance Award 2010
General Retail Award 2010
Cases cited: Fair Work Ombudsman v Tsurc Pty Ltd [2014] FCCA 2472
Potter v Fair Work Ombudsman [2014] FCA 187
Division: Division 2 General Federal Law Number of paragraphs: 43 Date of hearing: 1 November Place: Melbourne Counsel for the Applicant: Ms N Campbell Solicitor for the Applicant: Australian Government Solicitor The Respondent: No appearance ORDERS
MLG 360 of 2022 FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)
BETWEEN: FAIR WORK OMBUDSMAN
Applicant
AND: YARRAVILLE BUSINESS PTY LTD
Respondent
ORDER MADE BY:
JUDGE MANSINI
DATE OF ORDER:
24 NOVEMBER 2023
THE COURT DECLARES THAT:
1.The Respondent contravened s.716(5) of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) by its failure to comply with the statutory compliance notice dated 22 July 2021.
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
2.The matter be listed for directions before Judge Mansini at 9.30am on 7 December 2023 in person in the Melbourne Registry.
3.The parties have liberty to apply.
Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry in the Court’s records.
Note: The Court may vary or set aside a judgment or order to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 17.05(2)(g) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (General Federal Law) Rules 2021 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 17.05 Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (General Federal Law) Rules 2021 (Cth).
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
Judge Mansini
INTRODUCTION
This is an application by the Fair Work Ombudsman in relation to a second-hand pawnbroking business (operated under the trading name “Cash Converters”) that did not comply with a statutory compliance notice.
The statutory compliance notice was issued following an investigation by which the FWO concluded that there had been underpayments in respect of employment entitlements over a period of 5 years.
The respondent company initially opposed the foundation of the statutory compliance notice but ultimately declined to defend the claim. At the time of the hearing, there was no evidence that the matters subject of the notice had been rectified.
These reasons explain the declaration made by the Court. The question of what (if any) further relief is to be ordered will be subject of a separate determination.
CONTEXT
There is a lengthy procedural history to the matter which is not necessary to set out in its entirety. Only that which is pertinent is outlined in the following paragraphs.
On 21 February 2022, the Fair Work Ombudsman (FWO) commenced these proceedings by filing an application and a statement of claim.
In the period after filing and until 18 May 2022, the Respondent initially did not comply with Court procedures and the FWO applied for default judgment for the first time.
On 18 May 2022, a legal representative went on record with the Court as representative of the Respondent.
On 26 May 2022, the Respondent’s lawyer filed a defence which made some admissions and outlined an intention to oppose certain parts of the claim.
On 29 July 2022 and 12 September 2022, the parties attempted mediation before a Registrar of the Court but the matter did not resolve.
On 24 November 2022, the then lawyer for the Respondent filed a notice of withdrawal. From then, the Respondent sporadically complied with Court procedures.
On 10 May 2023, the FWO applied for the second time for default judgment.
On 15 May 2023, a procedural directions hearing was convened. On that occasion, there was an appearance for the FWO and a Mr Borruso (former director of the Respondent) sought to appear in-person for the Respondent.
On 6 June 2023, the Respondent filed a response which opposed the application for default judgment.
On 15 June 2023, a procedural directions hearing was convened. On that occasion, there was an appearance for the FWO and Mr Borruso sought to appear in-person for the Respondent. There was a discussion about what was required of the Respondent. The outcome was that the question of liability was listed for hearing on 1 November 2023; the Respondent was ordered to file and serve any affidavit evidence on the question of liability by 4.00pm on 14 July 2023 and an outline of written submissions on the question of liability by 4.00pm on 25 August 2023; and the parties were to file a court book by 4.00pm on 22 September 2023.
On 4 August 2023 the FWO filed written submissions and on 17 October 2023 a court book and a list of authorities.
As at the hearing on 1 November 2023, the Respondent had not filed or served any affidavit evidence, submissions or anything at all since the 15 June 2023 orders. There was also no record of any correspondence with the Court notifying of appointment of a lawyer or seeking an adjournment or further time in which to comply with the Court’s orders.
At 10.00am on 1 November 2023, the matter proceeded to hearing before the Court as presently constituted. On that occasion, the FWO was represented by Counsel and there was no appearance for or on behalf of the Respondent.
At the hearing, a lawyer of the Australian Government Solicitor for the FWO affirmed an affidavit which evidenced their efforts as to service and their engagement with the Respondent since the case management hearing on 15 June 2023. By that affidavit, the FWO had corresponded with the Respondent on 24 July 2023 to remind of the requirement to file and serve any affidavit evidence on the question of liability and a Mr Grainger for the Respondent had replied on 31 July 2023 to indicate that Mr Borruso had been unwell for the 2 weeks prior and he would endeavour to contact the FWO about the matter sometime that week.
Being satisfied that the Respondent was on notice of the hearing and the Court’s orders of 15 June 2023, and having regard to the lengthy history and substantial opportunity afforded to the Respondent by that time including multiple explanations of Court procedures and what was required of them, it was determined appropriate to proceed in their absence pursuant to r.13.06 of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (General Federal Law) Rules 2021 (GFL Rules).
MATERIALS BEFORE THE COURT
In summary, the FWO filed the following materials on which it sought to rely as at the liability hearing on 1 November 2023:
(a)Application and statement of claim filed on 21 February 2022;
(b)Reply to the Respondent’s defence filed on 16 June 2022;
(c)Affidavits of a lawyer of the Australian Government Solicitor for the FWO affirmed 28 February 2022, 2 May 2022, 8 May 2023, 11 May 2023, 1 November 2023;
(d)Affidavit of Fair Work Inspector Rollins with annexures filed on 14 October 2022; and
(e)Outline of submissions on liability filed 4 August 2023.
At the time of the hearing on 1 November 2023, the following materials had been filed by the Respondent:
(a)Notices of address for service filed 18 May 2022, 26 September 2022, 6 February 2023 and 15 May 2023;
(b)Defence filed on 26 May 2022; and
(c)Response to the interlocutory application for default judgment filed on 6 June 2023.
It falls then to consider the material before the Court as to whether there was a contravention and it is appropriate to make the declaration and other orders sought.
THE EVIDENCE
The Respondent’s defence indicated opposition to certain components of the claim including as to the foundation of and underlying contraventions in the statutory compliance notice. There were some facts which the FWO, by its reply, appeared to accept were cast in doubt by the defence but it contended were not determinative of the matters relevant to establishing the contravention of s.716(5) of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (Act) subject of the claim. By the Respondent’s ultimate non-compliance with Court orders and non-appearance at the liability hearing, it elected not to file evidence to contradict that of the FWO.
Based on what evidence is before the Court, a summary of the accepted facts is outlined below and constitutes findings made.
The FWO is and was at all material times:
(a)a statutory appointee of the Commonwealth appointed by the Governor-General by a written instrument pursuant to s.687(1) of the Act;
(b)a Fair Work Inspector pursuant to s.701 of the Act; and
(c)a person with standing to bring these proceedings and to apply for orders for contraventions of civil remedy provisions pursuant to s.539(2), Item 33 of the Act.
The Respondent, Yarraville Business Pty Ltd, is and was at all material times:
(a)a company incorporated under the provisions of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), and registered since 20 November 2008;
(b)a ‘constitutional corporation’ within the meaning of s.12 of the Act;
(c)a ‘national system employer’ within the meaning of s.14(1)(a) of the Act;
(d)a company with a registered office of Perks & Associates Pty Limited, Level 1, 180 Greenhill Road, Parkside SA 5063 (Registered Address);
(e)by reason of the matters at (b) and (c), an entity to which the Act applied in respect of its employees; and
(f)a ‘person’ within the meaning of s.716 of the Act.
On 2 March 2020, the FWO received a request for assistance from an employee of the Respondent (Employee) who alleged he had been paid less than that to which he was entitled under the retail award.
From around 17 March 2020 to 22 July 2021, the FWO conducted an investigation in respect of the Employee’s employment with the Respondent.
The investigation was conducted by Fair Work Inspectors Rollins, Portbury, McLindon, and Allen (individually or collectively referred to as FWO Inspector). Each FWO Inspector was at all material times appointed under s.700 of the Act. As part of the investigation there was correspondence between a FWO Inspector and the Respondent including by way of multiple conversations with Mr Borruso, the Head of People and Culture at Cash Converters, and an Employee Relations Specialist at Cash Converters; email correspondence with Cash Converters’ Head Office and the entity listed on the company register as the Respondent’s registered business address, Perks & Associates; and communications with various employees of the Respondent. During the course of the investigation, the FWO Inspector(s) supported the Employee in attempting to resolve the underpayment concerns directly with the Respondent and were given assurances that Cash Converters’ Head Office was conducting a payroll audit at around that time including an assessment of the Employee’s circumstances. Subsequently, the Respondent’s calculations were provided to the FWO (prepared by Employsure – not in evidence before the Court). The Respondent was forthcoming with other information during the course of the investigation and engaged in various communications with the FWO Inspectors. This information did not resolve the matters under investigation.
On 22 July 2021, a FWO Inspector gave a statutory compliance notice to the Respondent which is the notice subject of these proceedings (Notice) and extracted in full at Annexure A of these Reasons. The issuing FWO Inspector having formed a reasonable belief on the information available to them at that time, within the meaning of s.716(1) of the Act, that the Respondent had contravened various sections of the National Employment Standards in the Act (NES), terms of the Banking, Finance and Insurance Award 2010 (Banking Award) and terms of the General Retail Award 2010 (Retail Award) as detailed in the Notice.
On 22 July 2021, the Notice was served by post on the Respondent’s registered office and by email to Mr Borruso’s known email for communication. On 29 July 2021, a FWO Inspector had an email exchange with a representative of Perks & Associates by which it was confirmed that the Notice had been received at the Respondent’s registered business address.
By the Notice, the Respondent was required, by 31 August 2021, to take a range of actions to calculate and remedy the direct effects of the identified contraventions and keep a record of same. The FWO specified the time for production of reasonable evidence of compliance with the actions specified therein including proof of payment as by 7 September 2021. By their defence, the Respondent admitted that it did not take the specified actions in the Notice by 31 August 2021 or provide proof of such by 7 September 2021 (although, the defence denied any requirement to take such actions on the basis that there was no contravention of the Banking Award or the Retail Award by the Respondent).
As at 12 October 2022, FWO Inspector Rollins’ evidence was that the FWO was not aware of any actions taken by the Respondent to comply with the Notice, either by 31 August 2021 or at any time after. At least the Respondent’s defence indicated that the Employee remained employed to work for the Respondent as at 26 May 2022 but there is no evidence of this. There is also no evidence of any attempts to communicate with the Employee about the matter of compliance with the Notice or any attempted rectification of entitlements since the Notice was issued.
DID THE RESPONDENT CONTRAVENE THE ACT?
Statutory framework
Section 716(5) of the Act provides (and at all relevant times provided):
Compliance notices
…
Person must not fail to comply with notice
(5) A person must not fail to comply with a notice given under this section.
Note: This subsection is a civil remedy provision (see Part 4-1).
Important to the statutory scheme is the concept that compliance with a statutory compliance notice given under s.716 of the Act does not of itself constitute an admission of the underlying contravention(s) or a finding of such contravention(s): s.716(4B). However a failure to comply with a statutory compliance notice amounts to a contravention of s.716(5) of the Act. That is, unless there is a “reasonable excuse” pursuant to s.716(6) of the Act. A person who seeks to rely on this exception bears the onus of proof: Potter v Fair Work Ombudsman [2014] FCA 187 at [72].
A fair work inspector may also apply to a relevant Court for orders in relation to contraventions of ss.716(5): s.539(2). The Court may make any order it considers appropriate where satisfied that a person has contravened a civil remedy provision: s.545(2). The Court may also make a pecuniary penalty order for such contravention: s.546.
A person who has been given a statutory compliance notice may apply to a relevant court for review of the notice on grounds that the person has not committed a contravention as set out in the notice and/or the notice does not comply with ss.716(2) or (3) of the Act: s.717 of the Act.
Application to the present case
Having regard to the findings made above, the Respondent company contravened s.716(5) of the Act by failing to comply with the specified actions in the Notice. There was no application to challenge or set aside the Notice pursuant to s.717. The Respondent did not plead or establish a “reasonable excuse” pursuant to s.716(6).
I am satisfied that the statement of claim filed in this matter and upon which the FWO relies complies with the rules of pleading and properly pleads a cause of action that supports the grant of relief in the form of a declaration. The Court has a wide discretion to make a declaration. I consider this is an appropriate case for declaratory relief if for no other reason than to record the Court’s disapproval of the contravening conduct.
The Respondent has engaged in no more than sporadic compliance with Court’s orders and most recently not complied at all (with the Court’s orders of 15 June 2023 and by its non-appearance at the liability hearing). However, having regard to the seriousness of the matter and in all of the circumstances, it is appropriate that the Respondent be afforded opportunity to consider, prepare and file written evidence and submissions as to the question of what (if any) penalty ought be imposed pursuant to s.546 of the Act, for its contravention of s.716(5) of the Act.
I am not presently minded to make the further orders sought, which are to the effect that the Respondent be ordered to take the actions that were specified in the Notice and rectify the alleged underpayments. As outlined above, the evidence supports a finding that the FWO Inspector formed a reasonable belief of the matters in the Notice as required by s.716(1) of the Act and as to justify finding that the Notice itself was validly issued. However, the defence casts sufficient doubt over the truth of certain matters in the Notice (such as corporate employing entity, period of employment and the applicable Award(s)) which are necessary findings to justify orders in the form sought and are not sufficiently established on the evidence. The FWO, by its reply to the defence, has acknowledged as much - but correctly highlighted that it was strictly not necessary to conclusively establish those matters for the purposes of establishing the contravention of s.716(5). Further, the question of whether the matters in the Notice have been rectified (in part or at all) is not resolved on the evidence before the Court. Accordingly, I am not presently persuaded that such further orders in the particular form sought are appropriate. This is a matter about which the parties will be invited to address the Court in addition to the question of what (if any) penalty is to be imposed.
CONCLUSION
A declaration will be made to give effect to the above reasons and the matter will be programmed for further directions in relation to the other forms of relief sought.
I certify that the preceding forty-three (43) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment of Judge Mansini. Associate:
Dated: 24 November 2023
Annexure A
COMPLIANCE NOTICE
(issued under section 716(2) of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth))
Date of Issue: 22 July 2021 NameofEmployer: YARRAVILLE BUSINESS PTY LTD trading as Cash Converters Yarraville
YARRAVILLE BUSINESS PTY LTD as The Trustee for Borruso Taylors
Lakes Trust & The Trustee for Sanders Taylors Lakes Trust trading as Cash Converters Taylors LakesACN/ABN: 134 257 971/61134257 971
134257971/ 26531807 062EmployerContact/Director: Noel Borruso I, Clint Rollins, being a duly appointed Fair Work Inspector, reasonably believe that YARRAVILLE BUSINESS PTY LTD (Employer) has contravened terms of the Banking, Finance and Insurance Award 2010 (Banking Award), the General Retail Industry Award 2010 (Retail Award) and the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (FW Act), as described below. This Compliance Notice requires you to take steps to remedy the contraventions described below.
Rights and obligations under this Compliance Notice
1.Failure to comply with this Compliance Notice may contravene section 716(5) of the FW Act and render you liable for a civil penalty (unless you have a reasonable excuse).
2.You may be liable to a civil remedy if you give false or misleading information or produce false or misleading documents. It is also a serious offence under the Criminal Code (Cth).
3.If you do not comply with this Compliance Notice, the Fair Work Ombudsman may, without further notice, commence legal action against you and/or individuals involved in your failure to comply with this Compliance Notice to recover any outstanding monies which this Compliance Notice requires you to pay and to seek civil penalties.
4.Complying with the Compliance Notice is not an admission that you contravened, or have been found to have contravened, the Banking Award, Retail Award or the FW Act.
5.You may apply to the Federal Court, Federal Circuit Court or eligible State or Territory Court for a review of this Compliance Notice on either or both of the following grounds:
(a) you did not commit the contraventions set out in this Compliance Notice;
(b) this Compliance Notice does not comply with sections 716(2) or 716(3) of the FW Act.
Details of the contraventions
6.Lawrence Pinto (Employee) has been employed by the Employer since 11 February 2014.
7.The Employee was engaged on a full-time basis and was paid $21.76 per hour at all times during his employment with the Employer.
Cash Converters Yarraville
8.The Employer, trading as Cash Converters Yarraville, engaged the Employee to work at Cash Converters Yarraville from 11 February 2014 to 30 April 2018.
9.At Cash Converters Yarraville, the Employee was engaged to work as a Personal Finance Operator, performing work commensurate with a Level 3 classification under the Banking Award.
10.The Employer contravened the clauses of the Banking Award (as in force at the time of the contraventions) and section of the FW Act as set out in the table below in the period 22 July 2015 to 30 April 2018 (Yarraville Contravention Period), unless the period is otherwise specified.
No Clause Details of contravention{s} (a) Clause 13.l(a) Full-time Minimum Wage Contravention
by failing to pay the Employee the minimum wage for a Level 3 classified employee under the Banking Award in respect of the ordinary hours worked from the first full pay period on or after 1 July 2016 to 30 April 2018 (Full-time Minimum Wage Entitlement)
(b) Clause 27.3 Full-time Public Holiday Penalty Contravention
by failing to pay the Employee at the rate of double time and a half in respect of hours worked on public holidays during the Yarraville Contravention Period.
(Full-time Public Holiday Penalty Entitlement)(c) Clause 23.l(b) Full-time Saturday Overtime Rate Contravention
by failing to pay the Employee at the rate of double time in respect of hours worked on a Saturday after 12pm during the Yarraville Contravention Period. (Full-time Saturday Overtime Rate Entitlement)
(d) Clause 23.l(c) Full-time Sunday Overtime Rate Contravention
by failing to pay the Employee at the rate of double time in respect of hours worked on a Sunday during the Yarraville Contravention Period. (Full-time Sunday Overtime Rate Entitlement)
(e) Clause 24.3(a)
(b)(ii)Annual Leave Loading Contravention
by failing to pay the Employee the greater of his relevant minimum wage for ordinary hours plus:
· 17.5% of the Employee's minimum wage; orthe Employee's relevant weekend penalty rates.
for annual leave paid during the Yarraville Contravention Period.
(Annual Leave Loading Entitlement)
(f) Section 90(1) Annual Leave Contravention
By failing to pay the Employee at the correct base rate of pay, being the Full- time Minimum Wage Entitlement, in respect of payment for annual leave during the period 1 July 2016 and 30 April 2018.
(Annual Leave loading Entitlement)
Cash Converters Taylors Lakes
11.The Employer, as The Trustee for Borruso Taylors Lakes Trust & The Trustee for Sanders Taylors Lakes Trust trading as Cash Converters Taylors Lakes, engaged the Employee to work at Cash Converters Taylors Lakes from 1 May 2018.
12.At Cash Converters Taylors Lakes, the Employee performed work commensurate with a Retail Employee Level 3 under the Retail Award.
13.The Employer contravened the clauses of the Retail Award (as in force at the time of the contraventions) as set out in the table below in the period 1 May 2018 to 21 March 2020 (Taylors lakes Contravention Period), unless the period is otherwise specified.
No Clause Details of contravention(s) (g) Clause 17 Full-time Minimum Wage Contravention
by failing to pay the Employee the minimum wage for a Retail Employee Level 3 under the Retail Award in respect of the ordinary hours worked from the first full pay period on or after 1 July 2019 to 21 March 2020. (Full-time Minimum
Wage Entitlement)(h) Clause 29.2(a) Full-time Overtime Rate Contravention
by failing to pay the Employee at the rate of time and a half for the first 3 hours
in respect of overtime worked on Monday to Saturday during the Taylors Lakes Contravention Period. (Full-time Overtime Rate Entitlement)(i) Clause 29.4(c) Full-time Saturday Penalty Contravention
by failing to pay the Employee an additional loading of 25% in respect of
ordinary hours worked on Saturdays during the Taylors Lakes Contravention Period. (Full-time Saturday Penalty Entitlement)(j) Clause 29.4(e) Full-time Sunday Penalty Contravention
by failing to pay the Employee an additional loading of:
· Between 1 May 2018 and 30 June 2018- a loading of 95%;
· Between 1 July 2018 and 30 June 2019- a loading of 80%; and
· Between 1 July 2019 and 21 March 2020 - a loading of 65%
in respect of hours worked on Sundays during the Taylors Lakes Contravention
Period. (Full-time Sunday Penalty Entitlement)(k) Clause 29.4(f) Full-time Public Holiday Penalty Contravention
By failing to pay the Employee an additional loading of 125% in respect of hours worked on public holidays during the Taylors Lakes Contravention Period.
(Full-time Public Holiday Penalty Entitlement) (l) Clause 32.3(a)
(b)(i)Annual leave loading Contravention
by failing to pay the Employee the greater of their relevant minimum wage for ordinary hours plus:
· 17.5% of the Employee's minimum wage; or
· the Employee's relevant weekend penalty rates
for annual leave paid during the Taylors lakes Contravention Period.
(Annual leave loading Entitlement)Required action under this Compliance Notice
14.In accordance with section 716(2) of the FW Act, I require you by 31 August 2021 to:
Step 1 – calculate and rectify underpayments
(a)in respect of the contravention referred to in row (a) of the first table above in respect of the Employee:
(i)identify the number of hours the Employee worked during the defined period in respect of which the specified entitlement (the Entitlement) was required to be paid (Hours);
(ii)identify the amount the Employer paid to the Employee during the defined period in respect of the Entitlement (having regard to the Hours, where applicable);
(iii)calculate the amount the Employer should have paid to the Employee during the defined period in respect of the Entitlement (having regard to the Hours, where applicable);
(iv)make a payment to the Employee of the difference between the amount referred to in (ii) and the amount referred to In (iii) immediately above; and
(v)make a record of the information and amounts referred to in (i) to (iii) and the amount of the payment referred to in (iv) immediately above (Underpayment Rectification Information)
(b)repeat the same process described in Step l(a) foreach of1he contraventions referred to in rows (b) to (I) of the two tables above.
Step 2 - Superannuation
(c)calculate any additional superannuation contributions required by clause 21.2 of the Banking Award and clause 22.2 of the Retail Award in respect of the amounts required to be paid to the Employee as a result of Step 1. (Please note that some of the contraventions referred to in the two tables above, may not require a superannuation contribution. Please check superannuation contribution requirements with the Australian Taxation Office)
(d)pay such additional superannuation contributions to the chosen Superannuation Fund of the Employee.
Reasonable evidence of steps taken to comply with this Compliance Notice
15.In accordance with section 716(2) of the FW Act, I require you to produce the following reasonable evidence of your compliance with the actions specified in paragraph 14 above:
(a) a schedule that sets out:
(i) the full name of the employee
(ii)in relation to the Employee, and in respect of each contravention that concerns the Employee, the Underpayment Rectification Information
(iii)in relation to the Employee, the additional superannuation contributions calculated for the Employee and paid to the Employee's Superannuation Fund in accordance with Step 2;
(b)proof that full payment has been made to the Employee as required to be made by Step 1 and Step 2, such as a bank transfer showing the transfer of funds to the Employee and their Superannuation Fund, or a copy of the Employee's payroll records showing the payment(s).
16.The evidence referred to above must be provided to the Fair Work Ombudsman by 7 September 2021 by post to Fair Work Inspector Clint Rollins at GPO BOX 9887 Melbourne Victoria 3001or by email to c***********@fwo.gov.au.
You may be liable to a civil penalty or other civil remedy under the FW Act if you give false or misleading information or produce false or misleading documents in response to this Compliance Notice. You may also be liable for a criminal offence under the Criminal Code (Cth) if you do so.
0