FEAR AND SILENCE IN AUSTRALIA’S PACIFIC WORKER SCHEME
The Pacific Australia Labour Mobility (PALM) Scheme was established to provide economic opportunity for temporary migrants from the Pacific and address labour shortages in specified sectors in Australia. The Australian Government and Pacific and Timor-Leste governments have declared worker wellbeing as their highest priority. The Australian Government has heavily invested in worker support initiatives including a dedicated service line for reporting problems.
Based on a survey of 370 workers, our report ‘Right or Wrong, Just Accept It’: How Employer-Tied Visas Foster Fear and Silence Among Pacific Workers on the PALM Scheme reveals there is likely a substantial proportion of PALM workers trapped in working conditions that would be unacceptable to Australian workers. Most would not report problems at work, and would change their employer if they could.
Conducted in late 2024, the survey found:
64 percent of participants would change their employer if labour mobility were allowed
30 percent stated they wanted to move because their workplace was unsafe
60 percent wanted to move “to be treated better”
The survey also found significant reluctance among workers to report workplace problems despite the avenues available. For example:
42 percent believed that no or few workers would tell anyone if they weren’t paid correctly, other than friends or co-workers
Only 34 percent said they would tell someone other than a friend or co-worker if a supervisor told them to do unsafe tasks
Only one in ten would use DEWR’s hotline
Only a third would raise safety or pay issues with their employer or the employer’s welfare officer
Fear of employer retaliation, and of not returning to Australia, were the key reasons workers gave for staying silent:
64 percent were afraid they might lose their job
33 percent were worried about causing problems for co-workers
32 percent were afraid they would be given less or worse work
25 percent feared their employer may not invite them, family or community workers to work in Australia again .
PALM workers’ visas are tied to their specific employer. If they leave that employer - or if their employer dismisses them - their visa can be cancelled and they could be required to leave Australia with significant barriers to returning. The desire to return was virtually universal (97%) among survey participants.
The report concludes that establishing a form of supported mobility in the PALM Scheme is the only comprehensive way to enable workers to feel they can safely report problems at work without jeopardising their current and future participation in the Scheme. Short of this, the government must explore other robust mechanisms that address workers’ actual and perceived risks of retaliation that foster fear and silence.
Without these changes, workers will not report noncompliance, and government and industry will be unable to meet their responsibilities to ensure PALM workers enjoy fair, safe and respectful working conditions in all Australian workplaces.
