Varun Ghosh (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Australian Labor Party and the Australian trade union movement want a better deal for working people in this country. The Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees Association brought an industrial action against the fast food giant KFC to that end. Tens of thousands of KFC employees were not provided the rest breaks that they were legally entitled to. The SDA, on their behalf, brought a case to enforce those rights, and the result was a settlement producing nearly $29 million of compensation for Australian workers to repay them for those entitlements.

That's a great result for those KFC workers but it is an important result for workers all over Australia. The case highlights, yet again, this power imbalance that exists between employers and employees and demonstrates the vital role that unions, like the SDA, play in exposing wrongdoing, protecting young workers and upholding our nation's workplace laws. The precedent may apply to other cases underway, but it also serves as a warning to large employers exploiting or mistreating young, casualised, vulnerable or lower-paid workers in this country.

Thousands of KFC workers gave evidence that between 2017 and 2023 they were denied 10-minute paid rest breaks, which they were entitled to under law. This wasn't some minor or technical issue or some simple oversight. It was a systematic denial of a rest break, a systemic exploitation of workers so that a corporation—a large corporation, in this case KFC—could improve its profits. For many Australians, fast food chains like KFC provide their first experience with work and their first interaction with a manager. The lead applicant in this case, Roshanpal Singh, summed it up perfectly when he said:

Like a lot of young people, this was one of my first real jobs. You don't question things; you just show up and do what you're told.

Preventing workers—particularly those working on their feet in a busy, crowded and hot kitchen—from being able to take rest breaks, however short they may seem, increases the risk of fatigue, undermines safety and, in the long term, undermines the wellbeing of those workers. Fellow class action member Lily O'Sullivan rightly pointed out:

Those rest breaks weren't a bonus; they were something workers were legally entitled to.

We cannot allow large corporations to set this example for young Australians entering the workforce.

Individual workers do not bargain on an equal footing with their employers. Individual workers—especially those who are young or who are employed in low-paid, casualised and vulnerable industries, like fast food—cannot take on employers alone. That's where our unions and our labour laws function as a countervailing force to balance some of that inherent inequality.

This case shows why strong industrial relations laws matter, and every member of the Albanese Labor government is committed to fighting for strong laws that protect vulnerable workers. The proposed settlement of $28.8 million didn't happen by accident. It happened because workers like Roshanpal and Lily decided to stand up to their employer and seek to vindicate their rights. It happened because the industrial relations system that the Labor Party has worked to improve over years and decades provides legal pathways to hold corporations and franchise networks to account. And it happened because those workers have the support of a strong union, the SDA, that was willing to take up the fight and get the result. And it was a great result, achieved by workers and their union taking the fight to the company. I commend the SDA and its officers for their tireless efforts on behalf of these young workers.

But I do want to stress this point: no worker should have to wait years to be paid what they are lawfully owed. No worker should have to wait years to be treated fairly and treated with respect, and this result sends a message: yes, rest breaks matter, but workplace laws matter, workers rights matter and lawful behaviour in the employment context matters. These are not optional. Employers that seek to upsize their profits through the mistreatment of staff or the systemic underpayment of staff, particularly junior staff, will be pursued and they'll be made to pay those entitlements. The ability to seek compensation after the fact is important, but it is imperative that we have strong unions, strong legislation and strong Labor governments to prevent this happening in the first place.