A federal Parliamentary Inquiry into wage theft and the operation of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) has provided an important opportunity to test whether current laws are addressing a genuine problem across Australian industries. There is good news for the nation’s auction and valuation sector.
The Auctioneers and Valuers Association of Australia (AVAA) has delivered clear, member-informed advice in a submission to the inquiry, this being that wage theft is not a systemic issue in the valuation and auction sectors, and policy settings must better reflect the practical realities of small business compliance.
The submission, developed by the AVAA Government Affairs Committee, draws directly on its members’ experience to present a grounded, evidence-based perspective on the wage theft framework. The message of AVAA members is both measured and firm, this is that the real challenge is not widespread underpayment, but the complexity of Australia’s modern award system.
AVAA’s position reflects its role as a genuinely member-driven organisation. The submission was informed by the day-to-day realities of small and medium-sized businesses operating across fine art, antiques, machinery, vehicles and broader asset classes. These businesses are often lean, highly specialised, and without dedicated human resources support. Their insights highlight how industrial relations laws operate in practice, not just on paper.
Importantly, AVAA makes clear that there is no evidence of widespread or deliberate underpayment across the sector. Where issues do arise, they are typically the result of inadvertent errors due to the complexity of modern awards rather than misconduct.
Misinterpretation of awards, incorrect employee classifications, payroll mistakes, and frequent changes to award rates are the primary drivers. This distinction is critical. It reinforces that the language of “wage theft” risks mischaracterising businesses that are, in reality, attempting to comply in a complex system.
The submission places significant emphasis on the structural challenges within the modern award framework. Determining the correct award and classification is rarely straightforward, particularly in businesses where employees perform hybrid roles across operational, administrative and specialist functions. This complexity creates uncertainty, even for well-intentioned employers, and increases the likelihood of unintentional non-compliance said Troy Williams, AVAA Chief Executive.
Against this backdrop, AVAA raised concerns about the criminalisation of underpayments in its submission to the parliamentary enquiry. While there is broad support for strong penalties in cases of deliberate and dishonest conduct, extending criminal liability into a system already characterised by complexity may have produced unintended consequences. There is the possibility that the criminal penalty provisions could discourage voluntary disclosure and correction of errors, and lead to more cautious hiring decisions, particularly in roles that do not fit neatly within existing award structures.
AVAA’s submission calls for a more practical, effective approach. Simplification of the award system, clearer guidance, and targeted support for small businesses are identified as the most meaningful ways to improve compliance. The focus, as articulated by members, should be on prevention, education and clarity rather than punitive measures alone.
This is member-driven advocacy in its most effective form. It is grounded in evidence, shaped by members, and focused on outcomes that support both fair workplaces and sustainable businesses.
.
Interested In Finding Out More?
If you’re interested in AVAA;s member-driven policy advocacy, email to government.affairs@avaa.com.au or telephone 1300 928 165. You can also stay up to date by following AVAA on LinkedIn, X/Twitter and Facebook.
.
