Inderjit Kaur worked in the kitchen of an Australian restaurant for 20 hours a week for seven months without receiving a single pay cheque.
The reason she put up with this "egregious" example of wage theft speaks to an issue at the heart of Australia's migration system.
The Indian-born chef relied on her employer to sponsor her skilled working visa.
"They can cancel my visa," Inderjit told ABC News.
''They can spoil my visa. They can spoil my career."
As immigration returns to pre-pandemic levels in Australia, Indjerit is sharing her story for the first time in the media in the hope that she can prevent others from being exploited.
The federal government is seeking to overhaul Australia's migration system, and it has earmarked migrant rights as an area to be tackled.
"Many are trapped in a Kafkaesque limbo," Home Affairs Minister Claire O'Neil said in a speech last week.
Inderjit's story shows how it is indeed bureaucracy — the way the system is designed — that contributes to the difficulties faced by people seeking a better life in Australia.
While they are classified as temporary migrants, many like Inderjit come here hoping to make this country a permanent home and invest significantly in the future.
Inderjit and her husband Daljit first came here on student visas from Punjab in 2009. They took out loans to enrol in higher education here, believing it was a pathway to securing work and permanency in Australia.
"It was for better education, better career, and better future," she said.
Inderjit studied cooking and business because she had heard there was lots of work in hospitality in Australia. She had two children with Daljit while studying and working here and eventually graduated in 2016.
With their student visas expiring, the couple now needed to get sponsored by employers. This is a common pathway for many migrants seeking permanency and full rights in Australia.
In late 2017, Inderjit responded to a Google advertisement for a chef's position in a restaurant in a regional Victorian town.
She was told they could arrange the crucial 457 visa or sponsorship.
The young family moved their life to the town and rented out a small unit. The only catch was that Inderjit agreed to work for free while her visa was being processed. She did not expect that would take seven months.
"I was very grateful for my visa status, and I didn't want to argue," Idjerjit said.
"It was hard without money for my family and myself but I'm helpless.
"The system is not in my favour."
Eventually, Indjerit's 457 visa came through. Her employer then asked her to contribute towards the cost of her visa, which is illegal, and to reimburse wages that would now be paid, court documents show.
She refused and was fired. She had just 60 days left to find a new employer or her visa would be cancelled.
"I am broken. Totally broken," she recalled of that period in her life.
Inderjit and Daljit considered pulling their Australian-born children out of school and returning to India. Their relatives back there sold off assets to keep them afloat financially in Australia and assess their options.
Inderjit found a migration agent who helped her secure a six-month student visa and then got put in touch with a free legal centre for migrant workers. It was here she found hope.
Together, lawyers working pro bono for the Migrant Workers Centre filed a case against Inderjit's boss and the company they owned. ABC News has agreed to her wishes not to name either.
In a judgement in the Federal Circuit Court in late 2020, Judge Heather Riley ruled in Inderjit's favour.
She noted the agreement between Inderjit and her employer that she work for free for 20 hours a week for seven months pending the securement of the 457 visa.
"Any agreement they had to that effect was illegal," Judge Riley ruled.
Inderjit's employer was found to have contravened the Fair Work Act in several ways, including not paying the minimum wage or super and demanding wage reimbursement and a sponsorship payment.
"The respondents preyed upon the applicant's vulnerability, in that she was a foreign national who was desperately seeking a 457 visa, for the respondents' own financial benefit," Judge Riley said.
"The respondents' underpayment contraventions were deliberate, egregious, and grossly exploitative."
One of the lawyers who came across Inderjit's case as she was fighting for justice describes it as "a profoundly affecting story".
Human Rights Law Centre managing lawyer Sanmati Verma regularly comes across exploited migrants who have endured wage theft and cash repayment schemes. It is less common for her to see somebody who stays to fight for justice.
"It's a profoundly rare case," Sanmati said.
"And that is precisely because, as happened with Inderjit, to take action against your employer is to risk the cancellation of your visa.
"You render yourself insecure because you have no visa options to remain in Australia to pursue action against your employer.
"And so it requires you to take immense risk upon yourself. And really, nobody is in a position to do that. Nobody should be required to do that in order to assert their lawful rights.
"The system is fundamentally set up to silence migrant workers and discourage them from taking action against exploitative employers, and lock them into exploitative working arrangements."
What could be done to fix this system?
The problems faced by migrant workers in Australia have been long discussed in the media since the wage theft scandal at convenience store chain 7-Eleven was exposed in 2015.
In the wake of that, Professor Allan Fels was tasked by the former government to review the system.
The resulting Report of the Migrant Workers Taskforce published in early 2019 found that around 6 per cent of Australia's workforce were temporary migrants.
"I was shocked at the amount of law-breaking going on," Professor Fels told ABC News.
"We found about one in two migrant workers were being exploited unlawfully. That's a sign of a system just not working at all."
The report concluded the most vulnerable included those on student visas, who were working more hours than their visas allowed to survive and were still likely being underpaid.
Workers in agriculture and hospitality were also among those most at risk. As well as underpayment, some employers were enforcing visa payback schemes, which are illegal.
"So they pay the wage, and then they take the worker to an ATM and get all the money back," Professor Fels said.
"Essentially, they're working for free or negligible."
Professor Fels handed down 22 recommendations, including higher criminal penalties, more resourcing for various departments, and a review of a scheme called the Assurance Protocol, which was designed to help workers report wrongdoing without fear of losing their visa.
"The Assurance Protocol was never enough and never serious," Professor Fels said.
The academic and founding chairman of the consumer watchdog, the ACCC, felt the former Coalition government did not go nearly far enough to implement his recommendations.
In a statement, Shadow Immigration Minister Dan Tehan said the Coalition introduced tough new laws and increased penalties to address migrant worker exploitation.
Labor has now identified that the migration system is not working for several reasons, including not getting the right sorts of workers into the country and leaving many on cyclical temporary arrangements.
Immigration Minister Andrew Giles confirmed to ABC News that one of the areas he intends to address is migrant exploitation and that it is leaning heavily on Professor Fel's work.
"We've committed to implementing his recommendations. We're getting on with the job right now," the minister told ABC News.
"We're preparing legislation to do that. But we're also looking at what we've learned since then and listening to the voices of migrant workers and people who are representing them in doing so."
The Department of Home Affairs has been holding meetings with various stakeholders, including unions and legal centres.
Many of those involved, including the Human Rights Law Centre, the Australian Workers Union, United Workers Union, and the Migrant Justice Institute, are calling for measures that go beyond Professor Fels' report.
They want stronger whistleblower protections for workers who report their exploitative employers, so they are less fearful that doing so will see their visa status revoked or their lack of a visa identified.
The group of 40 advocate groups is also calling for a specific visa for migrants so they can stay in Australia while they fight their employer in court.
"I would support every measure that encourages exploited workers to come forward without fear of deportation, so I broadly support their recommendations," Professor Fels said.
Professor Fels also supports the wider focus on Australia's migration system, as he believes the endemic issue of migrant worker isolation doesn't happen in isolation.
This is something the Immigration Minister also accepts.
"No one can excuse the predatory behaviour of employers who are exploiting people," Mr Giles said.
"But there are also clearly structural issues at play.
"These exploitative practices flow on across the Australian workforce and really diminish wages and conditions for all workers."
The federal government has not put a timeline on its overhaul of the migration system, but ABC News understands more detail will be released around budget time in May.
"My one warning is don't bury the migrant underpayment issue in a wider review of migration and end up doing nothing," Professor Fels said.
"Migrants don't get a fair go by Australian standards.
"They should get the same treatment, the same fair go, the same protection under the law, as any worker would."
After fighting her employer in court, Inderjit Kaur is still in Australia under a bridging visa.
This is the last visa option for somebody trying to stay in Australia. It allows her to work, and she is now being paid a wage to cook in the kitchen of another restaurant.
Her children go to school in the region, and she hopes to get permanency with her family in Australia.
After being here more than a decade, Inderjit calls herself Australian and believes in the country's values of a "fair go". She also wants it to do better.
"Australia is a good country," she said.
"Need some fixing; otherwise, I'm very happy here."
