One of the country’s biggest job providers is accused of pressuring a jobseeker to sign a false description of her employment status, an alleged deception which would have triggered a publicly funded payment to the company.
The Victorian woman, who did not want to be named, claims the employment service provider APM asked her to sign paperwork confirming she had worked four weeks when she had actually spent months on sick leave. APM has strongly denied any wrongdoing.
APM sent the woman an email on 6 May, requesting she reply and confirm in writing that she had worked four 15-hour weeks, over a four-week period in April and May, earning $450 a week.
Calling that 60-hour, $1,800 scenario “a complete concoction”, the woman refused. She told Guardian Australia she had been on sick leave since October because of a back injury.
“So it was a complete concoction of hours and earnings, at a time when I’m not earning anything.”
Job providers, such as APM, receive public funding when jobseekers enter paid employment. They bank a payment from the government if a person stays in a job for four, 12 or 26 weeks. Payments range from $240 for a “partial four-week outcome” to $5,000 for a “full 26-week outcome”. Providers get paid most for placing disadvantaged participants, with payments ranging from $1,000 to $4,000.
APM said it does not comment on specific cases but denied it had done anything inappropriate.
“APM rejects any claims of impropriety or fraud, we have an independent audit team in place that monitors compliance, and job seekers are always encouraged to raise any issues/concerns they have with our complaints team, and it will be investigated,” a spokesperson said.
In July, APM announced a 23% slump in earnings compared with the previous year, and the embattled provider has been acquired by the US-based equity firm Madison Dearborn Capital Partner.
Providers such as APM are under increasing pressure from regulators over the issue of harassing jobseekers for payslips. The Department of Employment Workplace and Relations said it would look “at where providers are reportedly asking clients for their payslips” and take action.
After she did not respond to APM’s email, the woman said she received a text message from the company saying her jobseeker payment was going to be suspended. The woman called her consultant at APM and told her she would not sign it.
“I’ve said, ‘I’m not signing that, it’s a fabrication’. And she said, ‘Well, nobody will know – it’ll just be between you and me. And we’ll be able to give you some money for acupuncture for your back if you sign this’.
A former employment consultant who has just finished a 20-year career in the industry told the Guardian he had seen that kind of scenario play out before.
“This is a fairly brutal system you work within,” he said. “I had worked for an organisation with fairly stringent KPIs and, if you didn’t meet them two weeks in a row, you would have to do a performance review and be managed out of the organisation.”
He said providers need evidence to get their funding – as they rely on it.
Over the past 10 years, the government has increased its evidence requirements and the easiest method is payslips. The strict KPI culture meant some would resort to “unscrupulous” behaviour such as providers contacting employers to re-negotiate a start date to get more funding, he claimed.
He said there is a focus on “high-value customers” who can net providers more money and strong encouragement from managers to push people into jobs, even if it may endanger their physical or mental wellbeing.
“It’s a recruitment model, rather than a model that assists people getting into work,” he said.
Jeremy Poxon, an advocate from the Unemployed Workers’ Union, said they hear from people every day who feel “pressured, harassed or intimidated” by their job agencies to hand over payslip details.
Guardian Australia is aware of jobseekers who claim they have been threatened with suspension if they don’t hand over payslip details – despite the DEWR announcing it had sent a nationwide directive to providers warning against intimidatory behaviour.
“Fundamentally, this predatory behaviour is inbuilt into the outsourced system,” Poxon said.
“It’s really disturbing that companies are continuing to engage in this conduct.
“It’s like becoming very clear that, as the system stands, the government either doesn’t have the power to rein these people in, or are completely unwilling to do so.”
The chief executive of Economic Justices Australia, Kate Allingham, said the government needs more oversight of the system.
