Top storiesNew ZealandPoliticsBusinessEntertainmentSportsWorld

Christchurch farm fined almost $46,000 for exploiting young 'volunteers'

Tuesday, 19 June 2018

A run down Tai Tapu property that accommodated thousands of young travellers has to pay a record fine for illegal use of volunteer labour.
A run down Tai Tapu property that accommodated thousands of young travellers has to pay a record fine for illegal use of volunteer labour.

A Christchurch farm that exploited volunteer workers has been slapped with a $45,900 penalty by the Employment Relations Authority (ERA).

The ERA decision said Robinwood Farms Ltd and its sole director and shareholder, Julia Osselton, showed complete lack of remorse, begrudgingly paid wages arrears, and continued to argue that the two workers at the centre of the case were volunteers or Willing Workers on Organic Farms (WWOOFers).

Robinwood's 'true level of mischief' would never be fully known because of the lack of records, but the intolerable situation was 'a clear and unequivocal case of worker exploitation under the guise of Wwooferism', the ERA said.

The Labour Inspectorate claimed thousands of young travellers had passed through the run down property at Tai Tapu, on the outskirts of Christchurch, where workers were fed waste from supermarket bins and lived in substandard conditions while helping run Osselton's various gardening and firewood businesses.

The working conditions at Robinwood WWOOFing Farm were described as
The working conditions at Robinwood WWOOFing Farm were described as 'intolerable' and a 'clear and unequivocal case of worker exploitation under the guide of Wwooferism'.

**READ MORE: 

Freebie labour and the story of Robinwood Farm

Travellers exploited through volunteer scheme fed from supermarket waste bins

Real Wwoofing survives a crack down on volunteer labour

Robinwood WWOOFing Farm
Robinwood WWOOFing Farm's Facebook page described it as providing accommodation for travellers from all over the world in exchange of some help on the 10-acre property.

Backpacker hostels bite the bullet over volunteer labour

Authorities ramp up efforts to stamp out freebie labour in the backpacker industry

Blatant and endemic: Illegal 'volunteer' labour rife in NZ's accommodation industry**

Although it could have imposed maximum penalties of $80,000, the ERA took into account that Osselton had paid the workers concerned arrears of wages and holiday pay.

In its submissions, the Labour Inspectorate said aggravating factors of the Robinwood case included the systematic use of migrant labour for many years, the vulnerability of workers who were deliberately underpaid $120 a week for 20 to 30 hours' work, and failure to provide employment agreements.

The penalty, which the inspectorate said was the largest ever fine for abuse of freebie labour, will be shared between the Crown and workers Rachael McGowan and Huikan Quan.  

The authority said those wanting to use WWOOFing schemes should be wary of its findings in this case and seek advice about the 'bona fides' of the arrangements they entered into. 

It was the second ERA award against Osselton, whose Karamea Holiday Homes business paid more than $20,000 to a Spanish worker last year and was hit with a $5000 penalty. 

Inspectorate manager for the hospitality sector David Milne said the fine sent a clear message that the kind of behaviour exhibited by Osselton would not be tolerated. He hoped it would act as a deterrent to others abusing volunteer labour. 

'Not only does exploitation take advantage of workers, it undermines businesses which do meet their obligations,' he said.

'Workers have a fundamental right to be paid for all the work that they do.

'Wherever a worker is being rewarded in a business at whatever level, the Labour Inspectorate's starting position is that these people are employees and minimum employment standards apply, including being paid at least the minimum wage for every hour worked.'

Having cracked down on illegal use of volunteers by the backpacker industry, the inspectorate will now focus on Rotorua and Taupō where there had been complaints about exploitation of volunteer labour by commercial accommodation providers, including motels.  

Milne said they had not approached websites advertising for free labour in return for accommodation, but he believed they had a moral obligation to consider whether the positions breached employment law.