A common cause of insurance lapsing is that legislation has been enacted forcing funds to cancel insurance if no contributions have been received in the past sixteen months, unless they get advice from the member to continue the cover. The fund will also send a letter to the member prior to a cancellation taking place, giving them the option of making a contribution or advising that the insurance is still required.
Unless the fund balance is not high enough to cover the insurance cost, a fund would not cancel the insurance because the most recent contributions was received a little more than three months.
It would be even simpler if businesses were required to make super deposits each pay; that should not be difficult with superstream and pay being EFT these days. The superfund could then automatically email/SMS/post a deposit advice for each. The vast majority of employees would probably notice if they did not receive one timely.
No ambulance chasers or ATO needed but government still thinks requiring small (any?) business to link payroll to superstream is an impost and that is higher priority for them to take care of than insuring employees donât get stiffed.
Itâs a problem that need not exist.
There are employers who in the past made regular fortnightly or monthly payments into super accounts.
Federal Government Legislation provides employers the opportunity to with-hold contributions for up to a few days short of 4 months. Super contributions are only required to be deposited once for each financial quarter.
Thereâs no requirement for an employer to set funds aside each pay in a trust account to ensure they are available.
There is no requirement to make deposits to personal super accounts more frequently than once every 3 months.
With payrolls even for SMEâs all come by the computer, and EFT a business norm, there should be no complaints about the paperwork. There is none other than the current quarterly returns.
The action is against one particular franchise, not McDonalds.
Yes they are disappointed that one of their franchisees was not apparently conforming to IR laws.
The reported action is against Liesary Pty Ltd that own 3 locations, but The union has already brought actions in South Australia, New South Wales and Western Australia against McDonaldâs franchisees over the same issue, but this is the first time a Victorian owner has been in the crosshairs⊠Mr Donovan said the union was now looking at taking action against other franchisees in both regional Victoria and Melbourne.
Maybe a case of donât look so donât see from corporate?
And letâs hope that McDonalds puts this franchisee on notice, and all others for that matter, that breaches of IR conditions will result in terminations of franchise.
A huge mountain from that molehill. All that will happen is that if you donât pick the minimum volume to cover the hourly rate you will be sacked very quickly.
And so employers better make sure that the employment conditions are reasonable for a normal worker to achieve otherwise the employee advocate organisations like unions will be coming after them again, and unfair dismissal provisions will be in play.
The âpiece workâ scam is an insidious cancer that needs to be removed from Australiaâs employment system.
