VIC Paid by Recruitment Agency but Working Full Time for Government?

[mrmovaff]

The job was advertised for a minimum 12 month contract position with state government. I went to interview with the state and then they offered me the position. However to my surprise when the recruiter emailed me the contract I noticed it will be with the recruiter not government.

When I asked, the recruiter said I will be working for the government but will be in the contract and paid by the recruitment agency. Then I noticed there is no 12 month on the contract and it is ongoing/casual. What they put on the desk for me to sign was different from what advertised. I was desperate and I signed up. When I started I noticed there are many other officers in the same situation.

My work email is a government(.gov) email. I work full time in the same space with other government staff. I am doing the same hours and work and team rituals, attending same team meetings, etc so all the same. I am government representatives on my projects and it is written on project documents. I have been here for 8 months now and I have not seen my on-the-paper employer (the recruitment agency) even once.

I believe I am literally employed by the government not the agency. The only difference is that government paying me indirectly through an agency.

My question is, does my current situation give me some rights or similarity to a government staff under employment law?

Thanks for your thought if you could help, please?

 

[Rod]

This is hard call to make and I suspect requires a lawyer to look through your paperwork, and even then you may only get a qualified answer.

Do you have any particular issue at the moment that needs fixing?

At face value it seems you are simply a contractor to your recruiter. Gives the Government an easy way of downsizing/moving on staff when the need arises.

Sham contracting is a possibility but without adverse action/dismissal being taken against you, you can't do much. You may be able to take a job directly employed by the Government but again this is not clear depending on the restraints in your contract. Many restraints won't be enforced, but it depends on the facts of each situation.

Sorry I can't be any more specific.

 

[mrmovaff]

This is hard call to make and I suspect requires a lawyer to look through your paperwork, and even then you may only get a qualified answer.

Do you have any particular issue at the moment that needs fixing?

At face value it seems you are simply a contractor to your recruiter. Gives the Government an easy way of downsizing/moving on staff when the need arises.

Sham contracting is a possibility but without adverse action/dismissal being taken against you, you can't do much. You may be able to take a job directly employed by the Government but again this is not clear depending on the restraints in your contract. Many restraints won't be enforced, but it depends on the facts of each situation.

Sorry I can't be any more specific.

Thanks Rod. I do not have any particular issues at my work right now but we all witnessed a rough dismissal of one of us with only a verbal notice given and the person had to leave on the spot and we all know he had not done any serious wrong doing. He decided not to follow up but it gave rise to our concerns about unfair dismissal and our possible rights, not under the very lousy casual contracts we have with the receuter but under common law or other legislations.

I was thinking hypothetically if that dismissed guy goes to a court would the court give him some rights due to the fact that he was working for government exactly like a government staff?

 

[Rod]

I was thinking hypothetically if that dismissed guy goes to a court would the court give him some rights due to the fact that he was working for government exactly like a government staff?

It is quite likely he has/had rights that a court would uphold. I mean this in a general way, as theft or violence at work can be grounds for instant dismissal.

If anything happens to you, see a lawyer straight away as a countdown clock of 21 days applies in many situations.

 

[mrmovaff]

It is quite likely he has/had rights that a court would uphold. I mean this in a general way, as theft or violence at work can be grounds for instant dismissal.

If anything happens to you, see a lawyer straight away as a countdown clock of 21 days applies in many situations.

Thanks a lot Rod. I had no idea about 21 days countdown clock.

No he did not do anything like violence or theft etc. A seminar organaiser from outside had approached him and asked if he could attend the seminar on behalf of the department and he had naively accepted however never attended the seminar as he could not make it. The bosses found out about this accidentally and became upset on why he had accepted the invite at the first place. They used this as an excuse to dismiss him in a brutal way.