Australia is restricting the number of domestic workers foreign diplomats can bring into the country, UN official says Modern slavery

The Australian government has banned foreign diplomats from allowing domestic workers into the country, a United Nations anti-slavery expert reported, after two recent cases in federal courts exposed systemic exploitation that a judge described as “slave-like working conditions.”

The United Nations Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of slavery concluded his visit to Australia this week, with a particular focus on temporary migrant workers across the country.

Prof Tomoya Obokata said “a large number” of people had expressed concerns to him that foreign domestic workers – brought into the country to work in the private homes of diplomats – were subject to widespread and largely invisible exploitation.

“According to the information I have received, the government’s current approach is to limit the issuance of these visas to a few people in order to make them less widespread.”

Obokata said he was told that the government was also “intensifying the information campaign” for diplomatic missions so that domestic workers are not exploited.

“I think it is the Federal Government’s job to ensure that the diplomatic community is fully informed about working conditions, rights and entitlements and ensures that these are enforced. I think raising awareness is very important.”

Two recent cases in federal court have brought to public attention the ongoing, systemic exploitation of domestic workers.

In 2023, Indian citizen Seema Shergill was awarded $189,000 in unpaid wages and interest after working in Australia for a year and earning less than $2,500 – about $9 a day.

The Indian high commissioner who hired them, Navdeep Suri Singh, was fined $97,200 this year. But the Indian government and Suri himself have denied any wrongdoing. Suri told the Guardian that Shergill was a diplomat and that her case could only be solved by the Indian authorities.

Shergill never received her outstanding wages.

In another ruling in August this year, Sri Lankan mother of two Priyanka Danaratna was awarded more than half a million dollars – $543,300 – in back wages and interest. Danaratna worked seven days a week, an average of 14 hours a day, in Australia for three years, with only two days off, both of which she spent in hospital.

Danaratna had her passport confiscated, was not allowed to go outside and told the court that she had not been given enough food. She was grossly exploited and was only paid 65 cents an hour.

Her employer, Sri Lankan diplomat Himalee Arunatilaka, did not respond to repeated requests for comment, but her government said the domestic worker was paid a mutually agreed salary. Arunatilaka is now Sri Lanka’s permanent representative to the United Nations, based in Geneva.

Danaratna has not received her outstanding wages.

In her ruling in the Shergill case, Judge Elizabeth Raper condemned the “slave-like working conditions” of some domestic workers and said some spend their entire lives “trapped in domestic servitude.”

“Their invisibility leads to exploitation.”

Government officials declined to comment on how visas for diplomatic domestic workers – part of subclass 403 – were restricted in the wake of these cases: whether diplomatic missions where exploitation had been discovered were removed from the visa requirement, or whether there was a broader one Restriction of visas had been imposed.

Dfat told the Guardian it “makes it clear to all foreign missions – through established policies and regular communication – that the Australian government expects them to strictly adhere to Australian law and community expectations regarding pay, conditions and standards of treatment.”

A Home Office spokesman said visas would only be granted to domestic workers with written support from Dfat and “evidence of an employment contract that complies with the Fair Work Act”.

Interior Ministry officials speak to domestic workers as part of the visa application process and raise concerns about possible exploitation by Dfat.

More broadly, the Special Rapporteur said in his interim report that he was “gravely concerned about the treatment of temporary migrant workers in Australia”, including domestic workers in diplomatic hostels, Pacific Australia Labor Mobility (Palm) program staff and working holiday visa holders and People with student visas.

“I have received credible information from a wide range of stakeholders, including workers themselves, revealing clearly disturbing, sometimes very serious, patterns of exploitative practices by employers, employment firms and migration agencies,” Obokata said.

He cited evidence of fraudulent hiring, underpayment, racial discrimination, dangerous working conditions, harassment, threats and actual violence, including sexual and gender-based violence.

Obokata said workers who left their exploitative employers to take jobs in the informal economy faced further exploitation and abuse.

“These workers are also exposed to sexual and criminal exploitation by other actors. Many of these conditions could amount to modern forms of slavery.”

Obokata said the fundamental problem with temporary employment programs in Australia was that they created a significant power imbalance between employers and employees, with workers generally tied to a single employer and dependent on that employer for their right to work and even remain in the country.

“The power imbalance undoubtedly leads to underreporting of workers, which in turn leads to impunity by employers, employment agencies or immigration authorities.”

NSW Anti-Slavery Commissioner James Cockayne said the special rapporteur’s report was “a wake-up call to governments at all levels in Australia”.

“While the Special Rapporteur rightly praises recent progress, his statement highlights the significant risks of modern slavery faced by temporary migrant workers, international students, people with disabilities and sex workers.

“Prof. Obokata joins a growing chorus of expert voices calling for Palm workers to be given greater labor market mobility and protection from exploitation.”

said Michele O’Neil, President of the Australian Council of Trade Unions The Special Rapporteur’s report reflected the long-standing position of the trade union movement.

“All temporary migrant workers must have the opportunity to change employers. This also applies to workers in the Palm scheme, who are effectively tied to their employer sponsor, meaning the employer essentially controls their paycheck and passport – a major modern slavery risk.”