False Records and Farm Labour: FWO Takes Action Against Queensland Labour Hire Company

| February 26, 2026

A Longstanding Pattern of Underpayment in Agriculture

It is an age-old scourge that has been played out in real life and the arts across centuries and generations.

From the fictional exploitation of migrant workers, George and Lennie, in Steinbeck’s of Mice and Men, to the modern-day mistreatment of labourers in modern Australia, there has been (and there remains) a worrying pattern of employers underpaying their workers, particularly in the agricultural sector.

In March 2017, the Federal Circuit Court in Brisbane imposed pecuniary penalties on labour hire company Maroochy Sunshine Pty Ltd and its sole director, Emmanual Bani, a combined total of $186,000 for the underpayment of 22 seasonal workers from Vanuatu, whose treatment the court described as “appalling” and “egregious”. 

Recent Proceedings in the Horticulture Sector

Fast forward to late January 2026 and the Fair Work Ombudsman (FWO) has commenced Federal Circuit and Family Court proceedings against another Queensland-based labour hire company, Korserv Pty Ltd (Korserv) and its manager Janghwan Choi (Mr Choi), alleging they knowingly provided false and misleading employment records to FWO Fair Work Inspectors. 

FWO Fair Work inspectors were undertaking a proactive auditing campaign of horticulture businesses in 2023, and attempted to conduct an audit of pay rates being provided to workers on a strawberry farm in the Glass House Mountains.  After being told Korserv supplied labour to the  farm, Fair Work inspectors requested Korserv’s time and wage records for its workers at that farm. 

As revealed in an FWO media release announcing the legal action, it is alleged that between December 2023 and January 2024, Korserv and Mr Choi supplied fabricated documents to Fair Work Inspectors for 14 farm workers, including three migrant workers on work visas. These documents are alleged to have consisted of fake payslips, falsified bank payment records, and piecework agreements (as prescribed by the Horticulture Award 2020) with forged signatures, implying payments had been made when, according to the FWO, they had not.

Mr Choi later admitted that Korserv had subcontracted payment responsibilities to two other companies, and that Korserv transferred funds to those subcontractors to pay workers.  The FWO is seeking penalties of up to $93,900 per breach of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act) for Korserv, and $18,780 per breach for Mr Choi.  

It will be alleged that the breaches involve knowingly providing false or misleading information (s535 of the Act) and providing false or misleading information or documents (s718A of the Act).

Key Issues Before the Court

The key legal issues to be determined include: 

• If it can be shown, on the balance of probabilities under the civil penalty provisions, that Korserv and Mr Choi knowingly provided such records and documents, they may be held liable and face civil penalties.

• The alleged use of falsified signatures raises issues of: 

      – whether the employment agreements were valid at all; 
      – whether workers were wrongly classified or paid under piecework rates without a lawful agreement in place. 

• Whether Korserv remains legally responsible for compliance in respect of record keeping and pay obligations – despite the alleged sub-contracting of these compliance duties to other companies. 

• Whether Mr Choi is personally liable under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act) “involved” in Korserv’s contraventions (e.g. aiding, abetting, procuring). 

Key Takeaways 

• There is legal obligation for all employers to keep accurate time and wages records (as required by the Act and in the Fair Work Regulations 2009 with respect to payslips). 

• There are hefty penalties for providing false and misleading records, and for attempting to hinder or obstruct Fair Work inspectors in the course of their work. 

• Even if Korserv subcontracted payroll/record keeping obligations to other entities, it is possible a Court may find that Korserv cannot contract out of its statutory obligations under the Act if it is the employer. 

• In Australia, a worker’s visa status does not change the minimum workplace rights they are entitled to under the Act or an Award.  

A directions hearing is listed in the FCFCOA in Brisbane on 21 May 2026.  Stay tuned – we will keep readers up to date with developments in this case. 

Strengthening Your Compliance Framework

Allegations of falsified employment records and underpayments highlight how critical accurate payroll systems and compliant record-keeping practices are particularly in high-risk sectors such as labour hire and agriculture.

Proactive auditing and regular compliance reviews are far more effective than responding to enforcement action.

If you are unsure whether your payroll systems, record-keeping processes, or Award classifications are compliant, IRiQ Law can assist with tailored compliance reviews and payroll auditing services.

Contact our team to discuss your obligations and ensure your business is protected.