Worker exploitation and fraud within the NDIS | External submission

1 May 2026

Libby Coker Chair Joint Standing Committee on the NDIS PO Box 6100 Parliament House Canberra ACT 2600

Dear Ms Coker,

RE: INQUIRY INTO THE INTEGRITY OF THE NATIONAL DISABILITY INSURANCE SCHEME

On behalf of the Australian Services Union (ASU), I thank you for the opportunity to participate into this important review of the NDIS and its integrity.

The ASU represents disability workers in the NDIS. Our members work in a range of occupations in the NDIS, yet our membership is predominantly women-dominated and casual. They work hard to achieve the best outcomes of their clients, but unfortunately too often experience workplace exploitation.

Workplace exploitation like wage theft and superannuation theft must be viewed as unethical behaviour within the NDIS. These behaviours should be seen as a precursor to broader defrauding of the NDIS. ASU members and organisers have found that unscrupulous providers who profit off the backs of low paid workers have no issue with exploiting NDIS participants.

Workers need avenues to make complaints and protections when they do.

The ASU supports moves to introduce universal, mandatory registration in the NDIS. However, when this occurs, employers and providers need to provide safe systems of work that allow workers to provide the best possible care. All measures to curb risk cannot simply be outsourced only to workers without corresponding protections.

High turnover is already standard in the NDIS. More must be done to ensure this workforce is supported, respected and has the employment conditions to thrive. Training and upskilling must form part of this strategy.

I thank you once again for the opportunity to provide a response to this important inquiry. Please do not hesitate to contact redacted if we can provide any further details. The ASU would appreciate an opportunity to appear before the Committee, and can provide further details of cases in this submission should it assist in deliberations of this Inquiry.

Regards,

Emeline Gaske National Secretary Australian Services Union

AUSTRALIAN SERVICES UNION National Office Melbourne & Sydney Ground Floor 116 Queensberry St Carlton South VIC 3053 T (03) 9342 1400 E info@asu.asn.au asu.com.au ABN 28 519 971 998

ASU Submission

Inquiry into the Integrity of the NDIS

Joint Standing Committee on the NDIS

Submitter: Emeline Gaske

Organisation: Australian Services Union

Address: 116 Queensberry Street Carlton South, Victoria, 3053

Phone: 03 9342 1400

Fax: 03 9342 1499

Email: redacted

Date: 1 May 2026

Page 2 of 11

1. Introduction

The Australian Services Union (ASU) is one of Australia’s largest unions, representing approximately 135,000 members. ASU members work in a wide variety of industries and occupations in both the private, public and community sectors. ASU members work as disability support workers, sole traders, caseworkers, social educators, advocates, team leaders, carers, trainers, coordinators, managers, counsellors, CEOs and admin workers at thousands of disability providers across Australia.

ASU members also work in the local government, the social and disability workforce, aviation and not-for- profit sectors, and many of whom have disabilities and rely on the NDIS. Working together in union, the ASU advocates alongside members with disabilities to resolve workplace issues and complaints of disability discrimination.

The ASU represents over 30,000 community sector members, which include disability support workers in NSW & ACT, Queensland, WA, NT and SA and we have further coverage across the country. We are also the union for disability advocates, NDIS local area coordinators, and support coordinators all jurisdictions across the country, as well as the union for sole traders and independent support workers.

Our NDIS membership is a women-dominated, predominantly casualised and low paid workforce. High turnover and low retention are commonplace. NDIS workers, alongside community sector workers have historically had their skills undervalued. Members have been calling for change and to have their work recognised as skilled, respected and equal.

The ASU is proud of the NDIS and our members are proud of the highly skilled and important work they do:

“Being able to help the clients live their best lives and provide them with genuine, unbiased support.”

“Supporting people with disabilities to understand their human, social, consumer and employee rights as well as facilitating connection to community groups and services”

“Making a difference in clients’ lives. Helping them lead independent, fulfilling lives. Plus I am Neurodivergent, so I love showing what Neurodivergent people can do.”

The NDIS is one of the greatest social reforms of recent decades and a proud legacy of the labour movement. The long-term social and economic benefits of the NDIS deserve recognition.

The NDIS aims to increase the employment prospects of participants and carers; ultimately leading to increased economic and productivity outcomes.

A scheme that ensures people with disabilities have access to the supports they need and can live with dignity speaks to our national values. These programs also lead to broader economic and social benefits.

Our members walk side by side with NDIS participants and people with disabilities. The rights of people with disabilities and their right to choice and control within the NDIS must be respected and protected.

Our union is committed to a sustainable and functioning NDIS. We want to see the scheme protected and fraud stamped out so the NDIS can be maintained to enable NDIS workers to do their important, and highly skilled work support people with disabilities to access the care and supports they need and deserve.

Page 3 of 11

2. The NDIS Workforce

The NDIS workforce is highly casualised and low paid. According to the National Disability Services’ NDS Workforce Census Report,¹ 40% of NDIS workers are employed casually. This has grown from a rate of 31% in 2020. Comparatively, of the Australian workforce as a whole, only 10% are employed casually.²

It is also a highly feminised workforce, with over two-thirds (68%) of workers being women or non-binary.³

There has also been a rise over recent years in the number of sole traders and independent contractors in the NDIS system. It is not uncommon for these workers to work for platforms providers like Mabel.

ASU NDIS members have been standing together to win better wages and conditions. Organising this industry is challenging, as structurally, NDIS workers do not have strong a bargaining position. NDIS funding, which is competitive and only accounts for minimum Award based entitlements, further emphasises the challenge of organising this workforce.

In this environment, wage theft and superannuation theft of NDIS workers is common. This often takes the form of employers deliberately misclassifying workers to pay them the wrong rate, or to classify them under the incorrect stream of the Award, for example under Community Services Employees instead of Schedule E – Home Care Employees under the Social, Community, Housing and Disability Services (SCHADS) Award. Members have also been classified incorrectly under the Home Care Award instead of the SCHADS Award.

The NSW ACT branch of the ASU has supported members in over 60 cases of NDIS disability support workers being underpaid due to the NDIS provider misclassifying the workers either under the incorrect Award or incorrect classification; paying workers at the wrong Award level which is also lower than the level accounted for in pricing arrangements.⁴

Additionally, The Services Union (TSU), a Queensland branch of the ASU, knows of at least 12 employers misclassifying workers under the Home Care Award, when workers should be covered under SCHADS.

The ASU has also seen concerning examples of for-profit corporations setting up not-for-profit subsidiaries to participate in the NDIS. These in effect work as labour hire organisations within the NDIS. Workers are not employed directly with host organisations, and therefore have their conditions undermined and cannot build the same connection and rapport with participants. This structure enables for-profit corporations to derive profit from the NDIS; a critical public program that supports people with disabilities. This is unconscionable behaviour.

Regulation of the NDIS targeting fraudulent behaviour must recognise that exploitation of workers is an indicator of broader fraudulent behaviour. Those looking to derive profit from the scheme will often short- change workers as a matter of course, before or at the same time as defrauding the scheme or participants. This issue must be addressed to ensure the sustainability of the scheme as well as the sustainability of the workforce.

¹ National Disability Services (NDS), NDS Workforce Census Report, 2025 accessed: https://nds.org.au/images/workforce/NDS8096%20Workforce%20Census%20Report%202025%20web.pdf ² Australian Bureau of Statistics, ‘Working Arrangements: August 2025’, accessed: https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/labour/earnings-and-working-conditions/working-arrangements/aug-2025 ³ National Disability Services (NDS), NDS Workforce Census Report, 2025, p 19, accessed: https://nds.org.au/images/workforce/NDS8096%20Workforce%20Census%20Report%202025%20web.pdf ⁴ Table 1: Assumed SCHADS Industry Award Classifications and Pay Rates, 1 July 2025 of the NDIS Disability Support Worker Cost Model https://www.ndis.gov.au/providers/pricing-arrangements

Page 4 of 11

Recommendation 1: Exploitation of workers such as via wage theft, should be an indicator of fraudulent behaviour within the NDIS. Regulation of the NDIS that targets fraudulent behaviour should include immediate triggers to investigate where wage theft is reported.

Recommendation 2: There must be clear and accessible pathways for workers to make reports or provide tip-offs about NDIS fraud, employers and non Award-compliant employment conditions. Complaints should be made to the NDIS Commission who should be resourced to investigate reports of fraud.

Recommendation 3: There must be whistleblower protections for those who make complaints of NDIS worker exploitation, akin to protected disclosure protections for tip-offs of non-compliant workplace conditions.

2.1 Retention and recruitment of NDIS workers

Retention and recruitment of NDIS workers is a significant challenge. Across the NDIS workforce over recent years, turnover rates have remained steady at between 22-28% for casual staff,⁵ and between 10-16% for permanent staff. Comparatively, economy wide turnover, measured by job mobility, was only 7.7%.⁶

In a recent survey of members, when ASU Disability support workers were asked how satisfied they were with their current job, more than one-quarter (26%) were either dissatisfied or very dissatisfied. Only 12.1% were ‘very satisfied’. When asked if they’d consider leaving, over 1 in 3 (34.3%) said pay and conditions were major factors contributing to them leaving the industry.

Workers leaving the NDIS workforce is extremely harmful for participants. The skills, knowledge, rapport and tailored experience vanishes when workers leave, and it can take years for it to be re-built. Not only do new workers have to learn the specific approaches of their new employer and the needs of their clients, but they also must build trust and connection with their clients and families which can take months or years. The cost of constant recruitment, onboarding, interviewing, advertising is wasted funds which should go towards supporting NDIS participants, yet many providers tell us that they are constantly recruiting due to high turnover. Measures to increase the retention of the NDIS workforce would increase the sustainability of the scheme and must be prioritised.

Recommendation 4: The Albanese Government should work with the ASU to increase worker retention by funding the NDIS to the true cost of a supported and high-quality workforce. This true cost should include permanent ongoing work, training, upskilling, appropriate supervision, and pay and conditions that can exceed minimum Award standards.

Pre-existing skills not currently recognised under the SCHADS Award, such as lived experience, cultural connection, and language proficiency must receive the due recognition warranted. Care, empathy, connection and social-based problem solving are also necessary for workers in the NDIS and unique skills that have long been undervalued and deemed to be merely traits of women practitioners. The ASU has been advocating for better recognition of these skills in the SCHADS Award review.

Concurrently, the need for NDIS workers is only expected to grow. Jobs and Skills Australia outlines that the health care and social assistance sector is projected to grow by up to 23% by 2035. Comparatively, the next highest growth industry is professional, scientific and technical which is expected to grow by 19% by 2035. NDIS workers are already in high demand. Providers report to us they simply cannot get enough workers.

⁵ National Disability Services (NDS), NDS Workforce Census Report, 2025, p 15, accessed: https://nds.org.au/images/workforce/NDS8096%20Workforce%20Census%20Report%202025%20web.pdf ⁶ Australian Bureau of Statistics, ‘Job Mobility: February 2025’, accessed: https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/labour/jobs/job-mobility/latest-release

Page 5 of 11

Compounded by high turnover, the projected growth in the sector will mean the recruitment of NDIS workers will need to expand rapidly into the future. Despite this, wages of NDIS workers remain low and exploitation is far too common.

3. Risk must not be outsourced to NDIS workers

3.1 Mandatory provider registration must be introduced

The ASU joined with the Health Services Union (HSU), United Workers Union (UWU), and Australian Workers Union (AWU) as part of the NDIS Provider and Worker Registration Taskforce to call for a graduated and risk- proportionate registration scheme of providers in the NDIS.

There have been far too many examples of NDIS providers exploiting participants and workers. Government must have oversight over the programs being provided under the NDIS, the standards that should be set and the outcomes that must be achieved. Public funds must demand the highest level of accountability and government must ultimately be responsible for the standards of service provision. This is especially true of programs that support people with disabilities.

On most recent public figures, only approximately of 15% of NDIS providers are registered. For the remainder of providers, there’s no external standards set, no pathways for reporting nor registration of workers.

The ASU joins with other NDIS unions to call for the introduction of mandatory provider registration. This should set best practice standards, supported by public systems to ensure knowledgeable, experienced workers facilitate high quality outcomes for participants.

The introduction of mandatory registration for supported independent living accommodation providers must be expanded to all providers within the NDIS. A provider registration scheme should:

Follow the money, stamp out rorts and rip-offs
Protect workers from rip-offs through industrial compliance
Uphold workers’ rights to health and safety
Link to a worker registration scheme that recognises the professional skills of the support workforce
Support continuous improvement in provider practice and lift quality of supports
Set basic standards and prevent a “race to the bottom” over quality and safety in a competitive NDIS market
Provide the government and regulator visibility and data about the NDIS markets and workforce

NDIS participants deserve well trained workers who are supported to provide the best quality care and assistance. ASU NDIS workers desperately want to provide the highest level of support possible. Poor workplace conditions lead to adverse outcomes for NDIS participants. These issues are especially relevant considering the NDIS workforce is historically women-dominated, low paid with less bargaining power in the workforce.

Recommendation 5: Introduce a universal, graduated risk proportionate model of NDIS registration for all NDIS providers. Appropriate worker clearance checks should form part of this system of registration.

A provider scheme should be graduated, proportionate to the risk level and scalable to provide clarity, accessibility and ease for workers and NDIS participants aligned to risk. Risk categories should centre the expertise of the workforce and NDIS participants.

Page 6 of 11

There are many factors relevant to risk, including whether the worker is one-on-one with the participant. The level of risk should also include the person with a disability’s other attributes and the complexity of their disability, such as disability (physical, intellectual or both), other attributes (like race, economic status, or history of family violence) and other situational factors will be relevant. The ASU looks forward to working with the Albanese Government to finalise appropriate categories of NDIS worker and provider registration.

Our sole trader members also endorse a tiered registration scheme, and we seek to work with the Government on the design of the registration system, so it appropriately reflects the input of contractors.

Recommendation 6: The Albanese Government should continue to consult with the ASU, people with disabilities and advocates about enforcing the appropriate level of registration, depending on risk.

3.2 Worker registration cannot be the only response

The ASU recognises the need for NDIS worker and provider registration and that the risks to clients and participants in the NDIS means that checks and balances are necessary. Registration also brings certainty to workers who know what is expected of them to commence and maintain employment in the sector.

However, the low rate of provider registration means NDIS workers in high-risk settings are left without any structural supports. As registration becomes mandatory, resources must be allocated to ensure that workers’ clearance checks are administered quickly and correctly, to ensure a predominantly casual workforce do not lose shifts while waiting.

Additionally, registration cannot be the only mechanism for ensuring safety and ethical standards. The structural issues in inherently high-risk industry cannot be ignored. NDIS workers are stretched for time and resources. Workers must not be punished for broader systems of work set up by employers, providers or the industry at large that fail people with disabilities.

NDIS workers are already overstretched, undertaking work on unpaid time to meet all the requirements of their work, including their administrative responsibilities, despite recent reforms like the Right to Disconnect. A recent review of NDIS and community sector workers covered by the SCHADS Award found that 15% of this work is unpaid.⁷ NDIS providers must be adequately funded to ensure workers meet additional reporting requirements necessary under universal registration on paid time.

The risk and corresponding form of registration should also consider the nature of the workforce. Research shows that insecure workers are more likely to be subjected to occupational health and safety (OHS) issues at work. Safe Work Australia research found that casual workers report over 50% more injuries per million hours worked than workers securely employed.⁸ ASU organisers report anecdotally that that injuries and OHS breaches are commonplace amongst our NDIS members who are highly casualised and undertaking psychologically and physically hazardous work.

The increased prevalence of labour hire models in NDIS service provision is concerning. Here, NDIS providers enter service contracts with unregulated, non-registered entities to provide workers. This can be through a combination of not-for-profit, and for-profit corporate structures. For the workforce, labour hire means insecure work, loss of entitlements and precarity associated with business failure. For participants, continuity of care is at risk. Across the disability sector complaints have skyrocketed about missing pay and

⁷ Cortis, N. and Blaxland, M. (2022) Carrying the costs of the crisis: Australia’s community sector through the Delta outbreak. Sydney: ACOSS. https://www.acoss.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/ACSS-Full-2021-Report-v6.pdf ⁸ July 2011, Australian Council of Trade Union (ACTU), ‘New research confirms insecure work is a health and safety risk to workers: unions’, accessed: https://www.actu.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/media108642acturelease-120730-insecure-work-safety-risks.pdf

Page 7 of 11

superannuation, for example the collapse of United Employment has left disability workers $6 million short in missing pay and super, and $5 million owed to the ATO.⁹ Such business models are inappropriate for the disability sector.

Workers cannot be responsible for, and have their registration put at risk by, structural workplace issues. For example, where employers fail to allocate enough time for workers to correctly complete their tasks, or provide care, or where employers fail to investigate where escalation is necessary. Casual work or the use labour hire to provide NDIS workers also fragments tasks by time. This also creates risk to NDIS participants, despite workers’ best efforts.

There must be safeguards in the registration system to ensure the risk isn’t completely outsourced to workers.

Where issues occur or mistakes are made, there must be well-resourced independent processes to investigate systems of work to understand the cause. There must be protections for workers to ensure that dismissal and de-registration is not the default and only mechanism of resolution. Dismissal should only occur when it can be categorically demonstrated that the worker alone was at fault. De-registration of workers must be a last resort measure.

Recommendation 7: Universal NDIS registration for providers should be accompanied by key requirements providers need to meet. These standards should be scaled depending on the risk setting. For example, this should include:

A certain level of institutional expertise, set by experts and lived experience advocates,
The rights and dignity of people with disabilities are protected and guaranteed,
Compliance with all industrial laws,
Minimum standards around secure work and compliance with retention targets, scalable depending on the level of risk of the work, and
Registration be linked to workers’ training outcomes.

Recommendation 8: Where complaints are made against registered NDIS providers, the NDIS Commission must investigate systems of work as a matter of priority. There should be safeguards in investigation processes to only dismiss or de-register workers as a last resort.

3.2.1 Portable training rights must be embedded in registration

Provider registration and worker clearance checks should be linked to NDIS workers accessing training. Currently, rates of training or upskilling in this workforce are low which means worse outcomes for workers’ wages and their careers, which ultimately impacts participants and leads to high turnover. This is because NDIS workers often face barriers that limit their ability to upskill or undertake formal qualifications given the insecure nature of their work, such as time and working hour limitations. As a result, the NDIS workforce is not afforded the opportunity to upskill, limiting their career progression. The workforce is also not being supported to access training and provide the highest standard of care to people with disabilities and NDIS participants.

A highly casualised workforce, or workforce that relies on sole traders, is generally not well supported to undertake vital training or upskilling. A 2013 study commissioned for the National Vocational Educational Education Research (NCVER) found that casual workers are less likely to participate in work-related training

⁹ 15 January 2026, Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC), Bronwyn Herbert, ‘United Employment collapse leaves disability workers $6 million short in missing pay, super and entitlements’, accessed: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-01-15/united-employment-ndis-labour-company-collapse-millions-owing/106148800

Page 8 of 11

than those in permanent or fixed-term employment: 24% for women workers and 22% for men.¹⁰ This is approximately half of the training received by permanent workers. Although this research is some years prior, the anecdotal evidence of ASU organisers visiting NDIS workplaces confirms this experience remains consistent.

The ASU has been advocating for a portable paid training right for NDIS workers. A portable training entitlement was endorsed by both the Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability and the NDIS Review. The ASU’s proposal would enable casual NDIS workers to access training and upskilling, while addressing the rapid decline in training and skills development amongst this workforce. It would also reduce the high cost of advertising, recruitment, onboarding and other on costs associated with turnover and provide greater workforce stability.

Specific funds need to be allocated to NDIS workforce training. Workers should be able to access this fund via accruing paid time off. The ASU proposes NDIS workers accrue one training credit for every 50 hours of work, to be used to undertake external, accredited training. This means workers will be able to accrue training credits regardless of whether they’re employed permanently or on a casual/contractor basis. For the average NDIS worker that means approximately three days of paid accredited training every year.

The ASU’s plan for portable training entitlements for NDIS workers includes:

Immediate training for new NDIS recruits to provide adequate skills to start their careers in the NDIS,
Foundational training (Certificate III) for all NDIS workers who not currently have this Qualification, and
Ongoing training and development for NDIS workers by accumulating training credits for every 50 hours worked in the NDIS. Whether working permanent, casual or as a sole trader, all NDIS workers would be able to accumulate training credits and access accredited courses.

The ASU’s proposed portable training scheme will help address issues associated with high-turnover and insecure funding, by providing a pathway for workers to upskill and expand their career pathways.

This portable training entitlement should be linked to worker registration. Training and upskilling will lead to better outcomes for participants and increased retention of workers, further reinforcing positive outcomes.

Recommendation 9: The Albanese Government should work with the ASU to provide a portable paid right to training for NDIS workers. On average, NDIS workers should be able to accrue entitlements and credits for a minimum of 3 days of accredited training per year.

4. Recently announced reforms to the NDIS

The ASU notes the reforms announced by Minister Butler in his National Press Club address about the NDIS. ASU NDIS members are concerned about the impacts on their employment and on the quality of their work. They’re looking for more guidance from the Government about what expanded registration requirements mean for them, as well as reforms to foundational and other supports outside of the NDIS. If some foundational disability supports are moved into the community sector, consultation with the ASU will be necessary to ensure no one is left without fair access to supports.

ASU members also work as area support coordinators and do important work in connecting NDIS clients and participants with services. Any moves to cut or reduce this part of the system must be done so in consultation

¹⁰ Training and its impact on the casual employment experience, Hielke Buddelmeyer, Felix Leung Duncan McVicar, Mark Wooden, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, University of Melbourne 2013

Page 9 of 11

with ASU members so that NDIS participants can still have access to tailored and relevant advice about services.

ASU members with disabilities and their families also access the NDIS for supports. We are looking for more information about how eligibility requirements will work and how people with disabilities will still be able to access quality services.

The NDIS is a critical program, foundational to a dignified life for people with disabilities. The ASU looks to work with the Albanese Government to ensure that reforms are implemented in a way that recognises the critical work of the NDIS workforce and protects people with disabilities.

Recommendation 10: The Albanese Government must work with the ASU and people with disabilities in implementing recent reforms announced about the NDIS.

5. Conclusion

ASU NDIS members are proud of their work and work hard to provide the best possible support and care for participants and people with disabilities. However, persistent issues like the insecure nature of the workforce and wage and superannuation theft mean workers are left without support and subject to exploitation.

The ASU has seen many examples of poor behaviour from NDIS employers. This is despite the Albanese Government’s recent Closing the Loopholes and Secure Jobs Better Pay reforms, which aim to eliminate the unlawful underpayment of wages and loopholes that allow employers to undermine collectively bargained pay and conditions.

Non-payment of lawful wages and avoidance of workplace conditions is often a pre-cursor to unethical practices. NDIS workers need an avenue to report these practices, with corresponding protections.

Mandatory and universal registration of NDIS providers is necessary. The ASU looks to work with the Albanese Government to determine the most appropriate model of a risk-proportionate registration scheme. However, it is important that registration does not solely mean compliance is outsourced to workers. More must also be done to provide safe systems of work for NDIS workers to enable them to provide the highest standards of care. Registration should be linked to compliance with industrial minimums, time to undertake administration work, retention targets and support for workers to access training.

ASU members are invested in the long-term sustainability of the NDIS. It is a scheme that gives voice to our national value that people with disabilities deserve to live with dignity and to have choice and control over their supports. ASU members want these supports to be of the highest possible quality. Change is needed so they can work in a way that ensures the highest standards can be achieved.

Page 10 of 11

6. Recommendations

Recommendation 2: There must be clear and accessible pathways for workers to make reports or provide tip- offs about NDIS fraud, employers and non Award-compliant employment conditions. Complaints should be made to the NDIS Commission who should be resourced to investigate reports of fraud.

Recommendation 6: The Albanese Government should continue to consult with the ASU, people disabilities and advocates about enforcing the appropriate level of registration, depending on risk.

A certain level of institutional expertise, set by experts and lived experience advocates
The rights and dignity of people with disabilities are protected and guaranteed,
Compliance with all industrial laws,
Minimum standards around secure work and compliance with retention targets, scalable depending on the level of risk of the work, and
Registration be linked to workers’ training outcomes.

Recommendation 10: The Albanese Government must work with the ASU and people with disabilities in implementing recent reforms announced about the NDIS.

Page 11 of 11