Women working in Australia's Pacific Australia Labour Mobility (PALM) scheme are experiencing domestic violence, sexual exploitation, and severe financial hardship due to a visa system that ties their legal right to stay to their employer's approval, according to new research from the University of Melbourne.
The research, led by Dr Cathy Vaughan and PhD candidate Gemma Tarpey-Brown, draws on interviews with women in the PALM scheme and with those who remain in their home countries while their partners work in Australia. It paints a stark picture of exploitation in the agricultural sector, which produces much of the fresh food Australians buy at supermarkets.
One participant, Grace*, came to Australia to work on a berry farm. She expected to send earnings home but instead found herself earning $100 per week and living in a shipping container. When she left the farm, her visa was cancelled. Five years later, she holds a temporary visa without work rights, has limited access to financial support or healthcare, and has experienced domestic violence.
Under the PALM scheme, more than 32,000 migrant workers from Pacific Island countries and Timor-Leste are currently in Australia. The scheme is designed to fill labour shortages in under-resourced industries such as agriculture and meat processing. But researchers say the condition that workers are tied to their employer creates a dangerous power imbalance.
“This serious power imbalance can undermine the safety and wellbeing of migrants,” the report states. While both men and women face exploitation, the researchers note that women also experience serious violations of their sexual and reproductive rights. A body of research has shown that temporary labour migration in the Asia Pacific exposes women to gendered harms.
Previous reporting by the ABC has documented systematic exploitation of migrant workers in Australia's food systems, but victims often do not feel safe to report mistreatment for fear of losing their visa.
*Name changed to protect identity.
Analysis
Why This Matters
- The PALM scheme supplies a significant portion of Australia's fresh food workforce; exploitation of these workers has direct implications for ethical supply chains and consumer trust.
- Women in the scheme face dual vulnerabilities: as migrant workers tied to a single employer, and as women at risk of domestic and sexual violence without adequate support.
- The findings come amid growing public and political scrutiny of Australia's temporary migration programs, with calls for broader visa reform.
Background
The PALM scheme was established by the Australian government to address labour shortages in agriculture and other industries. It replaced earlier seasonal worker programs and has expanded rapidly, with over 32,000 participants. Workers are granted a visa that is conditional on remaining with their approved employer, a feature designed to prevent visa hopping but which critics say creates a form of indentured labour. Previous reports from the Australian Human Rights Commission and media investigations have flagged systemic underpayment, poor housing, and lack of access to healthcare. The current research adds a specific focus on gender-based harms.
Key Perspectives
Migrant workers: Women in the scheme report being trapped in abusive situations because leaving an employer means losing their visa and becoming undocumented. They face low wages, substandard housing, and limited access to healthcare or legal support. Workers who speak out risk deportation.
Australian government: The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, which administers the PALM scheme, has stated that worker welfare is a priority and that the scheme includes compliance and monitoring mechanisms. However, researchers argue that tying workers to their employer is inherently exploitative and that current safeguards are insufficient.
Farmers and employers: The agricultural sector relies on the PALM scheme to fill critical labour gaps. Many employers follow the rules and provide decent conditions, but the structure of the scheme allows bad actors to exploit workers with impunity. Industry groups have called for better enforcement rather than structural change.
Critics and human rights advocates: Organisations such as the Migrant Justice Institute argue that the visa condition must be removed. They point to the scheme's design as a root cause of abuse, and call for a pathway to permanent residency and independent reporting mechanisms.
What to Watch
- The Australian government's response to the research, including any announcements of reviews or reforms to the PALM scheme.
- Upcoming parliamentary inquiries or Senate estimates hearings that may examine the scheme's operation.
- Further media investigations and NGO reports that could trigger public pressure for change.