Workplace Compliance Reviews
AWS conducts proportionate workplace compliance reviews for Australian employers that need a clear view of gaps, priorities and evidence. A review can cover one defined risk stream or connect employment, payroll, policy, psychosocial and WHS systems across the organisation. Scope is set against the entities, jurisdictions, workforce and decisions that matter—without presenting the result as legal advice, certification or regulator approval.
A decision-ready review
Employers commonly commission a review after growth, acquisition, payroll or HR-system change, new regulation, repeated complaints, an incident, due-diligence request, board challenge or regulator contact. A review is also useful when records exist but leaders cannot readily show who owns each obligation, whether controls work, or what evidence supports that conclusion.
Tell us the trigger, entities, jurisdictions and areas of concern. AWS can propose a staged scope, review method, decision points and practical deliverables.
Request a confidential scoping callReview streams
The streams create a complete review map, but an engagement need not cover all six. AWS defines boundaries and hand-offs at the outset so the same issue is not counted repeatedly and specialist legal, tax, payroll or technical advice can be identified where appropriate.
01
Review award and agreement coverage, classifications, rates, allowances, overtime, penalties, leave and other entitlements against payroll configuration and actual work patterns. Scope may include risk-based employee and pay-period sampling, source-data reconciliation and validation of payroll controls. A systemic finding may require the affected cohort or period to be expanded rather than treated as an isolated sample exception.
02
Test contract templates and selected executed agreements against the employment framework that applies, including award or enterprise-agreement interaction, salary and set-off wording, hours, flexibility, notice and current workplace practices. Rosters, time records and manager instructions can be sampled where practice—not the template alone—determines whether a control is working.
03
Assess whether the document set is current, coherent and usable: policy hierarchy, approval and review dates, responsibilities, reporting routes, procedural safeguards and alignment between position descriptions and work actually performed. The review identifies duplication, gaps and contradictions without assuming that every document needs to be replaced.
04
Map other in-scope obligations and the governance arrangements used to manage them, which may include record keeping, consultation, delegations, training, contractor interfaces, reporting, protected rights, discrimination prevention and regulator-response readiness. The legal framework is confirmed for each employing entity and jurisdiction rather than treated as nationally uniform.
05
Review how psychosocial hazards are identified, assessed and controlled, how workers and health and safety representatives are consulted, and what evidence shows controls operate in practice. Depending on the agreed scope, this may involve document review, de-identified data, targeted interviews or consultation, and testing of selected controls—not an investigation into individual complaints or a clinical assessment.
06
Examine the organisation's WHS or OHS framework, responsibilities, risk and incident processes, contractor controls, consultation, training, assurance and corrective-action systems. Review criteria are set against the law applying in each jurisdiction and the organisation's own system requirements. This is not certification, regulator approval or a guarantee that every hazard has been identified.
Proportionate method
AWS agrees the review criteria, sample logic, access, confidentiality and escalation points before testing starts. The method is selected for the risk and assurance needed; it is not assumed that every engagement requires interviews, workforce consultation or transaction-level audit.
A focused review of instruments, contracts, policies, registers, procedures, reports and control records. It can identify design gaps, but documents alone may not show whether practice matches the stated process.
Risk-based testing of selected workers, transactions, sites, business units or time periods. The sample and expansion rules are documented so a material or systemic exception is followed through appropriately.
Targeted discussions with control owners, managers, workers or representatives where implementation, work practice or consultation evidence needs to be understood. Participation is designed around the scope and confidentiality needs.
More extensive testing may be commissioned for a high-risk stream, a known issue or board assurance. Depth, evidence standard and reporting are agreed in advance; a standard review does not imply audit-level testing across every stream.
Scoping and priorities
Scoping begins with the reason for the review and the decisions it must support. AWS maps employing entities, workforce groups, locations, industrial instruments, WHS or OHS jurisdictions, systems, known issues and available records. Review depth is then prioritised by potential worker harm, legal and financial exposure, control dependence, recurrence, evidence quality and the organisation's capacity to remediate.
A staged review can begin with a desktop diagnostic and defined samples, with expansion only where an exception, weak record or systemic control issue justifies it. Decision rights are recorded: who receives emerging findings, who can approve expanded testing, when legal advice should be sought, and who approves remediation. This keeps the review useful without allowing scope to drift.
AWS is a workplace consultancy, not a law firm. The review provides practical compliance and assurance support. It does not provide a legal opinion, certify compliance, bind a regulator or guarantee that no contravention exists. Where findings require legal interpretation, privilege, tax advice, actuarial input or specialist technical testing, AWS will identify that need for the employer to address with the appropriate adviser.
Tangible outputs
Related guidance
Scoping, sampling and documentation for a wage compliance review.
The pathway after an underpayment is confirmed, including payment, records and regulator decisions.
Testing prevention measures through design, implementation and effectiveness evidence.
Obligation registers, assurance lines, exceptions and verified closure.
AWS can scope a single-stream review, a staged cross-functional program or follow-up verification against an existing action plan.