A few days ago, I shared the story of a young man I support who was incredibly proud to start working.

He was proud to have a job.
Proud to earn his own money.
Proud to contribute.

Then we discovered what he was being paid.

$3.31 an hour.

That experience led me to write to Federal Minister for Disability and the NDIS, Mark Butler, and the issue was subsequently reported by The Australian.

But the more I have looked into this, the clearer it has become that this is not about one participant, one employer or one provider.

This is about the system.

Under Australia's Supported Wage System, some employees with disability can still legally be paid according to an assessment of their productive capacity — with the current minimum supported wage floor sitting at just $3.31 per hour.

Australia's National Minimum Wage is $26.44 per hour.

I understand that supported employment is complex.

Some people with disability require substantial ongoing assistance to participate in employment. Some may not currently be able to work at the productivity level expected in open employment.

That support costs money.

And I absolutely believe that support should be funded.

But support funding and wages are not the same thing.

The NDIS can fund the additional disability-related assistance a person requires to participate in employment.

A wage is payment for the work that person performs.

We should be able to acknowledge both.

We should also be able to ask difficult questions about a system in which an organisation may employ a person with disability, receive government or NDIS funding associated with supporting that person at work, and at the same time legally pay that worker only a few dollars an hour.

That does not automatically mean that providers are doing something wrong.

It does mean the system deserves transparency, scrutiny and reform.

And perhaps the most frustrating part is this:

Australia has already had this conversation.

The Disability Royal Commission examined supported employment and subminimum wages extensively.

Its Recommendation 7.31 proposed that Australia introduce a scheme ensuring employees with disability receive at least 50% of the minimum wage.

It also proposed that the Australian Government subsidise employers for the difference during the transition period — recognising that simply increasing wages without supporting employers could put jobs at risk.

The Royal Commission then recommended a review after five years and the development of a pathway towards 100% of the minimum wage by 2034.

That was not an unrealistic demand to suddenly force every supported employer to pay full Award wages tomorrow.

It was a proposed transition.

A funded transition.

A measured transition.

A transition designed to improve wages while protecting employment opportunities.

So what happened?

The Australian Government's response to Recommendation 7.31 was:

“Subject to further consideration.”

Consultation followed in 2025.

The Government has progressed other disability employment initiatives, including work aimed at creating pathways into open employment and supporting the transition towards more inclusive employment.

But Recommendation 7.31 itself remains listed as:

“Subject to further consideration.”

So I think Australians are entitled to ask:

How much more consideration is required?

Where is the outcome of that consultation?

What has government concluded?

Will the proposed 50% minimum-wage floor proceed?

If not, what alternative is being proposed?

What is the timeframe?

And what is the long-term plan for workers with disability who can currently legally earn as little as $3.31 an hour?

These are reasonable questions.

This is also why I have started a petition calling for reform of Australia's supported disability employment system.

The petition calls for:

•  Aclear government position on Recommendation 7.31 of the Disability Royal Commission

• A published national timetable for supported-wage reform

•  Proper transition funding so that increasing wages does not result in workers with high support needs losing employment opportunities

•  Greater transparency where an organisation is both a person's employer and their NDIS employment-support provider

•  Clear separation between what is being charged for disability-related employment support and what the employee receives for their labour

•  Stronger transparency and oversight of Supported Wage System assessments

•  Regular opportunities for workers to develop skills, have their capacity reassessed and increase their wages

•  Genuine pathways into open employment where that is the person's goal

•  and meaningful involvement of people with disability themselves in designing whatever comes next.

 

I want to be very clear about something - 

I am not campaigning to abolish supported employment.

For some people with disability, supported employment provides something incredibly important: routine, social connection, confidence, friendships, purpose, skill development and meaningful participation in their community.

Those opportunities need to be protected.

But protecting supported employment should not require Australia to stop asking whether we can do better.

We can protect employment and improve wages.

We can fund disability-related support and recognise the value of someone's labour.

We can acknowledge differences in productive capacity without accepting extremely low wages as the permanent destination.

And we can create pathways for people who develop skills and capacity over time rather than allowing the system to become a ceiling on what they can achieve.

The Royal Commission has already done the work.

People with disability have already told their stories.

Experts have already examined the issue.

Government has already consulted.

What is needed now is clarity about what happens next.

This started for me with one 20-year-old who was proud to have a job.

But it is no longer just about him.

It is about what kind of employment system Australia wants to provide for people with disability.

Fair pay.
Real opportunity.
Transparency.
Choice.
Dignity.

The petition is available below for anyone who wants to read the proposed reforms and add their voice.