From ‘prestigious employer to corporate sweatshops, how did we get here?

PWC, KPMG, Ernst & Young, Deloitte, Accenture, and the likes. They are amongst the world’s biggest corporate consultancies long known for exploitative labour practices. For decades, they were well known as workplaces that will grind you 70+ hours a week while dangling a senior/partner status at the end of the tunnel. Despite that reputation, young applicants still flocked to these companies for ‘the prestige/brand name’ – in line with what they were told in school/university.

So what does this have to do with corporate sweatshops? First, we need to understand the shift in the market that just took place.

Why aren’t candidates applying for roles with the big consultancies anymore?

Fast forward to 2021, the market has flipped.

With a huge candidate shortage in most developed countries including Australia, coupled with The Great Resignation – employees expect much more from employers. 2 years of lockdowns have changed perspectives that otherwise haven’t been reviewed in decades. Employees want a much better work-life balance and are much less likely to subject themselves to the work ethics of the big consultancies.

This movement away from the big names was further accelerated by how these organisations treated employees during the COVID-19 lockdowns. For many, the start of the pandemic was the hardest part of their professional lives. These big-name consultancies were among the first to dock employee pay as at ‘anticipated revenue decline’.

In 2021, in this candidates’ market that will very likely continue far into 2022 – they have not forgotten. More than ever, candidates clearly have higher standards for employers (e.g. flexible working is no longer a ‘perk’, it’s the norm). The rates at which staff turnover takes place now indicate that the market has learned (the hard way) how much company loyalty is really worth in the 21st century.

This climate led to the big 4 consultancies and likes facing a shortage of candidates, with abundant resignations. So what have they been doing?

The rise of the white-collar corporate sweatshops in Australia?

For decades, all of these big names have been running foreign offices – paying staff a fraction of what they would be paid in a Western country. This was a successful tactic with foreign graduates. For example, frequently paid as little as $40 per month in South East Asian countries, despite working in the capacity of an auditor or accountant. It’s commonplace to work 60+ hours in these offices, and due to the lack of opportunities in these countries, many go ahead with it. These companies consistently draw talent in despite these conditions – by dangling prospects like a better position in the future – where they may be placed in Europe, the US, or Australia. In reality, this rarely if ever happens.

Given how poorly these organisations treated staff in Australia when the pandemic began – they have been struggling to fill their vacancies ever since. Australian labour has more leverage in the current market – the working conditions offered by PWC, Deloitte, KPMG, Ernst & Young, and the likes just don’t cut it. The Australian worker wants a better work-life balance more than ever now, and competitive pay. The pandemic has accelerated this movement.

PWC’s Sydney based sweatshop run by migrants

What did PWC do in response to this? They targeted an already marginalised community and blatantly exploited them to back-fill the current crisis. In 2021.

The Australian Financial Review revealed that PwC, Australia’s biggest auditor, had used dozens of unqualified workers, on lower salaries and with less training and resources than their main office counterparts to complete audit work from an unbranded office in Parramatta for large listed clients. More than 90% of them were from a non-English speaking background and were visa holders.

Why did they target visa holders? Because they are vulnerable in these circumstances. As non-citizens, they have limited rights on these matters and are extremely reliant on their employers to maintain their visas.

This led to a weak Senate inquiry but no real consequence came out of it. PWC partner, Catherine Walsh, told the inquiry the firm had reformed working conditions at its “skills hub”. But she denied any wrongdoing by the company.

This is despite the many whistle-blowers pointing out that PWC insisted most staff at the “skills hub” were required to work more than 80 hours a week and that the workers had conducted audit work that required professional qualifications.

Given who the victims are (migrants) – Australians, the media and politicians will be less inclined to take this any further. Since the senate enquiry there has barely been any media on this crime.