Pacific Labour Scheme Liaison Officers Stretched Thin
An analysis argues that too few country liaison officers, with unclear roles, leave Pacific workers in Australia without reliable support.
Updated on Nov. 3, 2026 in Employment
Live Poll
Should Australia's government do more to protect overseas workers under its labour programs?
Richard Curtain writes that the Pacific Australia Labour Mobility scheme has just 15 country liaison officers and two labour attachés, each serving roughly 1,872 workers. He argues their scarcity and conflicting expectations make the support role ineffective.
Why it matters
Short-term workers are far more likely to turn to their team leader or employer than to a country liaison officer, limiting the officers' practical reach. Curtain argues that adding more officers will not help unless their role is clearly defined.
Survey data from the 2021-23 Pacific Labour Mobility Survey covering Kiribati, Tonga and Vanuatu shows only about 10% of short-term workers would seek liaison officer help, while 49% would turn to their team leader. The draft DFAT terms of reference defining the role has not been made public.
The players
Richard Curtain
Richard Curtain is an Australian labour migration researcher who has written extensively on Pacific labour mobility schemes.
Pacific Australia Labour Mobility (PALM) scheme
The PALM scheme is Australia's flagship program allowing workers from Pacific Island and Timor-Leste nations to take temporary jobs in Australia.
The details
Curtain writes that country liaison officers face conflicting expectations and are often far from the workers they serve. The PALM scheme's Approved Employer Guidelines say nothing about the role, and fewer than one in 20 longer-term workers would report a complaint to an officer.
Timeline
2021-23: Pacific Labour Mobility Survey gathers worker support preferences.
2025: Approved Employers of Australia survey covers 35 employers and 12,235 workers.
Past three years: Victorian end-of-year gatherings of officers and scheme participants have been held.
Big Picture
The critique targets the design of Australia's Pacific Australia Labour Mobility scheme, which relies on a handful of country liaison officers to support workers spread across many employers. Curtain's argument suggests that the scheme's support model, rather than its size alone, limits how well workers are protected.
Workers in the scheme who need help with pay or conditions are more likely to rely on a team leader or employer than on a liaison officer. Until the officer role is clearly defined and published, workers have limited clarity on where to turn for support.
The takeaway
Support systems for migrant workers depend on clear roles, not just headcount. Workers benefit most when they know exactly who is responsible for helping them and how to reach that person.
Further reading
For broader context on work and jobs trends, explore more Employment coverage.
Source note: This article includes information reported by SolomonTimes.
Live Poll
Should Australia's government do more to protect overseas workers under its labour programs?
