Sep 29, 2025BusinessGlobalABC News

First Nations Australians Launch Class Action Over Alleged Discrimination in Work for the Dole Scheme

Aboriginal Australian community gathering in a remote outback setting, symbolizing cultural resilience and social justice

In a significant move for Indigenous rights, a class action lawsuit has been filed in the Federal Court of Australia against the Commonwealth government. The case, brought forward by Maurice Blackburn Lawyers on behalf of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, accuses the remote Work for the Dole program of racial discrimination. Participants from isolated communities claim the scheme imposed harsher requirements on them compared to urban jobseekers, exacerbating inequalities faced by First Nations people.

The Work for the Dole initiative, designed to help unemployed individuals gain skills and work experience, has long been a cornerstone of Australia's employment services. However, for those in remote areas—often Indigenous communities—the program allegedly demanded excessive hours and activities without adequate support or flexibility. Lead plaintiff, a resident from a remote Northern Territory community, shared that the rules felt like a barrier rather than a bridge to opportunity, forcing many to choose between compliance and cultural obligations.

This lawsuit builds on years of advocacy highlighting systemic issues in remote employment programs. Indigenous leaders argue that such schemes fail to account for geographic isolation, limited job markets, and cultural differences, leading to disproportionate impacts. The National Indigenous Australians Agency has defended the program, stating it aims to provide meaningful engagement, but critics point to data showing higher non-compliance rates in remote areas, often tied to these very challenges.

If successful, the class action could lead to compensation for affected participants and reforms to ensure equity across Australia's diverse landscapes. As one lawyer involved noted, "This is about recognizing that one size doesn't fit all—especially when lives and livelihoods are at stake." The case underscores broader conversations around reconciliation and fair policy-making in the country.