Payslip result

The result page for one payslip. It reads top to bottom: the verdict in one sentence, each thing that looks wrong in plain words with the one thing to do about it, the next step as a button, and the technical detail one click away under "See the full breakdown".

The page only shows a full result once a check has run. Before that you may see one of these instead:

• "Extraction is done — confirm the award, classification and hours so the check runs against the right minimums." with a "Confirm details" button. See Confirm payslip details.
• "This payslip hasn't been evaluated yet."
• "No award set — this payslip wasn't checked". Nothing has been compared to a wage floor until an award and classification are set, either on the person's record ("Set 's award") or on this payslip alone (see Award for this payslip).
• "Awaiting extraction — we couldn't read the award/classification from this document, so no compliance check has run yet."

At the top of the page, "All payslips" returns to Payslip compliance. If the payslip is linked to a person, "All payslips for " opens their record and "Edit their award" opens it for editing.

The verdict

The chip at the top of the card carries the outcome. It is a prompt to check, not a finding of underpayment or a determination of compliance — FairCheck only sees the payslip. Beside it: the person, the pay period and the award.

Every payslip ends up in one of three outcomes, the same words on the list, the tiles and this page: Looks right (green), Worth checking (amber) or Needs your input (grey). A fourth chip, Ready to fix, appears once the pay is short on hours you've confirmed — see Ready to fix.

Under the chip, one sentence says what the result means:

The sentence under the headline gives the reasons: whether the hourly rate is fine, how many things look worth checking, and roughly how far below what we'd expect for the hours the total is (the figure is highlighted).

What looks wrong

Each flagged check appears once, in plain words: a short title ("Weekend penalty may be missing"), what we saw ("7.5 hours were worked on a weekend, but the payslip has no weekend rate on it.") and, in green, the one thing to do ("Confirm those hours were paid at the higher weekend rate."). A check that needs your answer — when the hours were worked, whether a public holiday was worked, whether a meal was supplied, which state the person works in — asks it right there.

A grey "Also worth knowing" box flags an overpayment, such as a casual loading paid to someone who isn't casual. It is never money owed and never changes the verdict.

When the result rests on hours we were told rather than this period's record, a grey note says so: "We based this on the usual week on 's record, not the payslip, because a payslip shows what was paid, not when it was worked." Give us the real hours and the estimate becomes an exact figure.

The buttons

• The next step, when there is one: "Confirm the hours" (opens Confirm payslip details on the Hours step — the award and level you already confirmed carry over — and brings you back here when you confirm; if the pay is short on those hours, this card becomes Ready to fix with the back-pay letter), "Answer the question" (jumps to the question), or "Confirm " when their award or level hasn't been confirmed yet.
• "See the full breakdown" opens the technical detail.
• "Download report" downloads the PDF.
• "Ask why" opens the HR Chat bubble with a question already typed. You still press send yourself. It isn't shown on a "Looks right" result.

Under the buttons: "We ran all our checks on this pay. 3 need a closer look. The rest looked fine." Then a row of smaller links: "Change award or level", "Re-run check", "Share the verdict", "Read the payslip again with AI" (scanned originals only), "See what we sent to the AI" and "Report an inaccuracy". "Re-run check" re-evaluates from the stored data; if the extracted data has been purged, the page says it can't be re-run.

When a question is needed

A run shows "Needs your input" when it needed review and at least one of its findings says the context the pay was made under can't be seen:

• a flat or loaded rate covering hours that can't be placed against penalties (FLAT_PAY_UNVERIFIED, RATE_CONTEXT_UNVERIFIED)
• a junior or apprentice whose own wage floor couldn't be found, so the wage rules stood down rather than price them against the adult rate (COHORT_RATE_UNVERIFIED)
• hours that are broken out and priced, but for which the instrument publishes no penalty, so there was never a figure to check them against (PENALTY_UNPUBLISHED)
• a "Public Holiday" line paid at the ordinary rate, which is right if the day was taken off and short if it was worked (PUBLIC_HOLIDAY_WORKED_UNKNOWN — see Was the public holiday worked?)

Ready to fix

When the hours behind the result are this period's record and the pay is short, the card turns into a plan for putting it right. The chip reads "Ready to fix" and the headline gives the amount: " is owed about $X, plus $Y super."

• This might not be the only pay affected. If the rates were set up wrong, earlier pays are likely wrong too. "Check all of 's pays back to their first payslip on file" starts a period report from their earliest payslip to this one (up to three years). With no earlier payslips on file, it offers to upload them.
• Step 1 · Pay the back-pay. FairCheck can't write to your payroll, so it gives you the lines to enter, each with a "Copy" button: the back-pay (wages), a line description ("Back pay, 12–18 Oct 2026"), and the super. Paying it through payroll means the tax, the super and the record are handled for you.
  • The super is the super already short on this pay, plus the Super Guarantee (at today's rate, since that's when the back-pay is paid) on the ordinary-hours part of the back-pay. Overtime doesn't attract the Super Guarantee, so its share is left out. Someone under 18 working 30 hours a week or fewer gets none.
  • "What it's for" lists the findings that make up the wages.
• Step 2 · Tell . "Draft the letter" opens the letter.
• Step 3 · Stop it happening again. "Review setup" opens the person's setup. Their award, level and hours are saved, so their next pay is checked the same way; the rates in your payroll are what needs updating.

Letter to the employee

A plain note to send with the back-pay: what the pay was checked for, what the correction covers (for example "weekend penalty rates and pay for the hours you worked"), the back-pay and super amounts, and that it will show on their next payslip as "Back pay". It is signed with your name and the employer's.

The letter sits in an editable box. Change anything you like, then "Copy the letter" or "Download .txt". FairCheck fills it in from a fixed template — no AI writes it — and doesn't send it or keep a copy. It's only offered on a "Ready to fix" result.

The full breakdown

"See the full breakdown" opens the technical detail, for you or an adviser:

• Base rate — the hourly rate paid against the minimum for this level, and whether it is at or above it. Only the hourly rate: the rest of the checks cover penalties, loadings, overtime and super. Where the floor came from a particular cohort (a junior or apprentice rate, for instance) a line says which.
• What we'd expect vs what was paid — the total for the hours on file against the pay, and where the hours came from.
• Checked against — the award (linked to the Fair Work Commission document) and level, the award's description of the level, why it was chosen, a "Read the clause" link and which version of the rates was used. For an enterprise agreement, its title and the award that applies where it is silent.
• How this was decided — see How this was decided.
• How sure we are — see How much this is worth.
• Every check, with the working — see What we checked.
• Award for this payslip, the AI review, the payslip details, and links to check our numbers against the award on the Fair Work Commission and Fair Work Ombudsman sites.

How the gap is shown

The summary gives one rounded figure: how far the pay is below what we'd expect for the hours. On a "Ready to fix" result the headline gives the wages and super separately. When the hours are an estimate, the figure is "about" and nothing is claimed until the hours are confirmed.

Some allowances can be owed without the payslip being able to show it. The overtime meal allowance is one: it depends on whether a meal was supplied. Until you tell us, its amount is not in the gap. It sits beside it instead: "Up to $Y in allowances may also be owed, if they apply." The payslip list shows the same "+ up to" under a payslip's gap, and the "Possible gap" tile shows the total for all the payslips in view.

What we checked

Inside the breakdown, every flagged check has a full card with its working. Checks that looked fine or didn't apply are folded under a line such as "12 looked fine · 3 didn't apply to this pay"; click it to expand them.

"Worth checking" on a card

After every check, FairCheck checks its own working: the rows must add up, the same hours must be priced the same way everywhere, the hours stated must be the hours worked, and super must include the ordinary-time pay. A card can carry an amber line where part of that working doesn't hold up, whatever the verdict, and the line names what to look at:

• "Worth checking: this figure may leave out pay it should include, so it may be higher."
• "Worth checking: the working for this check doesn't add up exactly."
• "Worth checking: the hours in this working aren't the hours worked."

The award card can say "Worth checking: the duties described may fit better than the level used." A passed check that carries a line is moved up beside the flagged ones. The line never changes a figure on the page.

Badges

Each check card carries a status badge:

An instrument badge says which document the rule came from: "EBA" when the rule was applied from your enterprise agreement, "AWARD" when it came from the modern award.

The weight in brackets

The bracket after a flagged check's title tells you what is at stake, in this order of preference:

• "$X short" — dollars actually claimed by the check.
• "up to $X depending on the answer" — the check's dollar swing turns on one unanswered question (see When were the hours worked?).
• "Worth checking" — the check's stronger severity, with no dollar figure attached.
• "Minor" — the check's lighter severity, with no dollar figure attached.

Evidence, and "How we worked this out"

Under the message, a check lists the evidence it recorded as key: value pairs. When the rule recorded its arithmetic, a collapsible "How we worked this out" section shows a one-line sentence (for example "76 hours × $25.41 award rate = $1,931.16 expected; paid $1,831.60; $99.56 short.") and a table with the columns Line, Hours, Rate required, Rate paid, Expected, Paid and Short. Rows with a shortfall are highlighted. A passing check shows the same rows with nothing short, so you can see what was compared.

Basis

The footer of a check reads "Basis:" followed by the clause the check rests on. Where FairCheck knows the source, the clause is a link to it.

Report

Every check card, and every skipped check in the expanded list, has a "Report" link. It opens Report an inaccuracy with that check pre-selected.

When were the hours worked?

When a check carries the code RATE_CONTEXT_UNVERIFIED, its card asks the question inline (the check's own wording, or "When were these hours worked?") with these options:

• "All ordinary day-time hours"
• "Some Saturday hours"
• "Some Sunday hours"
• "Some evening shifts"
• "Some night shifts"
• "Not sure"

Choosing a Saturday or Sunday answer reveals "Roughly how many of the hours?", which must be at least 1 and no more than the hours on the pay lines (or 168 if none are known). "Answer & re-check" stays disabled until you have chosen.

What each answer does:

• "All ordinary day-time hours" records every paid hour as ordinary, and the run re-prices with that as evidence. The flag clears if the pricing holds.
• "Some Saturday hours" / "Some Sunday hours" records the split you gave as worked hours and re-prices the run through the same path as any other evidenced run. The page says "Thanks — re-checking with your answer. Refresh in a moment."
• "Some evening shifts" / "Some night shifts" are recorded but not priced. The engine prices shift loadings from payslip lines, not from an hours split, so the check stays flagged. The card then reads "You told us some of these hours were evening/night shifts. A payslip can't show how many, so this stays flagged — add the hours actually worked (edit details & re-check) or connect the payroll system to price it exactly."
• "Not sure" is recorded and the check stays flagged: "You weren't sure when these hours were worked, so this stays flagged. The connected payroll system is the exact answer."

Every answer is stored on the payslip with who answered and when.

Was the public holiday worked?

A full-time or part-time employee who has a public holiday off is paid their ordinary rate for the hours they would have worked, with no penalty. A worked public holiday is paid at the award's public holiday rate. A line that says only "Public Holiday" doesn't say which, so when it is paid at the ordinary rate the check card (code PUBLIC_HOLIDAY_WORKED_UNKNOWN) gives the amount that would be owed if the day was worked and asks:

• "No, it was a day off" — the line is checked as a public holiday not worked: ordinary rate, no penalty.
• "Yes, they worked it" — the line is checked against the public holiday penalty rate, and any shortfall is claimed.

Either answer re-checks the payslip ("Thanks — re-checking with your answer. Refresh in a moment.") and is stored with who answered and when. Until it's answered, the line is still held to the ordinary rate, the lowest it could lawfully be.

The question isn't asked when the line already says "Worked" or "Not Worked", when it's paid above the ordinary rate, or for a casual employee. Casuals aren't paid for a public holiday they don't work, so their public holiday lines are always checked as worked.

Does this person work in that state?

Public holidays depend on the state: Labour Day is in October in South Australia and in March in Victoria. FairCheck finds a holiday in the pay week on its own, from the state the employer is registered in (the ABN register, or the address printed on the payslip). A business registered in one state can employ people in another, so whenever a public holiday finding rests on that guess, the check card names the holiday and the state used and asks "Does this person work in SA?":

• "Yes, SA" confirms it. The holiday stays priced.
• "No, they work in" another state, then "Re-check": the payslip is checked against that state's holidays instead. A holiday that isn't one there is checked as an ordinary day.

Either answer re-checks the payslip and is stored with who answered and when. It also counts for this person's later payslips, so it's asked once.

Was a meal supplied on the overtime days?

Most awards pay a meal allowance when overtime runs past a minimum length and the employer doesn't supply a meal. The minimum depends on the award: more than 1 hour under the Retail and SCHADS awards, more than 1.5 hours under the Clerks award, more than 2 hours under the Hospitality award, and 2 hours or more under the Road Transport award. Many awards also don't pay it when the overtime was notified ahead of time (for example the day before), or when the employee could reasonably go home for a meal.

When a payslip pays overtime but no meal allowance, the "Allowances you should be getting" card (code OVERTIME_MEAL_ALLOWANCE_UNVERIFIED) says how many days it may be owed for and asks "Was a meal supplied on those overtime days?". Where the award has exceptions, they are listed under the question and the answers read accordingly:

• "Yes, a meal was supplied" (or "A meal was supplied, or one of those applies") — nothing is owed and the flag clears.
• "No meal was supplied" (or "No meal, and none of those apply") — see below.
• "Not sure" — the answer is recorded, and the amount stays beside the gap as "+ up to".

Any answer re-checks the payslip and is stored with who answered and when.

A "no" turns into a shortfall (OVERTIME_MEAL_ALLOWANCE_UNPAID, counted in the gap) only when FairCheck holds the award's minimum and every overtime line on the payslip names its day, so each day can be measured against it. Only the days that reach the minimum count. The evidence says which minimum was used ("Counted when overtime was at least 2h in a day"). Otherwise the card stays "worth checking", saying it can't tell which days ran long enough, and the amount stays beside the gap. A half hour of overtime never earns the allowance.

How much this is worth

"How sure we are", in the breakdown, says what this answer is worth: what it could catch, given what FairCheck was told. A higher tier means the answer rests on more evidence.

How the tier is decided:

• Tier 0 when no award or classification is set.
• Tier 1 needs an award, a classification and the hours printed on the payslip.
• Tier 2 adds either an estimated pattern (a typical week) or a standing allowance or break profile from the person's work profile.
• Tier 3 needs hours FairCheck can stand behind for this period.
• Tier 4 is not yet reachable from a payslip check.

Evidence versus a plan

Only evidence may claim dollars. Which hours count as evidence:

• Hours supplied for this period — a roster you typed, structured pairs, a timesheet paste, a payroll feed, or hours attested through Check a pay run — are evidence and may claim dollars.
• Approved timesheet shifts from a connector are evidence. Rostered shifts are a plan, and an unapproved timesheet shift is treated the same way. If any shift in the period is a plan, the whole period is treated as an estimate.
• A typical week is an estimate. It is enough to flag, never enough to claim a dollar figure.
• Hours adopted from what the payslip itself prints are useful for pricing the rates paid, but they are never evidence of unpaid time, so they flag and never claim.

The gate is applied per rule. A base rate printed on the payslip and below the floor is arithmetic on evidence the document itself carries, so Tier 1 may still report that shortfall in dollars.

When the qualification step had to guess, a "What we assumed" line follows, with each assumption in the qualification's own words.

How this was decided

The "How this was decided" row in the breakdown is one sentence saying what the pay was checked against and whose decision that was. Depending on how the award and level were set, it reads along the lines of:

• "Checked against , which confirmed directly on ." — set by someone who knew.
• "Checked against , which confirmed on ." — confirmed in the wizard.
• "Based on the award selected: on ." — chosen from a list.
• "Checked against , as recorded on this person's record on ."

When the award or level was guessed or assumed, the sentence turns amber and reads either "We guessed from the pay rate on the payslip, and accepted the guess." or "We assumed because it was the closest fit to what we were told.", followed by "Why: …" where reasons were recorded, and always ending "Check this before relying on the result."

Award for this payslip

This card shows the award and classification this one payslip is priced against, and where that came from:

• "From 's record. Change it there and every payslip of theirs follows." — the normal case; the payslip inherits the person's award.
• "Set on this payslip only — 's record says ." with an "Override" pill — this payslip has its own award.
• " has no award set. Set one on their record — it applies to all their payslips."
• "This payslip isn't linked to an employee, so there's no record to inherit an award from."