A long-standing superannuation carve-out affecting cleaners, housekeepers and nannies has come under renewed pressure, with the Super Members Council (SMC) using a Senate inquiry to push for the removal of a rule it says is denying tens of thousands of workers retirement savings.
The industry body has urged the federal government to abolish the exemption that leaves domestic workers employed in private homes without guaranteed super if they work fewer than 30 hours a week for the same employer, arguing the policy is outdated and disproportionately harms women.
Its latest analysis estimates about 37,000 domestic workers would be caught by the rule in 2026-27, with women accounting for 86 per cent of that cohort.
According to the Council, those workers are missing out on almost $150 million in super contributions in a single year, including about $126 million lost by women alone. On average, each affected worker would forgo almost $4,000 in annual super.
The push comes as the Senate Economics Legislation Committee examines the laws behind the exclusion of part-time domestic workers, giving fresh visibility to a rule the Council says no longer reflects the modern super system.
While the exemption was originally designed to stop fees from eating into low-balance accounts, the Council argued that rationale has weakened now that fee protections apply to smaller balances.
The body said removing the 30-hour threshold for domestic workers in private homes would align those roles with the broader workforce and help address structural inequities in retirement outcomes.
Its modelling suggests a typical part-time domestic cleaner could retire with more than $130,000 extra in super if the exclusion was removed, translating into about $4,500 a year in additional retirement income and lowering reliance on the Age Pension.
The campaign also ties into the Council’s broader criticism of the same 30-hour rule as it applies to younger workers. Previous analysis from the group found 515,000 under-18 workers would miss out on a combined $405 million in super this financial year because they are excluded when working fewer than 30 hours a week for one employer.
That threshold has become a growing target in super policy debates, particularly because of its impact on the gender gap. The Council has pointed to earlier findings showing women retire with 25 per cent less super than men and argued the disparity can begin from the first years of paid work.
It has also been estimated that guaranteeing super for all under-18 workers could leave a typical teenage girl with nearly $2,500 more in super by age 18, which could grow to around $11,000 by retirement through investment returns.
“Cleaners, housekeepers and nannies are doing essential, paid work, yet the law still treats them as second-class citizens when it comes to super — and that burden falls overwhelmingly on women,” says the Council’s CEO Misha Schubert.
“When something is outdated, you fix it. Fixing these outdated laws would help close the gender super gap and boost the retirement savings of thousands of hardworking Australians.”
