Although he continues to be paid a retainer as a member of its elite panel, he has not received any match fees for the past year.
Hair is suing the ICC for racial discrimination at the Central London Employment Tribunal.
He told the hearing that if he had umpired his customary allocation of Tests and one day internationals, he would have earned about US$ 90,000-100,000 in 2007.
"My projected earnings from fees in ICC associate matches in this year would now appear to be a maximum of US$30,000," he said.
"Since returning to Australia I have been trying to find permanent employment without success.
"I have applied for positions at the Australian Rugby League and with a charity as a fund-raising manager, but I have been unsuccessful on each occasion. I do not have any confidence in being able to find a suitable place in the workforce for some considerable time, if at all.
"I feel devastated and let down by the ICC. Since August 20 2006 (the fourth day of the final Test at the Oval when he accused Pakistan of ball-tampering) no-one from ICC has shown any concern for my welfare or for the welfare of my family.
"My family has suffered the pain of reading headlines such as disgraced former umpire' and 'sacked former umpire' and I have found it difficult to cope with daily life in the knowledge that I have not been given a reasonable opportunity to defend myself or make a representation to the Board in person."
Hair, who was cross-examined in the afternoon by Michael Beloff, QC for the ICC, said that he was aware it was likely his contract with the ICC would not be renewed after March and claimed he had not received any structured plan from the governing body about his future.
"There has never been any criticism about my match management capabilities by either Doug Cowie, the ICC Umpire Manager, the match referees or the captains," he told the hearing.
"I find it incredulous that an ICC sub-committee adopted a position leading to my removal from umpiring top level cricket without me being given a chance to defend the charges against me or even to know what I am alleged to have done wrong.
"Even more astonishing to me is the fact that the ICC maintains there are no minutes or transcript of either the sub-committee's discussion or the subsequent Board discussion or the voting on the resolution," he said.
"I asked Malcolm Speed (the chief executive of the ICC) if it could possibly be performance related but he agreed that my performances since joining the elite panel had been generally very good and I had been continually ranked in the top three umpires.
"I was at a loss to understand how my career could possibly be effectively ended unless it was by a racially motivated and racially discriminated process."
Beloff, who erroneously put to Hair that it was a unanimous decision by the ICC to demote him - England and Australia were opposed - asked him about the passages in his autobiography concerning Muttiah Muralitharan, the Sri Lankan spinner whom he called for throwing, and asked whether it was right to call his action 'diabolical'?
Hair replied that he was applying the Laws of Cricket as they existed at the time.