In
light of the recent 7-Eleven scandal surrounding the exploitation and
underpayment of its workers, the Chairman and Chief Executive Office of
7-Eleven have announced their resignations.
The
lesson to be learned by all employers, regardless of the size, scope or
structure of their business, is that there are significant financial and
non-financial consequences for employers who breach their obligations to employees.
Regardless
of their visa or residency status, employees in Australia are entitled to basic
rights, such as payment of minimum...
Thursday, 22 October 2015
Thursday, 17 September 2015
Even a small mistake can have big consequences for employers
Coffey
Projects (Australia) recently learned the hard way that there are serious
consequences with providing employees incorrect information in relation to
their workplace rights and entitlements.
Despite
employing a Human Resources manager, Coffey Projects relied on outdated
policies that did not reflect amendments to the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth)
and provided an employee with incorrect information about his parental leave
entitlements.
The
outdated policy incorrectly stated that parental leave was...
The Standard Employment Contract: A Cautionary Tale
It really is a case of ‘buyer beware’ with
many business owners downloading or buying standard employment contracts and
templates online in an effort to save time and money.
Small businesses with limited human resources
training are turning to Google and other search engines instead of an
employment lawyer.
Unfortunately, these standard templates are
often outdated and in contravention of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth).
Some documents offer less benefits than the
employee is entitled to receive and...
Did you know that as an employer, you can be held responsible for your workers even when they are not working?
The Fair Work Commission recently heard a
case in which three employees sought an order to stop bullying at their
workplace. Their employer, DP World Maritime Limited, sought to strike out
their application on the basis that the bullying behaviour took place when the
employees were not ‘at work’.
Numerous employees had engaged in telephone
calls and Facebook messages concerning their colleagues’ union memberships and
made derogatory comments to and about them. These exchanges took place both
during and outside of office hours...
When does a workplace entitlement becomes a contractual right?
An
employer who failed to follow its own workplace policies has been successfully
sued for breach of contract in the Full Court of the Federal Court.
The applicant in this case was a second
officer on a supply ship and employed by the respondent, Farstadt Shipping
(Indian Pacific) Pty Ltd.
Like most employers, the respondent had a
Workplace Harassment and Discrimination Policy in place which set out the
procedure for dealing with complaints. When the applicant made a complaint of
sexual discrimination,...
Pitfalls of lack of process
Earlier this year, two cases heard in the
Fair Work Commission demonstrated what can occur when proper process is not
followed relating to termination of employment
In Lyberopoulos v Reidwell Investments BT
Pty Ltd T/A Coco Cubano Blacktown [2015]
FWC 4256, the employee was employed for less than seven months before
she was summarily dismissed.
The employer claimed she failed to comply
with their procedures and did not follow directions. The parties contested the
facts of the case and Senior Deputy President...
Monday, 2 March 2015
Workplace Bullying - Can a business be responsible for bullying outside of work hours?
The
Fair Work Commission recently heard a case in which three employees sought an
order to stop bullying at their workplace. Their employer, DP World Maritime
Limited, sought to strike out their application on the basis that the bullying
behaviour took place when the employees were not ‘at work’.
Numerous
employees had engaged in telephone calls and Facebook messages concerning their
colleagues’ union memberships and made derogatory comments to and about them.
These exchanges took place both during and outside of office hours in several
locations...
Workplace Policies Traps for Employers
An employer who did not follow
its own workplace policies has been successfully sued for breach of contract in
the Full Court of the Federal Court.
The
worker was a second officer on a supply ship and employed by Farstadt Shipping
(Indian Pacific) Pty Ltd.
Like
most employers, the company had a Workplace Harassment and Discrimination
Policy in place which set out the procedure for dealing with complaints. When
the worker made a complaint of sexual discrimination, the procedures were not
followed.
The
Court had to determine whether...
Wednesday, 25 February 2015
Solidarity forever? Not quite
Solidarity forever? Not quite
An inexperienced
union official employed for an important project to further the union’s aims
was sacked when the union’s leadership discovered that his political opinion
was different from theirs.
The official
contested his dismissal as a breach of his general protections and was awarded
$120,000.00 compensation.
If you want to know
more about the decision in Sayed v Construction,
Forestry, Mining and Energy Union [2015] FCA 27 and read my commentary on
it email me at gdoran@nevettford.com.au
The...
Sunday, 22 February 2015
When is a warning not a warning? When it’s a chat
When is a warning not a
warning? When it’s a chat
A worker was awarded nearly
$29,000.00 in compensation from his employer after the Fair Work Commission
found his dismissal for serious misconduct to be harsh and unreasonable: Anderson v Thiess Pty Ltd [2014] FWC
6568.
Ronald Anderson, 65, worked
for Thiess Pty Ltd in Queensland for over a decade until he was summarily
dismissed in June 2013 for forwarding a highly offensive email about Muslim
radicals to a group of co-workers using his work email.
Thiess...
Monday, 16 February 2015
Ready, aim...don't fire!
A small business owner has been
fined almost $30,000 for unfairly dismissing an employee.
Acupuncture Australia Pty Ltd
summarily dismissed a sales assistant for allegedly stealing from the business.
The employee had worked for the company for three years when the managing
director began to suspect her of theft. The sales assistant was sacked on the spot
and reported to the police, despite a lack of proof of any crime.
The managing director was unable
to provide any evidence to the Fair Work Commission of theft or fraud...
Tuesday, 10 February 2015
Tweet or Twit: you be the judge
Tweet or Twit: you be the judge
In early 2014 I
wrote about the risk to employment from the use of social media out of hours
but where critical comments of an employer were made.
A recent decision of
the United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal: Game Retail Ltd v Laws [2014] UKEAT 0188_14_0311 demonstrates that use of social media,
which an employer judges as inappropriate can lead to the termination of
employment...
Thursday, 15 January 2015
Employers on notice about age discrimination
In a landmark court ruling in April 2014, relating to age
discrimination in the workplace the Federal Circuit Court in Brisbane imposed
penalties on a restaurant and its directors for terminating the employment of a
worker on his sixty fifth birthday: Fair
Work Ombudsman v Theravanish Investments Pty Ltd & Ors [2014] FCCA
1170.
The employee had worked for the restaurant since 1996 as a
full time employee. Upon returning from long service leave in 2011, he was told
he would be placed on part-time employment.
In the lead up to his...
Conduct unbecoming means no remedy
An order for
reinstatement or the payment of compensation as the remedies for unfair
dismissal are discretionary and not mandatory: Jeffrey v IBM Australia [2014] FWC 8166 is a case in point.
After long periods of
absence because of illness IBM dismissed Ms Jeffrey, a business analyst, for
the reason that on medical grounds she would not be able to fulfil the inherent
requirements of her role for the foreseeable future.
The Commission found
that the medical evidence upon which IBM relied did not support that conclusion
and therefore found...
Monday, 12 January 2015
Choosey can be costly
The issue of redundancy looms where
an employer loses work to a competitor as part of a tender process.
Often what occurs is that the
employees of the employer, which has lost the work can apply and are accepted
as employees of the employer, which has won the work.
Where an employer is able to
redeploy an employee either within its business or obtain work for the employee
with another employer, and the employee does not co-operate in that process,
the employee may not be entitled to a redundancy payment if employment is
ultimately terminated....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)