Adverse Action Claim Fails – Employee Just Misbehaving…

The Federal Magistrates Court has found that Queensland Newspapers summarily dismissed one its printers because of repeated misbehavior, rather than his exercising of workplace rights, as was alleged.

The printer, Mr. Gofton, had 34 years’ service.  He claimed the Company dismissed him after he sought to access the supplementary personal leave entitlement pursuant to the relevant industrial award, and when his request was refused, Mr. gofton complained about the refusal.  He argued the Company also forced him to attend a meeting with managers after the refusal.

However, Federal Magistrate Jarrett found he was not entitled to the leave, as he had failed to fulfil the conditions for payment provided in the  award.  His Honour said the printer had failed to provide sufficient certification, and in any case the leave was only available for “illness and non-compensable injury“.

The printer had sought the 9 days of leave when he returned to work after taking compassionate leave following the death of his mother, as he had exhausted all of his personal/carers’ leave during her illness. The Company’s HR manager, Ms. Hawkes, rejected the application on the basis that personal leave was not intended to replace compassionate leave.

The court’s ruling meant two bases of Mr. Gofton’s adverse action claim failed, as his lack of entitlement to the leave meant the Company lawfully took adverse action when it refused to pay his leave claim.  Further, the court ruled that the Company had in fact adequately responded to Mr. Gofton’s complaint about the non-payment of the leave, and not failed to adequately respond to his complaint, as alleged by Mr. Gofton.

His Honour also found that the Company did not require the printer to attend a meeting with its Operations Manager, and it did not summarily dismiss him because he made, or pursued, his supplementary leave claim. His Honour accepted that the “real reason” for the Company’s dismissal of the printer was his “unacceptable behaviour over a period of time and about which he had been warned“.