Author: PWLadmin

  • Fair Work Ombudsman Investigation – Unregistered Apprentice and Underpayment

    Image

    A teenager, employed as a carpenter, was allegedly underpaid more than $8,000 by a construction company in Queensland, according to a further Fair Work Ombudsman prosecution.

    JDAC Pty Ltd (JDAC), the employer and construction company, allegedly paid the full-time carpenter apprentice rates between June 2008 and February 2009, despite the fact that the employee was not formally registered as an apprentice. The employee was aged 18 and 19 years of age at the time.

    Apprentice rates may only be paid by an employer to an employee when the employee and employer have formally lodged an apprenticeship contract, and the employee is formally registered as an apprentice.

    JDAC allegedly paid the employed carpenter between $7.46 and $7.73 per hour, while he was entitled to be paid in excess of $15 per hour.

    The employee lodged a complaint with the Office of the Fair Work Ombudsman and as a result has had part of the alleged underpayment rectified.

    An order seeking the repayment of the remaining money owed shall be sought in the Brisbane Magistrates Court in May this year.

     

  • Independent Investigations in Your Workplace – Bullying, Harassment and Discrimination – Training in Your Workplace

    Brooke Pendlebury conducts investigations in your workplace to assist you in managing bullying and harassment or discrimination complaints, reduce the risk of escalation of these complaints through early intervention, and provide thorough, efficient and independent investigation findings, when necessary.

    A full and thorough investigation provides your workplace with the information needed to make effective business decisions about individuals and teams helping you target resources to improve employee relations and team culture, as well as ensure compliance with the Work Health & Safety Act 2011 (NSW).

    Brooke offers the following services:

    • Full consulting services with respect to management of staff and conflict.
    • Independent investigations into complaints between staff and management, including bullying, harassment, discrimination, victimisation.  Detailed reports are provided to your organisation at the conclusion of the investigation.
    • Supported investigations for organisations that require guidance and support through the process of internally invetsigating complaints.
    • Training in investigation skills to help your staff managing complaints internally.
    • Training in prevention and zero-tolerance, and gradual workplace culture shifts, away from bullying and harassing to respectful and productive.
    • Mediations to assist staff overcome conflict situtaions.

    Please, call Brooke today to discuss how investigations and training may assist your workplace.

  • Performance Management and Dismissal

    Performance Management and Dismissal

    Fair Work Australia has found it was unfair for HJ Heinz Company Australia to dismiss a Sales Manager who refused to be performance managed because he feared it was designed to trigger his dismissal by the Company.

    In ordering the reinstatement of the former WA Sales Manager, employed by Heinz from 1983 until his dismissal in August 2011, FWA Deputy President McCarthy said the performance grounds relied on by management had been “imperfectly, if not carelessly, formed for an employer of Heinz’s size“.

    One of the reasons Heinz management gave the Tribunal for insisting on an individual performance management plan for the Manager was a low score in his annual review.  However, this score was not an individual performance rating, but a Company-wide rating that gave all employees the same score.  DP McCarthy said, “It could not be a justifiable reason or even part of a reason for the development of a plan solely for [the manager]”.
    The Sales Manager repeatedly asked for details of the performance concerns and expressed his fear that the Company was going to use this process to force him out of his job.  Ultimately, he was given until 17 August 2011 to sign the performance management plan or be dismissed.

    Heinz argued that the dismissal occurred because the Manager refused to take part in discussions about performance concerns or even sign up to an individual performance management plan.  However, Deputy President McCarthy said that he did not accept Heinz’s argument, but believed the dismissal was instead based on a possibly flawed view that his performance required improvement.

    Deputy President McCarthy said Heinz had not satisfied him that reinstatement was not possible and ordered that it appoint Mr. Moretti to a position on no less favourable terms and conditions than his former position, and repay the remuneration he had lost between his dismissal and the reinstatement.

    (Frank Moretti v HJ Heinz Company Australia Ltd [2012] FWA 1016 (7 February 2012))

  • Falsified Medical Certificate Justified Dismissal

    Fair Work Australia has recently upheld Westpac’s dismissal of a customer service employee who tendered a falsified medical certificate.

    Commissioner Deegan said Westpac had no alternative to dismissing the employee after she falsified the medical certificate and then alleged workplace bullying when confronted with the allegation.

    Commissioner Deegan said she was satisfied there was a valid reason for the termination of the employee’s employment and that she had been afforded procedural fairness.

    Commissioner Deegan said, “I did not find the [employee’s] evidence persuasive in relation to her reasons for falsifying the medical certificate.”

     “Her evidence was contradictory and her story changed whenever she was shown that her version was not supported by the evidence.”

    Ropafadzo Tokoda v Westpac Banking Corporation [2012] FWA 1262 (14 February 2012)

  • Falsified Medical Certificate Justified Dismissal

    Fair Work Australia has upheld Westpac’s dismissal of a customer service employee who tendered a falsified medical certificate.

    Commissioner Deegan said Westpac had no alternative to dismissing the employee after she falsified the medical certificate and then alleged workplace bullying when confronted with the allegation.

    Commissioner Deegan said she was satisfied there was a valid reason for the termination of the employee’s employment and that she had been afforded procedural fairness.

    Commissioner Deegan said, “I did not find the [employee’s] evidence persuasive in relation to her reasons for falsifying the medical certificate.”

     

    “Her evidence was contradictory and her story changed whenever she was shown that her version was not supported by the evidence.”

    (Ropafadzo Tokoda v Westpac Banking Corporation [2012] FWA 1262 (14 February 2012)

  • Falsified Medical Certificate Justified Dismissal

    Fair Work Australia has upheld Westpac’s dismissal of a customer service employee who tendered a falsified medical certificate.

  • 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“.

  • Mediation Tips

    MEDIATION

    Mediation is a process in which a mediator, independent of the disputing parties, facilitates the negotiation between parties, of their own solution to the dispute by assisting them to:

    –         isolate the issues in dispute,

    –         develop options for their resolution, and

    –         reach an agreement which accommodates the interests and needs of all the parties.

    The mediator does not impose a solution upon the parties.

    Tips on how to prepare for mediation:

    –         Many clients will be experiencing mediation for the first time, so educate them about the process and the roles of the mediator and legal representatives,

    –         Encourage clients to participate in joint sessions, and re-assure them that they can call for a break if needed,

    –         Have the client prepare an opening statement in the client’s own words,

    –         Allow the parties time to discuss non-legal issues before they start to talk about agreement,

    –         Tolerate emotion and tolerate discussion that is not rational.

  • Your OH&S Obligations from January 2012

    You may be aware that substantial changes are being made to the current Occupational Health and Safety laws.  The changes are an attempt to create ‘harmonisation’ across individual States and Territories that have historically had their own OH&S legislation.  A uniform approach to the new laws has been agreed to by all States, which will bring about a greater level of certainty and reduced costs to businesses.

    For workers, this will mean the same rights, entitlements and protection across Australia regardless of their place of work.  For businesses that operate across State and Territory borders, it will mean being subject to the same laws in each jurisdiction, creating a more streamlined and less complex OH&S process.

    The model laws include the new Work Health and Safety Act (WHS Act) and the Work Health and Safety Regulations (WHS Regulations).  They will be supported by national Codes of Practice.  All jurisdictions had committed to enacting the model Act by January 2012, however at this stage only ACT, NSW and QLD have passed the legislation.  WA and VIC have requested an extension of time (to 2013), but now is still a great time to review your current OH&S practices and begin aligning them to the new system.

    Some key changes are set out below:

    1. The new notion of a ‘PCBU’

    A PCBU is a “Person Conducting a Business or Undertaking” and will replace the term “employer” in the context of these matters. This is because the WHS Act now extends beyond traditional employer / employee relationships to include new and evolving work arrangements and risks.

    The PCBU is the principal duty holder for a business.

    2. The new definition of “worker”

    A person is a worker if they carry out work in any capacity for a PCBU, including work as:

    • an employee;
    • a contractor or subcontractor;
    • an employee of a contractor or subcontractor;
    • an employee of a labour hire company who has been assigned to work in the business or undertaking;
    • an outworker;
    • an apprentice or trainee;
    • a student gaining work experience; or
    • a volunteer.

    3. An increased “duty to consult”

    A PCBU must consult with workers when:

    • identifying hazards presenting risks;
    • making decisions about eliminating or minimising risks;
    • making decisions about the adequacy of facilities for the welfare of workers;
    • proposing changes that may affect the health or safety of workers; or
    • setting procedures for resolving health and safety issues;

    An intention of the Act is to ensure engagement and leadership in WHS management.  This has led to harsher penalties in relation to officer liability.  An “officer” is a senior executive who makes, or participates in making, decisions that affect the whole or a substantial part of a business or undertaking (Section 9, Corporations Act (Cth)).  Officers will be required to exercise “due diligence” to ensure that their business complies with its safety obligations. This means that officers may be liable for breaches of safety without an incident/accident even occurring, with penalties potentially including fines and imprisonment.

    Some further general tips to help you in preparing for the transition:

    • Consider the impact the new legislation may have on your current policies and procedures (eg. consultation arrangements, training, etc).
    • Undertake a gap analysis of your current health and safety system to determine what changes are required to achieve compliance.
    • Understand the necessary revisions to your current policies and procedures
    • Consider who in your organisation may be considered an “officer” and ensure each has a clear understanding on their responsibilities under the model Act.
    • Develop a more robust consultation process, given the expanded application of the duty to consult. Make sure that you include all relevant workers.
    • Consult with your workers about what is happening and any changes that will need to be made in readiness for the new legislation.
    • Implement changes and train workers in any new policies.
    • Monitor key developments in the jurisdictions where your business operates, and introduce them as required.
  • Work Related Driving and the Safety Issues

    Manage the risks associated with work related driving.

    Employer responsibilities

    Employer’s have a responsibility to identify, assess, control, monitor and review the risks associated with work-related driving, and consult with employees on work related driving occupational health and safety (OHS) issues.  Specific requirements of road traffic laws also have to be met and cover matters such as vehicle roadworthiness, driver licensing and road rules, e.g. speed limits. Where applicable to the organisation, ensure the OHS management system includes:

    • purchasing and maintaining a safe and roadworthy fleet
    • ensuring employees have the relevant appropriate driver licenses
    • scheduling work to account for speed limits and managing fatigue
    • providing information and training on work related driving safety
    • monitoring and supervision of work related driving safety program

    Employee responsibilities

    Employee duties include:

    • holding a current, valid driver’s license
    • abiding by all road rules, e.g. speed limits, not driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol, seat belts, not using mobile phones while driving
    • refraining from driving if impaired by tiredness or medication
    • reporting any incidents required by the employer’s program
    • carrying out any routine vehicle checks required by the employer

    OHS risk management system for work related driving

    Start by developing policy/ies on work related driving. This can include policies on vehicle selection and safe driving.

    In addition, procedures should be developed such as:

    • fatigue management
    • area specific safety requirements e.g. country driving
    • what to do in emergencies
    • regular checking of worker and vehicle credentials e.g. checking the driver’s licence is still in force

    When developing policy and procedures, make sure there is consultation with employees and areas of the organisation which may be able to add insight to the issues.

    Stay up-to-date with the latest safety information on vehicle types.  Have procedures which ensure the right vehicles are purchased for the job, e.g. will you need to transport clients with mobility issues.  Have regular, preventative maintenance procedures in place for your vehicles.  Consider driving risks when scheduling work, trip times, traffic congestion, routes, weather conditions.

    Monitor the safe driving system to ensure it is effective.  Regularly review policy and procedures .  Remind workers to report driving related incidents and collect information on these incidents to ensure effective risk management.