National Workplace Lawyers : Employment Lawyer : OHS Lawyer : Unfair Dismissal : Discrimination Lawyer : Industrial Lawyer

News Feed

Changes to the Unfair Dismissal Remuneration Cap, National Minimum Wage, Minimum Award Rates and Filing Fees

Introduction New award rates, unfair dismissal thresholds and other changes in the employment arena have been announced, some of which commence from 1 July 2024. These are some of the main changes.   Unfair dismissal threshold (high income threshold) and maximum compensation cap The high income threshold will increase from the previous $167,500 to $175,000 from 1 July 2024. This means employees whose annual rate of earnings is $175,000 (which excludes statutory superannuation) or more, and who are not covered by an award or enterprise agreement, are unable to pursue an unfair dismissal application. The change also means that the maximum compensation that can be awarded for an unfair dismissal claim will increase from $83,750 to $87,500. National minimum wage The national minimum wage will increase to $915.90 per week or to $24.10 per hour (calculated on the basis of a 38-hour week for a full-time emp...

26 June 2024

FWC Annual Report 2022-23

The Fair Work Commission’s 2022-23 Annual Report available here includes several noteworthy points. We have summarised some key points below. During the 2022-23 year: there were 31,523 applications lodged with the FWC, compared to 34,122 applications in 2021-22. The following graph summarises the types of applications lodged with the FWC:   Of the finalised matters, 50% were finalised within 5 weeks and 90% were finalised within 13 weeks; 33 days is the median time from lodgment to conciliation in unfair dismissal applications; and 12 days is the median time from lodgment to agreement approvals without undertakings. The following table provides a comparison between the years 2022-23 and 2021-22: Description 2022-23 2021-22 Difference ...

18 October 2023

Employee who was terminated before first day of work brings dismissal dispute

In this case the employer raised a jurisdictional objection to an employee’s general protections application involving dismissal by arguing that it could not have dismissed the worker because her employment had not yet commenced.   The facts in the case involved a casual employee who had been “allocated” but not yet worked their first shift and therefore no wages had been paid. The Commission explained whilst the performance of work and payment of wages would generally be relevant considerations in determining the existence of an employment relationship and the absence of either could suggest no employment relationship, these are not the only factors and all of the surrounding circumstances should be taken into account. The Commission considered the following factors, amongst others, pointed towards the existence of an employment relationship: The signed contract of employment made express reference to an ‘employment relationship’ b...

31 July 2023