News Feed
Do you need to be "at work" to be bullied under the Fair Work Act?
In an important decision, a full bench of the Fair Work Commission (the Commission) has provided some guidance on when a worker is "at work" for the purposes of a bullying complaint. Background Under the Fair Work Act's anti-bullying regime, the Commission may make an order to stop bullying if it is satisfied that a worker has been "bullied at work". The term "at work" is defined as "while the worker is at work". In this matter, three employees (the Applicants) of DP World Melbourne Limited (DP World) and members of the Maritime Union of Australia (MUA), each made an application against both DP World and the MUA, for an order to stop bullying conduct. It was alleged that DP World and the MUA had engaged in various forms of unreasonable behaviour including: MUA took no action to prevent two of the Applicants being called "laggers" and failed to advise members that some allegations against one of the Applic...
28 January 2015Former employees do not have access to the dispute resolution clause in an enterprise agreement
Recently, the Fair Work Commission (the Commission) found that employees whose employment had been terminated could not subsequently enliven the dispute resolution clause under the relevant enterprise agreement. Background Several former employees requested the Commission to arbitrate a dispute between them and their former employer, Patrick Projects Pty Ltd (Patrick Projects) pursuant to the Patrick Projects Pty Ltd AMC Cargo Handling Agreement 2012-2105 (the Agreement) on the alleged failure of Patrick Projects to provide the employees with training. Five of the employees had been terminated for redundancy reasons on 20 March 2014. They made an application to the Commission over a month later requesting it to deal with a dispute between them and Patrick Projects under the Agreement's dispute settlement provision. Findings The Commission found it had no jurisdiction to hear the dispute lodged b...
5 December 2014It's not about the whether the drugs affected the performance of your duties but whether you complied with the policy
Recently, a Full Bench of the Fair Work Commission (the Full Bench) affirmed there was a valid reason for the dismissal of an employee who contravened a zero tolerance drug and alcohol workplace policy and reversed the initial finding that the dismissal was unfair. Background The employee was engaged as a ferry master with Harbour City Ferries Pty Ltd (Harbour City). On the evening of 24 July 2013 the employee had smoked marijuana for pain relief purposes and was not due to work the following day as he was on annual leave. He received a call from Harbour City, and was asked to replace a master who was on sick leave. The employee had replaced other masters during this period and did not refuse the shift on the basis of drug intake. The employee was also aware of Harbour City's drug and alcohol policy and its application. There was an accident while the employee was performing the duties when he crashed the ferry into a wha...
5 December 2014