News Feed
It'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 2014No obligation to co-operate with fitness for work assessment - not so says Fair Work
Introduction A recent Fair Work Commission (the Commission) decision confirms employees are, in general, obliged to co-operate with an employer's reasonable direction to assist with fitness for work assessments. Background Ms Columbine was engaged as a Correctional Officer (CO) with the GEO Group Australia Pty Ltd (GEO). In September 2011, in separate incidents, Ms Columbine suffered work related hip and shoulder injuries. Ms Columbine returned to work in modified duties. In March 2014, Ms Columbine's modified duties came to an end and there was no other position available in which she could work with her medical restrictions. In May 2014, Ms Columbine produced a medical certificate from her general practitioner (GP) advising she could undertake work for four hours a day in her pre-injury role with standing and walking limitations. The next day, GEO forwarded Ms Columbine a letter advising it was considering terminating her...
5 December 2014Flagrant breaches of post employment duties may result in an injunction even when there are no post employment restraints
Recently the Federal Court of Australia (the Court) ordered an interlocutory injunction restraining an employee from dealing with his former employer's clients, even though the employee was not subject to any express post employment restraints. Background The employer, APT Technology Pty Ltd (APT), provides mechanical engineering consultancy services throughout Australia. The employee's contract of employment contained an express confidential information term. The employee was summarily dismissed on 16 June 2014 for setting up and conducting a rival business in direct competition to APT during his employment, and using APT's confidential information. The employee managed to secure many of APT's clients. APT, even after approaching the clients, was unable to successfully return their business. The employee acknowledged the breaches but alleged: that by the end of July 2014 he had ceased using the confidential information; and for t...
19 November 2014