News Feed
Pregnant employee receives more than $235,000 in compensation and penalties - cause to pause?
Background The employee commenced employment with R & C Piccoli Investments Pty Ltd (Piccoli) in 2000 as a photographer. Robert and Christine Piccoli were managers of the business and owners of a 50% share each in Piccoli. The managers' son, also worked for the business. It was intended that the managers' son and the employee would take over the business upon the retirement of the current business owners at the end of 2012. On 28 August 2012, the employee advised Piccoli that she was 10 weeks pregnant. She further advised that she was flexible regarding the length of her maternity leave and expressed a desire to initially return to work on a part time basis after the birth of the child. On 30 August 2012 and over the following weeks, Piccoli through a series of meetings and correspondence, undertook a course of action including advising the employee that: they were concerned that due to the pregnancy she would not be as dedicated ...
20 May 2014First Road Safety Remuneration Order took effect on 1 May 2014
What is a Road Safety Remuneration Order? A Road Safety Remuneration Order is a legally enforceable instrument which sets out minimum entitlements and requirements for certain drivers, employers, hirers and supply chain participants in the road transport industry. The first Road Safety Remuneration Order entitled the Road Transport and Distribution and Long Distance Operation Road Safety Remuneration Order 2014 (the Order) commenced on 1 May 2014 and expires on 30 April 2018. Unless an existing entitlement for instance, an entitlement under an enterprise agreement, is more beneficial, the Order applies in addition to any modern award entitlement that would otherwise apply. In the coming months, the Road Safety Tribunal will, as part of its second annual works program, be reviewing the following sectors: long distance operations in the private transport industry; and cash in the transit industry. ...
16 May 2014Federal Court confirms employers' implied right to obtain a medical report regarding an ill employee
The recent Federal Court decision of AIPA v Qantas [2014] FCA 32 confirms an employer has an implied right at law to obtain medical information about an employee's ability to undertake their duties. Background The employee, engaged as a pilot, submitted a medical certificate stating he was suffering from clinical depression and certifying him unfit for work for 3 months. The employee subsequently submitted a further medical certificate which provided little or no information stating that he suffered from a "medical condition" and would be unfit for work for a further 3 months. On four occasions, Qantas requested the employee obtain a medical report from his treating medical practitioner indicating his diagnosis, prognosis, capacity to return to pre-injury duties and the anticipated time frame. Qantas also requested the employee attend a meeting regarding the matter. The employee failed to comply with the requests. Qantas advised the employee that fail...
8 May 2014