The relationship between employers and casual employees is a significant aspect of the modern workforce. Recently, a case brought before the Fair Work Commission (FWC) shed light on the treatment of a casual employee working as a brow and lash artist for a beauty services company. The employee, who had been consistently working shifts, found herself removed from all future shifts after a hospital admission due to a domestic violence incident. This action prompted the FWC to deem it a deliberate decision and a dismissal.
A recent legal case adjudicated by the Supreme Court of Queensland has provided insights into the complexities surrounding an employee’s termination from a diagnostic imaging organisation. The case revolved around allegations of workplace harassment, victimisation, and inappropriate behaviour, leading to significant ramifications for the parties involved.
When it comes to terminating an employee, most people immediately think of unfair dismissal. While unfair dismissal is indeed a prominent legal concern, there is another, arguably more hazardous, area of employment law: General Protections.
Let’s delve into the differences between unfair dismissal and General Protections, and why General Protections can present significant challenges for employers.
In a recent case before the Fair Work Commission (FWC), the consequences of failing to follow proper dismissal procedures were brought into sharp focus. The case involved a long-term employee who was abruptly dismissed following a heated discussion about overtime pay, leading to a ruling of unfair dismissal.
The Fair Work Commission recently dealt with a significant case that raises questions about employment contracts and the rights of employers and employees. The case centred around whether an employee’s decision to begin a new job while on extended leave from her current employer could be considered a repudiation of her employment contract, and whether the subsequent actions by the employer constituted unfair dismissal under the Fair Work Act.
The Fair Work Commission (FWC) recently handled a notable case involving a university employee who claimed her resignation was effectively forced by her employer. The core issues revolved around workplace accommodations for medical conditions, remote work arrangements, and the distinction between voluntary resignation and dismissal under the Fair Work Act.
The Fair Work Commission (FWC) recently adjudicated an unfair dismissal case involving a worker in the addiction treatment sector. This worker, who was made redundant, argued that her dismissal was unjust. The case brought to light several critical issues, including redundancy processes, redeployment obligations, and employee misconduct discovered during the redundancy period. It underscores the importance for employers to adhere to proper procedures during restructuring and for employees to maintain their obligations until their final day of work.
Navigating Employer-Employee Boundaries In a recent ruling by the Fair Work Commission (FWC), a small business employer faced a contentious case involving the dismissal of an employee for engaging in personal transactions during business hours. The incident, which unfolded at a car dealership, underscored critical issues of employee conduct and employer rights under the Small Business Fair Dismissal Code.
The Fair Work Commission (FWC) recently issued a pivotal ruling that early notice of non-renewal for a fixed-term contract can indeed be regarded as dismissal. This landmark decision, in the case of Warren George Francis v. Volunteer Marine Rescue Assoc Qld Inc [2024] FWC 978, highlights the critical need for employers to handle contract terminations with heightened diligence and care.
Final Pay Final Pay is what an employer owes an employee upon employment ending. It is an employer’s obligation to pay the employee any: Outstanding wages for hours that the employee has worked; Any penalty… Final Pay and Required Notice