L&E Global’s Employment Law Overviews 2019-2020 Global Edition

A fashion start-up company has been fined $274,278, with an additional penalty of $54,855 personally imposed on the company’s managing director for failing to pay three employees their proper Award rates and for failing to comply with an investigation of the Fair Work Ombudsman

The Federal Circuit Court of Australia recently ruled that two company directors were personally liable as accessories to the corporate respondents’ contraventions because they were “involved”, within the meaning of section 550 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (FW Act), in the underpayment of employees. The two directors were “involved” because, despite the fact that they relied on others to perform day to day human resources functions, they knew the employees were not being paid their wages or salaries as they should have been. The question of penalties payable by the two directors is yet to be determined. This decision serves as a timely reminder of the potential personal liability that managers can face with contraventions to Australia’s workplace relations laws

The Federal Court of Australia has ruled that an employer cannot require an employee to work a “split-shift” under the Airline Operations – Ground Staff Award 2010. In doing so, the Federal Court has also held that rostering an employee on for more than one period of paid work within a 24-hour period impermissibly constituted a split-shift under the Award

The Federal Court of Australia has held that a global payments management company engaged in adverse action against a client executive “because of” his mental disability, when it dismissed him for reasons that included “serious concerns about [his] capacity to return to work” whilst he was on sick leave for work stress and depression.

A Federal Court Judge has stated that the provision of a minimum period of notice under section 117 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) does not proscribe the implication of a term of reasonable notice into a contract of employment, responding to recent decisions to the contrary.

The Full Court of the Federal Court has unanimously ruled that casuals, who are employed on a “regular and predictable” and “continuous” basis, are entitled to annual leave under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth). This was despite true casual rates incorporating a loading to compensate for non-receipt of annual leave under the Act