The Federal Court of Australia has dismissed a lawyer’s claims for disability discrimination and victimisation against his employer, a small specialist family law legal practice, finding that the legal practice had afforded the lawyer “reasonable adjustments” when he returned to work after a period of absence following a major depressive episode
Even in the era of far-reaching international trade agreements and regional economic and political partnerships, the majority of laws and regulations governing the workplace are still determined by the individual countries where employees work.
Spanning 6 continents, L&E Global’s member firms are ideally situated to provide clients with pragmatic, commercial advice necessary to achieve their objectives. Our members work closely with corporate, legal, human resources departments and corporate executives across a variety of sectors and industries to address the strategic and tactical issues that arise in the workplace.
Discover the most important labour and employment rules, regulations and best practices specific to each jurisdiction, conveniently together in one place.
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
On 12 December 2018, the Fair Work Amendment (Family and Domestic Violence Leave) Act 2018 (Act) came into effect.
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.
The Federal Circuit Court of Australia has held that an account manager was entitled to overtime and weekend penalty rates despite being paid an annualised salary that exceeded the corresponding minimum rate of pay prescribed under the relevant Modern Award.
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