Law changes needed to fix ‘illogical’ unfair dismissal decisions, says former Fair Work vice-president
A former vice-president of the Fair Work Commission says
legislative reform is the only answer for protecting employers against unfair
dismissal decisions that defy “logic”.
In an opinion
article published by
Fairfax this morning, Graeme Watson, who called out the ”dysfunctional” nature
of the commission’s processes when he quit his role in January, says
the Commission “has departed from the notion of determining whether an employer’s
actions were reasonable” in deciding unfair dismissal cases.
Comparing
Australia’s industrial relations system to international examples, Watson says
the UK’s approach of considering whether an employer acted “within a band of
reasonable responses” is a more sensible alternative to the Fair Work
Commission’s approach, which determines both the fairness of process and
whether the impact on an employee is harsh or not.
“The result is a series of Catch-22 situations” where despite
doing the right thing, employers can be asked to pay compensation or reinstate the employee, Watson
says.
“Legislative
reform has become necessary.”
Council of
Small Business Australia chief executive Peter Strong says many in the the
business community continue to feel the outcome of unfair dismissal cases
“depends on the opinion of the commissioner you get at the time”.
“You might get
one person who’s said you’ve followed all the rules, but I don’t like the
impact on the person involved, therefore you can’t do it,” Strong says.
The
unpredictability of case outcomes is a significant worry for SMEs, Strong says.
While legislative reform may be a challenge, he suggests moving towards having
commissioners consider the impact of the situation on the employer, and what
choices they reasonably had available to them.
The current
framework involves a commissioner decide on whether a dismissal was unjust and
whether it was harsh given the employee’s circumstances, and Strong says the
impact of the situation on the business owner should also be considered.
“First of all,
the penance is they have to go to court — they’ve done nothing wrong and
all of a sudden it causes time and money and distress on the individual. But
there’s no consideration for the employer, who is also a person — yet
they don’t count,” Strong says.
Scott Barklamb,
director of workplace relations at the Australian Chamber of Commerce and
Industry, says the current framework needs to do more to reflect “what a
reasonable person” would have done.
“Far too many
dismissals are contested on the basis of procedure, and I think we would
fairly say [what is determined as] “harsh” has been given too much emphasis,”
Barklamb says.
“We want to see
action in this area — it’s one of the principal areas that businesses of
all sizes call on for reform.”
Employer
success rate a concern
In his article,
Watson highlights figures from Fair Work Commission annual reports suggesting
that while employers were successful 60% of the time in unfair dismissal cases
prior to 2013, this number dropped to below 40% in 2015-16.
However, there
were fewer unfair dismissal cases lodged in 2015-16 than in 2012-13, and the
number of these cases is not increasing but has remained steady over the
past four years, at an average of 14,733.
Watson argues
that inconsistency in the Fair Work Commission’s decisions is contribute to the
number of unfair dismissal applications lodged each year, as well as the number
of appeals and settlements.
“The choice for
an employer when faced with an unfair dismissal application is either an
expensive settlement or a costly and disruptive case with an uncertain
outcome,” he said.
“The operation
of the remedy rewards applicants regardless of the merits of their case and
punishes employers regardless of the fairness of their actions.”
Business owners have argued they
feel the deck is increasingly stacked against them in these cases, citing
confusion over why they have to pay compensation to workers in cases where they
saw no other choice but to terminate.
The
managing director of lighting
company LED Technologies said earlier this year the $6000 in compensation he
was ordered to pay for
sacking an employee over an offensive Facebook post was the “best money” he’d spent all
year because it meant putting the stressful situation behind him.
“Would I change
[firing the staff member]? No,” he said at the time.
While calls for legislative reform continue, the government’s
recent priorities have been more focused on amending the Fair Work Act to protect vulnerable workers, rather than changing dispute
resolution processes
Originally
published by the Smart Company - http://www.smartcompany.com.au/people-human-resources/industrial-relations/law-changes-needed-to-fix-illogical-unfair-dismissal-decisions-says-former-fair-work-vice-president-graeme-watson/
AWPTI - workplace investigation Sydney and through-out NSW, QLD and Victoria. Workplace training national wide
Misconduct investigations, bullying investigations, harassment investigations & sexual harassment investigations, complaint investigations, grievance investigations, discrimination investigations
www.awpti.com.au
http://awpti.com.au/investigations/
AWPTI - workplace investigation Sydney and through-out NSW, QLD and Victoria. Workplace training national wide
Misconduct investigations, bullying investigations, harassment investigations & sexual harassment investigations, complaint investigations, grievance investigations, discrimination investigations
www.awpti.com.au
http://awpti.com.au/investigations/
Comments
Post a Comment