Skip to main content

Workplace investigation report inadmissible in anti-bullying case

Workplace investigation report inadmissible in anti-bullying case

The Fair Work Commission has rejected an employee's request to view a workplace investigation report that he alleged includes details of bullying at a colleague's previous job, finding it inadmissible in his current anti-bullying case.
The Deakin University lecturer sought orders in March 2017 from the Commission to stop workplace bullying by a number of colleagues. He also applied for the 2015 report to be produced, claiming it contained evidence of one of his colleagues having been "at least perceived by a number of staff" to have engaged in bullying behaviour while working at the University of Newcastle (UON).
He said the colleague's conduct as a manager at UON was "materially relevant to the substantive issues in dispute".
Deakin University, the colleague, and UON objected to producing the report on a number of grounds, and after considering their refusal, Commissioner Bissett found the colleague's behaviour at UON, in circumstances where the employee wasn't employed at that University, "cannot have relevance to the determination of [the colleague's] behaviour with respect to [the employee] at Deakin".
"In this respect [the employee's] comment that the application is for an anti-bullying order and bullying relates to particular forms of management behaviour that may have been exhibited elsewhere' is misplaced," she said in upholding the objection.
Labels:
Location: Sydney NSW, Australia

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Unfair dismissal – harsh to dismiss, however reinstatement not appropriate

In the recent decision of  Paul Johnson v BHP Billiton Olympic Dam Corporation Pty Ltd  [2017] FWC 4097, Commissioner Hampton found that, although the employee had engaged in misconduct constituting a valid reason for dismissal, the dismissal was nevertheless harsh due to a number of mitigating factors. However, the Commissioner did not consider reinstatement appropriate because the employer had a rational basis for its loss of trust and confidence in the employee given the importance of the need for compliance with safety policy and the maintenance of appropriate discipline in connection with workplace health and safety matters. The employee was instead awarded compensation. The facts The employee was employed by BHPB from 24 May 2001 until his dismissal on 31 March 2017. At the time of his dismissal, the employee was a process specialist, responsible for a team of technicians looking after a flash furnace and other equipment in areas of a smelting facility at an und...
Post a Comment
Read more

Workplace Investigation biased process

The presence of bias be it actual or perceived during an investigation can derail the investigation and undermine any findings and recommendations. Complaint of bias are often raised relating to two areas, the investigation process itself or the investigation interviews. This article will examine the process, part two will examine bias during interviews. Workplace investigations are defined as  "an unbiased gathering of evidence"  and to ensure that that a complaint of bias is not raised or substantiated it is important to follow these rules; Approach the investigation with an open mind. Do no make any judgements on the parties Do not make any judgements on the truthfulness of any of the parties versions of events until all the evidence has been gathered. Gather all the evidence, not just the evidence that supports the complaint Do not form a theory and then seek evidence to support your theory only Do not make early determinations If you feel that you ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Violence Valid Ground for Dismissal

Violence Valid Ground for Dismissal The Fair Work Commission (in the case of  Sekirski v Scope (Vic) Ltd [2017] FWC 1200 ) has found that an employee who assaulted a co-worker by striking her in the face was validly dismissed.  Stif Sekirski commenced employment as a Disability Support Worker with Scope (Vic) Ltd in November 2014.  Mr Sekirski’s employment was terminated on 2 September 2016 on grounds of serious misconduct. It was alleged that Mr Sekirski punched a co-worker in the face, then called her a bit** and threw a chair in her direction.  The FWC was satisfied that this conduct had occurred, and held that this conduct provided Scope with a valid reason to terminate Mr Sekirski’s employment. It is important that when confronted with matters involving violence in the workplace employers ensure that they conduct a timely and thorough investigation.   We recommend that even if summary dismissal is a likely outcome you should s...
1 comment
Read more