Unfair dismissal in Australia

Last updated

Unfair dismissal in Australia is the right to not be unfairly dismissed from work in the Fair Work Act 2009 . This is a core part of Australian labour law, and refers to an unlawful act of employment termination due to it being an unfair action on the employee by the employer.

Contents

History

The ability for an individual to seek relief from unfair dismissal was first established in a statutory scheme in South Australia in 1972, [1] [2] followed thereafter by Western Australia, [3] Queensland, [4] New South Wales [5] and Victoria [6] in the early 1990s.

Protection from unfair dismissal at the Commonwealth level was enhanced in 1984 by the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Commission with its ruling in the Termination, Change and Redundancy Case, [7] [8] that awards should contain a provision that dismissal "shall not be harsh, unjust or unreasonable" and subsequent awards following it were upheld by the High Court of Australia. [9] [10] [11] The Parliament of Australia later extended the reach of protection from unfair dismissal with the passage of the Industrial Relations Reform Act 1993, [12] which relied upon the external affairs power and the ILO Termination of Employment Convention, 1982 . [13] [14]

Contemporary law

Commonwealth jurisdiction

Unfair dismissal findings

Unfair dismissal will be found to have occurred where the Fair Work Commission, acting under section 385 of the Fair Work Act 2009 , [15] [16] determines that:

  1. a person has been dismissed; [17]
  2. the dismissal was harsh, unjust or unreasonable; [18]
  3. it was not consistent with the Small Business Fair Dismissal Code; [19] [20] and
  4. it was not a case of genuine redundancy. [21]

If the Fair Work Commission determines that a dismissal was unfair, the Commission must decide whether to order reinstatement or compensation. [22] The Commission is required to first consider whether reinstatement is appropriate and can only order compensation (capped at 6 months pay) if it is satisfied that reinstatement is inappropriate. [23]

Coverage

In general, people covered by unfair dismissal laws are those who have worked more than six months for an employer [24] (or more than one year for a small business employer), [25] for which one or more or the following conditions must apply: [26]

  1. a modern award covers the person;
  2. an enterprise agreement applies to the person in relation to the employment;
  3. the person's annual rate of earnings is determined to be less than the high income threshold. [27]

The scope of coverage is quite broad. The Commonwealth has declared that all employers falling within its jurisdiction are subject to the scheme, including: [28]

In addition, the States have delegated certain classes of employers by virtue of the Constitution's referral power:

Classes of referred employers, by State [29]
Class Flag of New South Wales.svg NSW Flag of Queensland.svg QLD Flag of South Australia.svg SA Flag of Tasmania.svg TAS Flag of Victoria (Australia).svg VIC Flag of Western Australia.svg WA
Private employers [a 1] Green check.svgGreen check.svgGreen check.svgGreen check.svgGreen check.svg
State government employers [a 1] Green check.svg [a 2]
Local government employers [a 1] Green check.svgGreen check.svg [a 2]
  1. 1 2 3 which are not already regulated as constitutional corporations
  2. 1 2 except for law enforcement officials and executives in the public sector

State jurisdiction

Where the Fair Work Act does not apply, relief from unfair dismissal may arise under State laws. [30] In Western Australia, recourse may be available from the Western Australian Industrial Relations Commission. [31] [32]

See also

Related Research Articles

The Australian Industrial Relations Commission (AIRC), known from 1956 to 1973 as the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Commission and from 1973 to 1988 as the Australian Conciliation and Arbitration Commission, was a tribunal with powers under the Workplace Relations Act 1996 that existed from 1956 until 2010. It was the central institution of Australian labour law. The AIRC replaced a previous system of industrial courts, which broadly speaking, was engaged in the same functions, but with superior independence and powers.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Australian labour law</span> Rights and duties of workers, unions and employers in Australia

Australian labour law sets the rights people, the role of trade unions, and democracy at work, against the duties of employers, across the Commonwealth and in states. Under the Fair Work Act 2009, the Fair Work Commission creates a national minimum wage and oversees National Employment Standards for fair hours, holidays, parental leave and job security. The FWC also creates modern awards that apply to most sectors of work, numbering 150 in 2024, with minimum pay scales, and better rights for overtime, holidays, paid leave, and superannuation for a pension in retirement. Beyond this floor of rights, trade unions and employers often create enterprise bargaining agreements for better wages and conditions in their workplaces. However, in 2024 collective agreements only cover 15% of employees, while 22% of employees are classified as "casual", meaning that they lose many basic protections other workers have.

Unfair dismissal in the United Kingdom is the part of UK labour law that requires fair, just and reasonable treatment by employers in cases where a person's job could be terminated. The Employment Rights Act 1996 regulates this by saying that employees are entitled to a fair reason before being dismissed, based on their capability to do the job, their conduct, whether their position is economically redundant, on grounds of a statute, or some other substantial reason. It is automatically unfair for an employer to dismiss an employee, regardless of length of service, for becoming pregnant, or for having previously asserted certain specified employment rights. Otherwise, an employee must have worked for two years. This means an employer only terminates an employee's job lawfully if the employer follows a fair procedure, acts reasonably and has a fair reason.

<i>R v Kirby; Ex parte Boilermakers Society of Australia</i> Judgement of the High Court of Australia

R v Kirby; Ex parte Boilermakers' Society of Australia, known as the Boilermakers' Case, was a 1956 decision of the High Court of Australia which considered the powers of the Commonwealth Court of Conciliation and Arbitration to punish the Boilermakers' Society of Australia, a union which had disobeyed the orders of that court in relation to an industrial dispute between boilermakers and their employer body, the Metal Trades Employers' Association.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">WorkChoices</span> Australian industrial relations law

WorkChoices was the name given to changes made to the federal industrial relations laws in Australia by the Howard government in 2005, being amendments to the Workplace Relations Act 1996 by the Workplace Relations Amendment Act 2005, sometimes referred to as the Workplace Relations Amendment Act 2005, that came into effect on 27 March 2006.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Commonwealth Court of Conciliation and Arbitration</span> Australian court (1904 to 1956)

The Commonwealth Court of Conciliation and Arbitration was an Australian court that operated from 1904 to 1956 with jurisdiction to hear and arbitrate interstate industrial disputes, and to make awards. It also had the judicial functions of interpreting and enforcing awards and hearing other criminal and civil cases relating to industrial relations law.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Federal Court of Australia</span> Australian superior federal court

The Federal Court of Australia is an Australian superior court which has jurisdiction to deal with most civil disputes governed by federal law, along with some summary and indictable criminal matters. Cases are heard at first instance mostly by single judges. In cases of importance, a Full Court comprising three judges can be convened upon determination by the Chief Justice. The Court also has appellate jurisdiction, which is mostly exercised by a Full Court comprising three judges, the only avenue of appeal from which lies to the High Court of Australia. In the Australian court hierarchy, the Federal Court occupies a position equivalent to the supreme courts of each of the states and territories. In relation to the other courts in the federal stream, it is superior to the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia for all jurisdictions except family law. It was established in 1976 by the Federal Court of Australia Act.

Common rule awards are a particular form of industrial award used in Australia to regulate minimum terms and conditions of employment. Awards are the end product of the processes of conciliation and arbitration where an industrial tribunal makes an award in settlement of an industrial dispute. Whereas awards are legally binding on all parties to the dispute which are named in the award, with common rule awards all employers in the industry or occupation covered by the award are bound by it.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Employment Rights Act 1996</span> United Kingdom Law

The Employment Rights Act 1996 is a United Kingdom Act of Parliament passed by the Conservative government to codify existing law on individual rights in UK labour law.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Industrial Relations Commission of New South Wales</span>

The Industrial Relations Commission of New South Wales conciliates and arbitrates industrial disputes, sets conditions of employment and fixes wages and salaries by making industrial awards, approves enterprise agreements and decides claims of unfair dismissal in New South Wales, a state of Australia. The Commission was established with effect from 2 September 1996 pursuant to the Industrial Relations Act 1996.

The Western Australian Industrial Relations Commission, as constituted under the Industrial Relations Act 1979, conciliates and arbitrates industrial disputes, sets conditions of employment and fixes wages and salaries by making industrial awards, approves enterprise agreements and decides claims of unfair dismissal in the State of Western Australia, with respect to those employers not regulated by the Commonwealth of Australia under the Fair Work Act 2009.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Act 1904</span> Act of the Parliament of Australia, no longer in force, registered as C1904A00013

The Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Act 1904 (Cth) was an Act of the Parliament of Australia, which established the Commonwealth Court of Conciliation and Arbitration, besides other things, and sought to introduce the rule of law in industrial relations in Australia. The Act received royal assent on 15 December 1904.

In labour law, unfair dismissal is an act of employment termination made without good reason or contrary to the country's specific legislation.

South African labour law regulates the relationship between employers, employees and trade unions in the Republic of South Africa.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Fair Work Act 2009</span> Australian industrial relations law

The Fair Work Act 2009(Cth) is an Act of the Parliament of Australia, passed by the Rudd government to reform the industrial relations system of Australia. It replaced the Howard government's WorkChoices legislation, it established Fair Work Australia, later renamed the Fair Work Commission.

The National Employment Standards (NES) is a set of eleven minimum entitlements for employees in Australia who are covered by the Fair Work Act 2009. An award, enterprise agreement, other registered agreement or employment contract cannot provide for conditions that are less than the national minimum wage or the National Employment Standards and they can not be excluded. The NES have applied to employees since 1 January 2010, having replaced the previous five entitlement standard under the WorkChoices legislation.

<i>Commonwealth Bank of Australia v Barker</i> Judgement of the High Court of Australia

Commonwealth Bank of Australia v Barker is a leading Australian judgment of the High Court which unanimously and firmly rejected the proposition that contracts of employment in Australia should contain an implied term of mutual trust and confidence.

<i>Australian Boot Trade Employees Federation v Whybrow & Co</i> Judgement of the High Court of Australia

Australian Boot Trade Employees Federation v Whybrow & Co, commonly known as Whybrow's case or the Boot Trades case, was the third of a series of decisions of the High Court of Australia in 1910 concerning the boot manufacturing industry and the role of the Commonwealth Court of Conciliation and Arbitration in preventing and settling industrial disputes. In doing so the High Court considered the constitutional power of the Federal Parliament to provide for common rule awards and the jurisdiction of the High Court to grant prohibition against the Arbitration Court. The majority held in Whybrow that the Arbitration Court could not make an award that was inconsistent with a State law, but that different minimum wages were not inconsistent as it was possible to obey both laws. In Whybrow the High Court established the doctrine of ambit, with the emphasis on the precise claim made and refused, and the practice with respect to "paper disputes" being treated "prima facie as genuine and real", with the majority holding that the High Court had power to order prohibition to correct jurisdictional error as part of its original jurisdiction. Finally in Whybrow the High Court unanimously held that the Federal Parliament had no constitutional power to provide for common rule awards.

<i>Federated Sawmill Employees Association v James Moore & Sons Pty Ltd</i> Landmark Australian court case

Federated Sawmill Employees Association v James Moore & Sons Pty Ltd, commonly known as the Woodworkers case or the Sawmillers case was a decision of the High Court of Australia in 1909 concerning the question whether the Commonwealth Court of Conciliation and Arbitration could make an award that was inconsistent with a State wages board determination. The High Court was divided 2:2 and thus the decision of the Chief Justice prevailed, in what is sometimes described as a statutory majority. Griffith CJ, O'Connor J agreeing, held that the Arbitration Court could not make an award that was inconsistent with the minimum wages fixed by a Wages Board under a State law.

Legislation relating to employment in the Republic of Ireland governs the provision and content of the contract of employment, payment of wages, length of the working day and working week, and dismissal procedures.

References

  1. Chapman, Anna (2009). "10: The Decline and Restoration of Unfair Dismissal Rights". In Forsyth, Anthony; Stewart, Andrew (eds.). Fair Work: The New Workplace Laws and the Work Choices Legacy. Sydney: Federation Press. p. 208. ISBN   978-1-86287-736-8.
  2. Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act, 1972 (SA) (No 125 of 1972), s. 15(1)(e)
  3. Industrial Relations Amendment Act 1993 (WA) (No 15 of 1993), ss. 67
  4. Industrial Relations Act 1990 (Qld) No 28 of 1990, s. 2.2(3)(c), whose scope was later extended by the Industrial Relations Reform Act 1994 (Qld) No 12 of 1994
  5. Industrial Arbitration (Unfair Dismissal) Amendment Act 1991, (NSW) No 11 of 1991, whose scope was later extended by the Industrial Relations Act 1996, (NSW) No 17 of 1996, Part 6
  6. Employee Relations Act 1992, (Vic) No 83 of 1992, Part 5, Division 1
  7. Southey 2015, p. 152.
  8. Termination, Change and Redundancy Case, (1984) 8IR34 (2 August 1984).
  9. Southey 2015, p. 153.
  10. Re Ranger Uranium Mines Pty Ltd; Ex parte Federated Miscellaneous Workers' Union of Australia [1987] HCA 63 , (1987) 163 CLR 656.
  11. Re Federated Storemen & Packers Union of Australia; Ex parte Wooldumpers (Vic) Ltd [1989] HCA 10 , (1989) 166 CLR 311.
  12. "Industrial Relations Reform Act 1993". No. 109 of 1993.
  13. Voll 2005, p. 537.
  14. The extent of the external affairs power had been determined by the High Court in Commonwealth v Tasmania ("Tasmanian Dam case") [1983] HCA 21 , (1983) 158 CLR 1.
  15. Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) s 385
  16. "Unfair dismissal". Fair Work Commission . Retrieved 25 July 2016.
  17. within the meaning of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) s 386
  18. within the meaning of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) s 387
  19. "Small Business Fair Dismissal Code". Fair Work Commission . Retrieved 25 July 2016.
  20. Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) s 388
  21. within the meaning of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) s 389
  22. Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) s 390
  23. Regional Express Holdings Limited trading as REX Airlines [2010] FWAFB 8753 at par. 23(12 November 2010)
  24. Strategies, Marketing ER (2021-06-24). "Unfair Dismissal | How to Avoid It". ER Strategies. Retrieved 2022-11-02.
  25. Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) s 383
  26. Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) s 382
  27. as determined under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) s 333
  28. "Benchbook: Unfair Dismissals" (PDF). Fair Work Commission. July 2016. pp. 25–27.
  29. "Benchbook: Unfair Dismissals" (PDF). Fair Work Commission. July 2016. pp. 25–27.
  30. "Termination of Employment: National Guidelines for Managers and Supervisors in Australia". Clayton Utz. 2015.
  31. "Unfair Dismissals and Contractual Entitlements". Western Australian Industrial Relations Commission . Retrieved 25 July 2016.
  32. Industrial Relations Act 1979 (WA) s 23A

Further reading