Adverse action & general protections | Page 13 (433 items)

More than a year after the High Court ruled Qantas took unlawful adverse action against 1,700 of its former employees, the Federal Court has awarded one of them $100k in compensation for non-economic loss alone.

It was "highly inappropriate" for a worker's paid agent to pursue a general protections claim that had no prospects of success, but the Fair Work Commission says the employer's $80k legal bill appears "excessive".

An employee who was only available to work on a day her employer closed its business was 'dismissed', the Fair Work Commission has ruled, allowing her general protections claim to proceed.

An employer was understandably offended by the suggestion it took adverse action against an employee because she disclosed she had autism, the Fair Work Commission has accepted in dismissing her claim.

A manager was not forced to resign, but rather engaged in a clear strategy of undermining his own return to work because "he wanted to be dismissed", the Fair Work Commission has ruled in rejecting his general protections claim.

In neglecting to provide clear evidence of who initiated serious misconduct allegations against an employee, an employer has failed to prove it didn't take unlawful adverse action against her.

An employer has been fined $25k for taking adverse action against an employee who complained about a superior, with the court noting its contravention was "serious".

Dismissing an employee who used excessive emojis and wrote a poem that made a colleague uncomfortable was not unlawful adverse action, the Fair Work Commission has accepted.

A general protections application lodged on the basis of a "future" right to claim unfair dismissal is an important one to watch, a workplace lawyer says.

After allegedly rushing a CEO's sacking to deny him the opportunity to claim unfair dismissal, an employer has been ordered to reinstate him until his adverse action claim can be determined.