Adverse action & general protections | Page 16 (461 items)

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.

The Fair Work Commission has ruled in favour of employers, in two disputes over whether casual workers were 'dismissed' when their engagements ended.

When a CEO asked an employee if she had another job to go to and then gave her an "opportunity to resign" before a negative performance review, she had no option but to quit, the Fair Work Commission found.