An employee has won the right to have his casual service included in the minimum employment period for lodging an unfair dismissal claim, after proving he had a reasonable expectation that his regular hours would continue.
A worker with less than six months' permanent employment has convinced a court she had an expectation of continuing, regular and systematic work since her earlier days as a casual employee, entitling her to unfair dismissal rights.
The Fair Work Commission has awarded $5000 in compensation to a casual worker who it found was unfairly dismissed by being excluded from her employer's roster.
In a landmark decision, the Federal Court has ruled that the funder of two class actions could potentially face a costs order if it loses, and must provide security upfront.
The Federal Government is appealing last month's ruling on personal leave entitlements, which if left unaddressed could cost employers up to $2 billion a year. Also in this article, a dismissal upheld despite its flaws; manager capabilities ranked by industry; and more.
The "soft control" an organisation has over gig workers is an important factor in determining whether an employment relationship or true independent contracting exists, the Fair Work Commission has highlighted.
An urgent fix is required for the "broken" system that is enabling increasing numbers of high-paid workers to pursue double-dipping claims, employer association leaders say.
Changing business structures are 'fissuring' workplaces, effectively breaking employment relationships to workers' detriment, according to an international labour market expert.
When an employer receives a complaint or becomes aware of a conduct issue, it's not always appropriate to go down a traditional disciplinary path. This HR Daily Premium Q&A will discuss alternative options and how to determine which is best in various circumstances.
Recent constructive dismissal claims highlight the risks involved in accepting a resignation from an employee who is experiencing mental health issues. Watch this Q&A to understand the rulings' implications for all employers.