Browsing: Industrial/employment issues | Page 11

A Victorian company that pleaded guilty to recklessly endangering an apprentice, while he was being supervised by the company director, has been fined $2.1 million - a penalty that is more than double the State's previous record safety fine for a single offence.

A worker's act of sharing offensive material with a group of colleagues on social media involved "abject stupidity", but his conduct was not sufficiently connected to his employment to warrant his dismissal, a Fair Work Commission full bench has found.

An appeals court has declined to create a "new category of duty" for employers, in overturning a psychologically injured worker's $1.4 million damages award for being subjected to a "sham" dismissal.

A leading legal expert on technology and the workplace has warned of the WHS risks and implications of using "bossware" to track workers' productivity, including that it can trigger cease-work orders under safety laws.

A worker has unsuccessfully claimed he was subjected to 15 counts of bullying and 13 forms of unlawful adverse action relating to his job responsibilities, with a commission finding all the alleged conduct was reasonable action taken in response to changed operational needs.

An appeals commission has upheld the psychological injury claim from a worker who was ridiculed for pushing for better COVID-safe standards. It rejected his employer's argument that his case was defeated by the fact that an alleged assault never occurred.

Two related companies, and a director who s-xually harassed teenage employees, have been fined a total of $290,000 for workplace safety breaches, with their failings including the absence of a specific reporting process in their online bullying and harassment policy.

An employer has been reprimanded for failing to properly discipline a bully and allowing further "reprehensible" conduct to occur, but the victim has been refused stop-bullying orders, after the company made a number of changes to the workplace to make it safe for him to return to work.

A court has rejected a CEO's claim that her employer engaged in a "witch hunt" to find reasons to sack her because she raised safety concerns at a board meeting. It also found that requiring her to obtain a medical certificate to show she was fit for work after she disclosed mental health issues did not constitute adverse action.

A commission had upheld the dismissal of a worker who, after being sent home early for fatigue-related issues, attended a music festival and then returned to the workplace behaving erratically.