Compass Group Australia Pty Ltd continues to battle headwinds and legal battles on both sides of the Tasman. Today it faces a s.372 dispute application from a staff member (Newman).
February 12, 2016
There are only a few days left for Sunshine Coast residents to apply for up to 44 registered nurse and aged care roles at IRT Group’s newest Community, IRT Woodlands at Meridan Plains. Construction of the seniors’ Lifestyle & Care Community is now complete and IRT Group is gearing up to open IRT Woodlands in April.
February 12, 2016
Case procedures – apprehension of bias – ss.400, 604 Fair Work Act 2009 – permission to appeal – Full Bench – unfair dismissal application referred to Deputy President for hearing and determination – after hearing concluded, appellant sent email to Deputy President’s chambers requesting Deputy President remove herself from deciding application on grounds of apprehended and actual bias – Deputy President issued two decisions – first declining appellant’s recusal application and second rejecting appellant’s unfair dismissal application – appellant appealed both decisions – in relation to first decision, Full Bench satisfied Deputy President dealt with application appropriately – acted consistently with practice that any application that a decision-maker should recuse himself or herself from hearing a matter on the ground of actual or apprehended bias is to be made and determined in the first instance by the decision-maker – no errors in making decision to dismiss application – not satisfied in public interest or any discretionary basis to grant permission to appeal – in relation to second decision, Full Bench not satisfied hearing conducted in a manner unfair to appellant – transcript indicated Deputy President went to considerable lengths to ensure appellant had a fair opportunity to present case – not in the public interest to grant permission to appeal – permission to appeal refused. Appeal by Woolston against decisions of Asbury DP of 26 November 2015 [[2015] FWC 5853] and [[2015] FWC 5993] Re: The Uniting Church in Australia Property Trust (Q.) t/a Blue Care Bli Bli Aged Care Facility.
February 12, 2016
Presbyterian Care Tasmania Inc has been presented with a s.739 (application to deal with a dispute) conundrum by a vexed staff member (Esam).
February 12, 2016
Anti-bullying – likely to continue – s.789FC Fair Work Act 2009 – application for order to stop bullying – alleged bullying at work during employment with respondent – applicant dismissed – respondent applied for dismissal of bullying application on ground that application had no reasonable prospect of success under s.587 of FW Act – Spencer v The Commonwealth of Australia considered – whether applicant would continue to be bullied at work – held that due to dismissal applicant would not have continued to be bullied at work – Federal Circuit Court proceedings commencing September 2016 – Commission held that applicant’s future employment status with respondent speculative – adjournment of application until Federal Circuit Court trial not efficient administration of justice – satisfied application had no reasonable prospect of success – application dismissed. Willis v Capital Radiology P/L t/a Capital Radiology and Ors.
February 12, 2016
Melbourne Pathology is being challenged by a s.739 (application to deal with a dispute in relation to flexible working arrangements) issued by a disgruntled staffer (Matthiesson).
February 12, 2016
An application for approval of the Eastern Heart Clinic and NSWNMA/ANMF Enterprise Agreement 2015-2017 (s.185 – application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement) will be reviewed by Fair Work Commissioner Johns.
February 12, 2016
Enterprise bargaining – scope order – ss.228, 238 Fair Work Act 2009 – application for a scope order re HammondCare – Health Services Union supported and endorsed the ANMF application – HammondCare is a Christian charity which specialises in dementia care – operates three main business streams: residential care, home care and health and hospital care – HammondCare has historically operated in New South Wales – since 2014 HammondCare has had three residential care facilities at Caulfield Hospital in Melbourne – in December 2014 when HammondCare started employing staff in Victoria the employees were informed about their relevant modern award, and that HammondCare had agreed to apply above award conditions derived from the two New South Wales agreements – ANMF wrote to HammondCare to discuss decision not to commence bargaining for a new enterprise agreement – ANMF was advised that HammondCare did not yet wish to commence negotiations but would meet with the ANMF in July 2015 when both of the New South Wales agreements were scheduled for renegotiation – in June 2015 HammondCare wrote to the ANMF stating its intention to negotiate a national agreement covering employees in Victoria and New South Wales – ANMF made an application for a scope order as it was concerned that bargaining has not proceeded efficiently or fairly – whether ANMF has met, or was meeting, the good faith bargaining requirements – Cimeco considered – Commission satisfied that ANMF has met, and was meeting, those requirements – whether making an order will promote the fair and efficient conduct of bargaining – MFB considered – found bargaining would proceed more efficiently and fairly if an order was made, than it would if no order made – order would ensure that interests of Victorian employees were not subjugated by interests of New South Wales employees – New South Wales employees outnumber Victorian employees by five or six to one – Commission satisfied that proposed group of employees was fairly chosen – satisfied that reasonable in all the circumstances to make order sought – parties reached an impasse on issue of whether proposed agreement was a national agreement or a Victorian agreement – reasonable to make scope order. Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation.
