TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT – misconduct – s.394 Fair Work Act 2009 – application for unfair dismissal remedy – applicant employed as registered nurse at aged care facility – applicant summarily dismissed for serious misconduct – respondent relied on videos evidence of three separate incidents taken by colleague in support of decision to terminate employment – videos taken without applicant’s knowledge or approval – first incident was of applicant laying on residents bed wearing dark glasses – applicant submitted she was resting eyes subsequent to recent eye surgery – Commission accepted this as applicant only at work that day to save respondent cost of employing a casual – second incident was in a resident’s dining room where applicant stated to resident you ‘can’t do anything – you can’t even walk´ – whilst Commission accepted sometimes necessary to speak in forceful tone to residents with dementia, Commission cannot condone words – words considered inappropriate, offensive, disrespectful and demeaning – respondent further submitted applicant was laughing at death of two residents – respondent claimed inappropriate to go into specific details of resident’s death – Commission stated graphic details not appropriate conversation in residents’ dining room – such explanation breached confidentiality of resident – third incident involved allegedly ignoring buzzers of residents while in residents’ TV room drinking tea or coffee – respondent claimed applicant was neglecting duties – applicant submitted she was on break – Commission accepted this – applicant stood down with full pay while investigation carried out – applicant submitted not guilty of alleged misconduct – applicant submitted recordings were in breach of her privacy and respondent knew they were obtained without consent and therefore could not rely upon them – applicant submitted denied procedural fairness – respondent submitted had valid reason to terminate applicant’s employment based on allegations of serious misconduct – respondent submitted gave applicant opportunity to respond to the allegations – Commission found trust placed in employees of aged care industry not open to abuse or neglect – Commission took into account applicant was entitled to be shown video footage taken by colleague – gave inconsistency between first statement and oral evidence little weight which alleviated procedural fairness exponentially – considered factors in Parmalat – found applicant not unfairly dismissed. Govender v Bupa Aged Care Mosman
August 8, 2017
TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT – termination at initiative of employer – s.394 Fair Work Act 2009 – application for unfair dismissal remedy – applicant submitted she was constructively dismissed due to false accusations about conduct and indignant treatment she was subjected to immediately prior disciplinary meeting and resignation – submitted she was encouraged to change resignation letter and resign with immediate effect – respondent raised jurisdictional objection on basis applicant not dismissed but resigned voluntarily – applicant worked as Assistant in Nursing at aged care facility – alleged misconduct related to video evidence taken on two occasions by colleague without applicant’s knowledge – applicant and respondent had differing recollections of applicant being advised of misconduct allegations and proposed investigation – Commission reviewed video evidence – Commission found no valid reason for termination – dismissal harsh and unfair – no reason why employment relationship could not be restored – previous manager no longer employed by respondent and applicant had excellent rapport with residents, their families and fellow employees – considered may be difficult for applicant to find alternative employment due to age and language deficiency – held applicant to be reinstated former position within 7 days of decision at Mosman facility, with same hours and duties – applicant to maintain continuity of employment – respondent to pay applicant base pay, excluding any weekend penalties, for period 16 November 2016 to 18 July 2017. Tavassoli v Bupa Aged Care Mosman
August 8, 2017
TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT – misconduct – s.394 Fair Work Act 2009 – application for unfair dismissal remedy – applicant dismissed after threatening and causing distress to co-worker and receiving complaint from one of respondent’s largest clients – applicant previously given verbal warning by respondent in relation to interactions with other staff members – applicant submitted he was dismissed for making bullying and harassment complaint – Commission found that conduct in relation to coworker amounted to serious misconduct and that conduct in relation to respondent’s client was unreasonable and lead to loss of business and had potential to risk relationship with the employer’s client – satisfied that making of bullying complaint was not reason for dismissal – found that applicant’s denial of serious misconduct and absence of remorse or willingness to change behaviours means that applicant was largely responsible for outcome – found applicant’s conduct valid reason to terminate employment – found termination was not harsh, unjust or unreasonable – application dismissed. Williamson v Semsley P/L t/a Senior Helpers Adelaide Northern Suburbs
August 7, 2017
Central Bayside Community Health Services Limited is trying to resolve a s.739 (Application to deal with a dispute) instigated by a staffer (Bartlett).
August 7, 2017
A woman who developed a severe infection associated with surgical mesh has been awarded $1 million, after a court found the doctors did not account for her personal risk factors. Kylie Bernadette Tinnock, 39, was rushed to Calvary Hospital in Canberra with a massive infection five weeks after she had surgery at Wagga Wagga Hospital to repair an abdominal hernia caused by caesarean section.
August 7, 2017
Ramsey Health Care Australia Pty Ltd said it is dealing with a s.394 (Application for unfair dismissal remedy) filed by a dislodged hook.
August 7, 2017
An assault charge has been re-laid over an incident at a Myrtle Bank nursing home where a 72-year-old grandmother was found battered and bruised in 2015. The fresh prosecution follows the sudden withdrawal last year of charges against a man, which left Elizabeth “Libby” Hannaford’s family dismayed. They had arrived at the Adelaide Magistrates Court in September last year expecting the hearing to begin, only to discover the charges had been withdrawn two months earlier. In response to inquiries at the time as to why the charges were withdrawn, Superintendent Stuart McLean said: “SA Police are confident that there was no reasonable prospect of conviction in this matter.” Now charges have been re-laid against the man who was a carer at the home at the time.
August 7, 2017
Ferngrove Pharmaceuticals Pty Ltd is involved in a s.604 (Appeal of decisions) because it didn’t like the previous Ji outcome.
