Bench Book Enterprise Agreements

COVID-19 The Attorney General has passed an executive order under the Fair Work Act to limit changes to enterprise agreements in response to the coronavirus pandemic to 12 months (May 18, 2020). more… The Benchbook provides detailed information on the following topics: Lamont/University of Queensland (No. 2) [2020] FCA 720 INDUSTRIAL LAW – Employment – if adverse action was taken by the respondents S 342 (1) of the Fair Work Act 2009 (FWA) – if adverse action has been taken against the applicant for violating the Labour Act Rights 3 40 (1) of the FWA – that the university is responsible for negative measures on the part of officials according to FWA S 793 – charges of violation of S34 (1) of the partially confirmed FWA – compensation according to FWA INDUSTRIAL LAW S 545 – employment – if the university violated contract contract contract agreements CONTRACT – if the university violated the implied terms of the contract. The opponent of the first appeal pays the applicant $15,000 as compensation for losses resulting from the offences committed by the opponent of the first appeal against s 340 (1) of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth). All new employees you employ will be covered by the applicable modern bonus or other enterprise agreement. If there is no modern attribution agreement or enterprise agreement covering new staff, the transferable instrument may also apply to new employees. The Benchbook can be accessed at benchbooks.fwc.gov.au/enterpriseAgreements/ FWC: Online Jobkeeper Disputes benchbook launched The Jobkeepers benchbook disputes has been prepared by the Commission to support parties who, under the Fair Labour Act 2009 (Cth), present or react to jobkeeper disputes. The Online Jobkeeper Disputes Benchbook is now available on our website (May 25, 2020). more… WorkPac Pty Ltd/Rossato [2020] FCAFC 84 INDUSTRIAL LAW – An employer`s request to find that a worker cannot enforce the rights of national employment standards to paid annual leave, compassionate care leave and compassionate leave because he was a casual worker under ss 86, 95 and 106 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Fth) (FW Act) and was unable to enforce the corresponding rights of the existing enterprise agreement, because he was a “casual Field Team Member” (FTM) – given the nature of the worker`s employment – taking into account the term “firm prior obligation” used in some authorities with respect to casual employment – workers are not casual workers under the FW Act or a casual FTM Act. RESTITUTION – Workers paid by employers at a flat-rate hourly rate under the employment contracts alleged by the employer contain an identifiable occasional burden – the employer stated that if the Court of Justice found that the worker was not a casual worker under the FW Act or an occasional FTM under the enterprise contract, it was legitimate to return the occasional burden, since the worker was unjustly enriched – the employer sought restitution for error and non-consideration.