Resources: Blogs

To join or not to join...

Blogs
|

Employee found to have bullied co-worker to join union not unfairly dismissed

In King v The Trustee for Bartlett Family Trust T/A Concept Wire Industries [2017] FWC 3867, the Fair Work Commission considered an unfair dismissal application where an employee was dismissed after it was found that he bullied another employee about joining the union.

Bullying complaints can often be difficult to manage and investigate, particularly when they involve allegations about the exercise of a workplace right to join or not join a union.

In King v The Trustee for Bartlett Family Trust T/A Concept Wire Industries [2017] FWC 3867, the Fair Work Commission (FWC) considered an unfair dismissal application where an employee was dismissed after it was found that he bullied another employee about joining the union.

Mr King was employed by Concept Wire Industries (the Employer), a family owned business with 25 employees. On 17 October 2016, Mr King attended a meeting with an official of the Australian Manufacturing Workers Union (the Union) where the election of a site delegate was discussed. Mr King, a union member, expressed interest in becoming the delegate and sought to encourage others to attend the meeting.

A few days after the meeting, an employee lodged a complaint against Mr King, alleging that Mr King engaged in behaviour that made him feel threatened, intimidated and bullied. The employee claimed that Mr King approached him on four occasions pressuring him to join the Union with the threat that if he didn’t he would “find a way to sack him” and would isolate him from others.

Mr King denied the allegations.

The Employer undertook a preliminary investigation and then determined that a formal external investigation should be conducted.

The external investigator interviewed a number of employees and, although there were no witnesses to the interaction, found the allegations to be substantiated based on the strength of the evidence from the employee. The Employer terminated Mr King’s employment due to misconduct based on his behaviour toward the employee.

In the FWC, the employee gave evidence that he was anxious about his interactions with Mr King and that Mr King knew that he was fearful about losing his job. Mr King denied the allegations and submitted that he spoke to many employees about the Union meeting and that his interactions with the employee about the Union were brief.

In considering whether the termination of Mr King’s employment was harsh, unjust or unreasonable, the FWC firstly considered whether there was a valid reason for the dismissal. The FWC had regard to a number of matters including that:

  • Mr King had workplace rights to assist the Union in the workplace and approach the employee (even more than once) to persuade him to join the Union using reasonable conduct;
  • The employee had an “equally important” workplace right not to join the Union and the workplace right not to be subjected to workplace bullying;
  • The Employer had an obligation to ensure a safe workplace which was free from workplace bullying and an obligation to act upon complaints of bullying it received; and
  • The external investigation was meticulous and balanced and was used by the Employer when considering terminating Mr King’s employment.

The FWC found that there was a valid reason for dismissing Mr King and that, procedurally, the termination of Mr King’s employment was fair. Accordingly, the unfair dismissal application was dismissed.

 

Lessons for employers

This decision highlights to employers:

  • Employees do not have to join or not join a Union nor should they feel pressured or intimidated to do so.
  • The obligation on employers to prevent or respond to complaints of workplace bullying.
  • An external investigation may be required where serious or complex allegations are made.

 

Information provided in this blog is not legal advice and should not be relied upon as such. Workplace Law does not accept liability for any loss or damage arising from reliance on the content of this blog, or from links on this website to any external website. Where applicable, liability is limited by a scheme approved under Professional Standards Legislation.

 

Similar articles

Employer found liable for workers compensation despite worker’s unreasonable perceptions

Fact or fiction

A recent decision of the New South Wales Personal Injury Commission serves as a reminder of the differing standards of proof when determining liability for claims of bullying and/or harassment under workers compensation laws and the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth).

Read more...

Failure to warn employee renders dismissal unfair

Template lesson

Many businesses, and in particular small businesses employers subscribe to human resources information systems which offer access to template letters and policies to provide a ready-made solution or to manage human resources administration.

Read more...

Employer’s withdrawal of role constituted dismissal from employment

Late withdrawal

For most employers, casual employment is favoured because of the flexibility it provides – employees are employed as required and have no guarantee of ongoing employment. This flexibility however does not mean that casual employees are not protected from adverse action.

Read more...

Full Federal Court rejects employers bid to quash decision which found employees were not genuinely redundant

Where does it end?

Section 389(2) of Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) provides that a dismissal will not be a case of “genuine redundancy” if it “would have been reasonable in all of the circumstances” for the employee to be redeployed within the employer’s enterprise or the enterprise of an associated entity.

Read more...

Bullying prosecution leads to conviction and fine for company and its director

I knew you were trouble

Under work health and safety legislation, persons conducting a business or undertaking have duties to ensure, so far as reasonably practicable the health and safety of workers in the workplace. It is also accepted that workplace bullying is a risk to health and safety of workers which needs to be managed as any other health and safety risk.

Read more...

Victoria records first workplace manslaughter conviction

Various Australian jurisdictions have been slowly introducing an offence of industrial manslaughter, dealing with workplace fatalities that arise as a result of negligent conduct by a person conducting a business or undertaking or its officers.

Read more...

Let's talk

please contact our directors to discuss how ouR expertise can help your business.

We're here to help

Contact Us
Let Workplace Law become your partner in Workplace Relations.

Sign up to receive the latest industry updates with commentary from the Workplace Law team direct to your inbox.