In the last week alone, the world has seen more than 30 people brutally murdered in mass shooting in the USA. In that regard, the American National Institute of Justice has conducted a recent study in which it has examined every shooting incident at schools, workplaces and places of worship since 1999. As a result of the study, it found that in the majority of mass shooting cases, early childhood trauma including exposure to domestic abuse and violence at a young age was a prevalent issue. The nature of such exposure included parental suicide, physical or sexual abuse, neglect, domestic violence, and/or severe bullying. The trauma was often a precursor to the development of mental health conditions, including depression, anxiety, thought disorders or suicidality.
Digital platforms have brought about significant convenience in the way people access many essential services such as accommodation, transport, food, odd jobs and maintenance work through apps such as AirBnB, Uber, UberEats, Deliveroo and Airtasker, commonly referred to as the “gig economy”. Unsurprisingly, this rapidly growing industry does not seem to be slowing down any time soon.
The right of individuals to disclose wrongdoing has long been stymied by the conflicting right of employers keeping confidential information, confidential. This conflict has been recently highlighted by the plight of Richard Boyle who is currently facing a 161 year prison sentence for blowing the whistle on the Australian Tax Office. His decision to disclose confidential information regarding the conduct of the ATO, has come at a significant cost to him. It is also clear that the failure to protect whistleblowers has had a real detriment to the disclosure of problematic conduct.
Few departments handle as many responsibilities and manage as much information as human resources. Technology makes the task of recruitment, performance evaluation, payroll, and benefits administration more manageable and allows human resource personnel to engage the company’s employees better.
While you hire someone, you may feel the need for some additional information on a candidate. After all, there are chances that the applicant may give you false or incomplete information on their application.
Meanwhile, there are some employees who don’t want you to know certain facts about themselves that may put them in a difficult position or disqualify them from getting the job. Thus, it is generally a good idea to run a little background check before you make the final job offer.
AI or Artificial Intelligence is a powerful technology that is being used in many fields and is revolutionising many sectors. HR is an area where AI is being used extensively. In fact, the gradually increasing use of AI in HR has given rise to fears that it may lead to a situation where the ‘human’ in HR may become irrelevant.
There are discussions on how HR departments may be entirely taken over by AI bots leading to the loss of jobs for humans. Is this really a possibility? What impact would AI have on humans carrying out the HR function? Read on to find the answers to these questions.
Welcome back to all our readers and best wishes for a successful 2019!
It is fair to say that the new year is certainly underway and with it, a raft of key changes to legislation have been ushered into the employment law arena. In this client alert we discuss the consequences of the Fair Work Commission Full Bench decision in Huntsman Chemical Company Australia Pty Ltd TA RMAX Rigid Cellular Plastics & Others [2019] FWCFB 318 (“Huntsman”) delivered on 18 January 2019 which considers the effect of the Fair Work Amendment (Repeal of 4 Yearly Reviews and Other Measures) Act 2019 (“Amending Act”) which provides a mechanism for the Commission to dispense with minor procedural errors relating to the making of enterprise agreements where it is concluded the enterprise agreement has otherwise been “genuinely agreed”.
It is now 12 months since the insidious discriminatory and sexually predatory behavior of powerful Hollywood moguls was exposed by a few very brave women. It is also 12 months since the phenomena of the #metoo movement. The fallout from all this publicity is certainly a heightened awareness of the unacceptable behaviours that occur at work, mostly against women. Now with the Christmas and New Year period upon us, many employers will be celebrating the end of 2018 with their employees. This is a fertile breeding ground for employees to “forget” they are required to adhere to a certain standard of behavior. However, with all employees more emboldened by the current climate, unacceptable behavior is far less likely to be tolerated and certainly much more likely to be reported.
It is that time of year again. Employers are looking at the holiday period and how this is managed. Many employers will be closing down operations over the festive season and want employees to take this time as annual leave. However, employees are not always so willing to take annual leave at this time.
It is not uncommon that we receive queries as to whether employers can direct employees to take annual leave. This often arises when the business shuts down usually over the Christmas and New Year season. Conversely, it is not uncommon that we receive a query as to whether, and in what circumstances, employees are able to trade in a portion of their annual leave entitlement for cash.
Last night I attended the eightieth commemoration of Kristallnacht, or the Night of Broken Glass at Sydney’s Great Synagogue. The events that occurred in Nazi Germany and its surrounding European countries, on Kristallnacht was the precursor to the worst atrocity committed by humans against one another in modern times, if not all times. How it could occur in the country that produced, Beethoven, Mozart, Freud, and many other intellectual giants remains one of the greatest questions. The answer I think is based on the concept of “Humans Rights” and what this means and what can occur when those rights are denied or not recognised in others.
The #MeToo movement has continued to expose the frequency of sexual harassment that occurs and continues to occur against women on a global level. Sexual harassment continues to be front and centre as a growing number of victims have come forward with their own #MeToo experiences.
In this week’s article we consider the continued effect of the #MeToo movement on Australian workplaces, the legal definition of sexual harassment and an employer’s responsibilities in relation to sexual harassment in the workplace. Most importantly, we consider what steps employers should be taking within their business to reduce the risks in this area. We also examine a recent decision which demonstrate the changing attitude of the Fair Work Commission towards sexual harassment in the workplace.
It is unusual for us to write a case note on one particular case, but the recent High court decision in Ancient Order of Foresters in Victoria Friendly Society Limited v Lifeplan Australia Friendly Society Limited [2018] HCA 43 (10 October 2018) (“Ancient Order of Foresters”), merits such an article.
Is it acceptable for an employee to approach the clients and connections of their previous employer for the benefit of a new employer? The answer to this question depends on a number of matters including whether the employee is subject to restraints preventing such conduct, whether the approaches to the clients occurs before or after the employee leaves the employment and whether the employee uses their old employer’s confidential information. In many of our previous articles, we have discussed the enforceability of restraints of trade and the protection of confidential information.