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

Commission finds employer’s unsubstantiated allegations rendered dismissal unfair

Not mushroom for error

Where there is a factual dispute about allegations made against an employee, employers must ensure that the allegations are properly tested before proceeding to a disciplinary process. This will ensure that the employee has been provided with procedural fairness and any reasons relied on by the employer as grounds for dismissal are valid.

Read more...

FWC finds Philippine-based worker entitled to claim unfair dismissal

Objection overruled

When engaging overseas workers to perform work for an Australian entity, employers need to be mindful of the risks that such workers may be considered employees to whom the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) might apply.

Read more...

Commission finds employer’s ‘rushed’ investigation process of sexual harassment allegation renders dismissal unfair

Something worth waiting for

When conducting workplace investigations, one issue that we commonly face is ensuring that the process is completed in a timely manner to minimise any disruption and uncertainty in the workplace. However, whilst investigations should be completed as quickly as possible, this must not come at the expense of procedural fairness being provided to all employees involved.

Read more...

Commission finds employer’s unsubstantiated allegations rendered dismissal unfair

Not mushroom for error

Where there is a factual dispute about allegations made against an employee, employers must ensure that the allegations are properly tested before proceeding to a disciplinary process. This will ensure that the employee has been provided with procedural fairness and any reasons relied on by the employer as grounds for dismissal are valid.

Read more...

Commission finds role with additional 88km travel time was not suitable alternative employment

The road less travelled

An employer may apply to the Fair Work Commission to have an employee’s redundancy pay reduced to a specified amount (which may be nil) in circumstances where it has obtained “other acceptable employment” for the employee.

Read more...

FWC finds Philippine-based worker entitled to claim unfair dismissal

Objection overruled

When engaging overseas workers to perform work for an Australian entity, employers need to be mindful of the risks that such workers may be considered employees to whom the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) might apply.

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 law and sports law.

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