Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 02 NOVEMBER 2013

Adverse action – limits on what constitutes a "workplace right"

If a workplace right does not arise via a workplace instrument or an order of an industrial body, it must be by statute.

AustraliaEmployment and HR
Tim Lethbridge (Previously With Kott Gunning)
Tim Lethbridge (Previously With Kott Gunning)
Author LinkedIn connections

In January 2013, we published a legal update regarding the case of Beauty and the Geek contestant Adam Marshall, who made an adverse action claim against his employer, the Bureau of Meteorology.

He claimed that he had exercised a "workplace right", being an entitlement under an enterprise agreement to take leave when medically unfit. The Federal Magistrates Court (now known as the Federal Circuit Court) accepted that this was a workplace right for the purposes of an adverse action claim.

In the recent case of Daw v Schneider Electric (Australia) Pty Ltd [2013] FCCA 1341, Mr Daw tried to stretch the definition of "workplace right" further.

Mr Daw claimed that his employment was terminated for refusing his employer's request to carry out an act that was either illegal or, if not illegal, not reasonable in all the circumstances. He had been asked to do professional engineering services work , as defined in the Professional Engineers Act 2002 (Qld), in circumstances

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from