*Please note that the links to the content in this Part will direct you to Westlaw AU.
The latest issue of the Workplace Review (Volume 7 Part 3) contains the following material:
FOCUS ON AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY
- Controlling behaviour outside the workplace: The widening scope of statutory conduct obligations in the public service – James Macken
Articles
For whom the bell tolls? Employment law compliance – it’s not just the employer’s responsibility – Neil Napper and Daniel Proietto
While compliance with employment law remains the primary responsibility of the employer, in Australia the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) has broadened responsibility through the concept of accessorial liability to any person involved in a contravention. The category of people who may be involved in a contravention is not closed. It includes directors and other officers of corporations, managers (such as Human Resources Managers) as well as external advisers like accountants and, possibly, lawyers. The concept has also been used to extend responsibility to other organisations seen as the ultimate beneficiaries of a worker’s labour, such as head or principal contractors and franchisors. It is vital that all who benefit from labour – and their advisers – are aware of the potential risks, and take steps to ensure compliance with employment laws.
To purchase this article, complete the Individual Article Sale order form and email it to [email protected].
Is there still an implied term of reasonable notice on termination? – Shauna Roeger and Professor Andrew Stewart
Traditionally, a term requiring reasonable notice on termination of a contract of employment has been implied where the contract has no agreed duration and makes no provision for termination without cause. This settled understanding has been disturbed by a recent decision of the South Australian District Court, Kuczmarski v Ascot Administration Pty Ltd [2016] SADC 65 (“Kuczmarskiâ€), which held that the term was not implied into a contract governed by s 117 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth). If this view (which has been contested) is upheld, there will be little practical scope to imply the term, at least in relation to termination by employers.
To purchase this article, complete the Individual Article Sale order form and email it to [email protected].
Workplace Review’s year, in review – Craig Ryan
This review of Workplace Review in 2016 considers the comprehensive coverage of workplace relations issues provided by the journal this year. It acknowledges that while partisan engagement with issues is unavoidable, particularly with a federal election focused on industrial relations, the journal provided balance in its presentation of material. Further, the journal’s practical orientation – including in relation to the everyday, human aspects of industrial relations – was tempered by an examination of deeper, long-term questions. A measure of Workplace Review’s success in 2016 was the outstanding contributions it received, including from leaders in the fields of workplace relations and law.
To purchase this article, complete the Individual Article Sale order form and email it to [email protected].
- Building fair – and compliant – workplaces: Fair Work Ombudsman Natalie James – Craig Ryan
COMMON LAW AND GENERAL PROTECTIONS
- Complaints and inquiries in relation to employment – s 341(1)(c)(ii): Recent issues – Dr Victoria Lambropoulos
- High Court issues reminder on the purpose of, and broad interpretation to be given to, work health and safety laws – Rowan Kelly
- Miscellany of the legal world – Jeffrey Phillips SC
For the PDFÂ version of the table of contents, click here: WR Vol 7 No 3 Contents.
