*Please note that the links to the content in this Part will direct you to Westlaw AU.<\/p>\n
The latest issue of the Workplace Review <\/em>(Volume 6 Part 2) contains the following material:<\/p>\n EDITORIAL<\/a><\/p>\n FOCUS ON SOUTH AUSTRALIA<\/a><\/p>\n FOCUS ON VICTORIA<\/a><\/p>\n Who has custody of a police officer\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s goatee? <\/em><\/strong><\/a>\u00e2\u20ac\u201c<\/em> Catherine Bembrick<\/p>\n This article discusses the recent Victorian Supreme Court decision in Kuyken v Chief Commissioner of Police <\/em>[2015] VSC 204 in which Garde J considered whether a new grooming standard imposed by the Chief Commissioner of Victoria Police prohibiting the wearing of \u00e2\u20ac\u0153goatees\u00e2\u20ac\u009d contravened the Equal Opportunity Act 2010 <\/em>(Vic) or the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 <\/em>(Vic).<\/p>\n To purchase this article, complete the Individual Article Sale<\/a> order form and email it to tlranz.journal.orders@thomsonreuters.com<\/a>.<\/p>\n Elder abuse \u00e2\u20ac\u201c an issue for employers? <\/em><\/strong><\/a>\u00e2\u20ac\u201c <\/em>Rick Manuel<\/p>\n With the ageing of the population and an increasing need for elder care facilities, there are appropriate concerns about the need to prevent elder abuse as demonstrated by high-profile media cases in recent years. This article considers elder abuse as an issue for employers and discusses a number of possible matters that may develop in the future.<\/p>\n To purchase this article, complete the Individual Article Sale<\/a> order form and email it to tlranz.journal.orders@thomsonreuters.com<\/a>.<\/p>\n Allegations and consequences: How should an employer respond to an employee\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s misconduct? <\/em><\/strong><\/a>\u00e2\u20ac\u201c <\/em>Luke Scandrett and Neil Napper<\/p>\n Determining an appropriate response to an employee\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s misconduct has often proved to be difficult for many employers. A hasty or disproportionate disciplinary process may result in the employer being embroiled in larger legal issues than the misconduct itself originally presented. In this article, the authors consider recent cases involving employee misconduct and examine the relevant lessons employers can learn from them.<\/p>\n To purchase this article, complete the Individual Article Sale<\/a> order form and email it to tlranz.journal.orders@thomsonreuters.com<\/a>.<\/p>\n Recent privacy considerations arising in the workplace \u00e2\u20ac\u201c social media and limitations on collection and use by employers of employee-generated content <\/em><\/strong><\/a>\u00e2\u20ac\u201c <\/em>Elizabeth Raper and Philippa Munton<\/p>\n The concept of privacy in the contemporary workplace remains a vexed issue. The recent case law reveals a number of things. First, employees continue to assert the existence of a wider right to privacy than exists under Australian law. Secondly, in the social media context, only very limited forms of communications have been excused on the basis that they are deemed to be \u00e2\u20ac\u0153private\u00e2\u20ac\u009d. Thirdly, there remains a need for employment lawyers to keep abreast of the limited recognition of privacy rights under Australian legislation, the equitable protections of confidence and case law.<\/p>\n To purchase this article, complete the Individual Article Sale<\/a> order form and email it to tlranz.journal.orders@thomsonreuters.com<\/a>.<\/p>\n INTERVIEW<\/a><\/p>\n Richard Kenzie: Without fear or favour \u00e2\u20ac\u201c industrial relations the Kenzie way <\/em><\/strong>\u00e2\u20ac\u201c <\/em>by Steven Andrew<\/p>\n SKETCHES<\/a><\/p>\n Artwork <\/strong>\u00e2\u20ac\u201c by Paul Nisted<\/em><\/p>\n COMMON LAW AND GENERAL PROTECTIONS<\/a><\/p>\n WORK HEALTH AND SAFETY<\/a><\/p>\n BOOK REVIEW<\/a><\/p>\n THE LAST WORD \u00e2\u20ac\u00a6<\/a><\/p>\n DIARY<\/a><\/p>\n For the pdf version of the table of contents, click here: WR Vol 6 No 2 Contents<\/a><\/p>\n\n
\n
Articles<\/h3>\n
\n
\n
\n
\n