Unfair dismissal reforms - A cautionary tale

[LeonMcS]

So I see that now Johnny has the numbers in both the upper and lower houses he may push through his long wished for changes to the unfair dismissal laws. Some of you employers may see that as a good thing, and in some cases you may be right. This is what happened to me this year. Without the current agreements in place, I would have been in serious trouble, with no recourse for the injustice served on me.
*
I work for a mining contractor. I've been in this industry for close to five years now, and with my current employee for nearly 2 years. Midway through 2003 I was transferred to a new site as our current site was shutting down. I spent 9 months at this new site before being called into see the boss one day. There were rumours of the current site downsizing, but as I was the safety officer on our crew, I thought my position was pretty safe. How wrong I was. Apparantly, my continued raising of safety issues was akin to painting a bullseye on my chest. After some initial pleasentries, I was advised by the Boss to 'start looking for other work'. When I enquired to whether I was being fired he said 'No, but I'd advise you to start seeking work elsewhere'.
Now, some people would take the hint but what if you've done nothing wrong and your actual workload surpasses that of other people in your position? I had worked solidly for 18 months for them at this stage, only taken one day off and consistently beaten production targets and actually set records. I had maintaned paperwork required by law for all the machinery I used and followed correct procedure required by law by tagging out equipment when it was unsafe to use.
My crimes were the issues I had raised as a S.O and the fact that after work, I didn't go and get pissed with the boys every night. I wasn't, as I was later told, 'a team player'.
Well I could live with that. I continued to do my job until a few weeks later I was once again called into the office to meet the boss. He enquired whether I had had any luck looking for work yet. I replied that since I hadnt been fired or been given notice, I was still employed for the company. He then did fire me, with no reason why and two days later I was to fly off site. Two days notice after a year and a half. But it gets better. Before I flew out, I had to sign the termination papers. The form I was asked to sign was left blank, with only my name on it. No date. No reason for dismissal. No indication of the notice I had been given.
Not being an idiot I refused to sign and on my return to Perth, I initiated an unfair dismissal claim. While I was researching my options, I found that the company had never registered the workplace agreement I had signed with them. Luckily, during an initial meeting with the GM, he gave me a photocopy of it, which clearly stated I had to be given two weeks written notice. I paid money to see an advocate, who filled me in on where I stood and the likely ramifications of proceeding to court and what tactics the company would employ. I later decided I would represent myself. His advice was invaluable and turned out to be 100% true.
Seven weeks after I was fired, with no money coming incoming in the meantime, the company, on the last day for them to respond before the case went to court, contacted me. The call went something like this.
"Are you going to proceed with your case against us?"
"Yes"
"Why"
"Because its an open and shut case of unfair dismissal"
"We agree"
To cut a long story short, I was reinstated, compensated for time lost and back working for them within a week and my holiday pay was reinstated.
The company had tried to outlast me, as I had been warned that they would by the advocate. But thanks to the current laws, I at least had an avenue to fight back.
I am still with them, nearly six months later, still in the same position (and now unlikely to move up) but have been treated fairly on my return where I continue to work a 12 hour shift, and once again, continue to have more output than most in my position.
Where would I have been if the new laws come into place. The ones where I cant sue my employer for unfair dismissal, even if I've done nothing wrong. If I had been some malingering idiot, fair enough, I can see it from a companys point of view. But what of the little guy who, when it all comes down to it, is in the middle of a clash of personalitys?
The worst thing through all of this was finding out no matter what I had acomplished during the previous 18 months, it didn't matter when it came to the word of a manager who didnt want the boat rocked. Well if a 50 tonne truck that loses its steering whilst driving isn't a safety issue, well...
There must always be some recourse for the worker. Not all cases are succesful because not all deserve to be. Just dont let it head down the same road as some of the states in the US, Georgia being an example where the employee cannot sue the employer over conditions, termination or anything.
Its just not right.

[Joel]

Thanks for that, it does give some idea of what can happen.

The only thing is, in small businesses, those business can often go through periods of time where they just can't afford to have employees on.

I can see in your case that there needs to be protection, and that should always be there.

I can't really comment further on this, becuase I don't know the specifics of the leglislation just yet - but I will need to make myself aware of it soon.

[eddies bank balance]

12 hrs a day! been there, done that and wont do it again! but congrats for keeping ya job.

[Proud Pies]

Leon, thanks very much for posting that, perhaps it should have been posted prior to the election to let people know what they were voting for in voting for the Howard Government.

The future scares me with this sort of thing and how the hospital/medical system will be exactly like the US system, if you can't afford private health, bad luck, you may as well lie down in the gutter and die (which happens in the US) and god help us if we need prescriptions. The only thing stopping me from moving to New Zealand and taking up the recriprical dole payment arrangement (do they have one??) is the fact that it's too far to fly in to see my beloved pies play weekly.

[Cannibal]

It's a salutary lesson for those who think all will be well.

I don't think it would have made much difference, though, Jacqui. Times are pretty good economically and basically, people won't vote out governments which preside over strong economies, unless you can convince them they will be better off under you.

I think Labour failed to get a message across that it had a lot to do with creating that economic strength. There's still a strong feeling that they should try to pretend Keating never existed, but it was Keating as Treasurer who made changes such as floating the Dollar which shielded us from the Asian fianancial meltdown a few years ago, expanded our export industries and generally created the framework for today's prosperity. The Liberals under Fraser (Howard was Treasurer then) didn't have the guts to make the changes Keating did (and Howard even said that they were changes he agreed with). Why not so say?

Similarly with the interest rate scare campaign. Labour could have emphasised that the climate which enabled people to borrow the money to buy their homes directly resulted from Keating's decision to open up the Australian banking system to foreign banks. Instead of government regulating interest rates, Keating's decision brought competition into the industry and it is this competition which keeps the pressure on rates to stay low, not John Howard.

I was surprised that very little was said about rising petrol prices. This is a cost of living increase directly attributably to going into Iraq. If Howard could run a scare campaign on interest rates, why could not Latham send a message that a litre of petrol would cost, say $2 by the end of 2005 under Howard, based on the percentage increase that had occurred over the last few months? Interest rates are never going back up again but Howard convinced people they could. Turn the tables on him on an economic issue he's vulnerable on.

Howard is smart and should never be underestimated. He knows how to twist things to make himself look good. Latham needs to take a leaf out of his book and face him with facts which support Labour's cause. It's ironic that there are Labour State governments in place, all on the fundamental basis that they are stronger economic managers than the State Liberals. Latham should have trotted out the Premiers to create a message that these guys do it for you, so will I.

Letting Howard control the agenda was a big mistake. But Latham will learn from it.

[DidakinthePocket]

If it wasnt for the howard government, ild be worse off then I am now. Did anyone believe that the Recession was the "Recession we had to have"? Like shit it was!

Good on you john for pulling us out and getting us back on track. For the record, any changes to the unfair dismissal laws would not change the outcome of the above case study.

They are being changed to stop the DOGS out there abusing them. I.E. turning up at a job stoned, drunk or on drugs, getting the arse and then comming back and claiming unfair dismissal.