Raven HR

📈 The FWO has been busy! The recent Fair Work Ombudsman (FWO) Annual Report 2023-24 shows the FWO has: 🕵🏻♀️ conducted 4035 investigations resulting in recovering more then $15.4 million in underpayments! 🌱 Resolved 17,504 workplace disputes. 💰 $473 million in unpaid wages and entitlements for nearly 160,000 employees. 👩🏻⚖️ $22 million in court ordered penalties. Here is an extract with some of the key stats. 🔗 I’ll put the link in the comments if you would like to see the full report. ⏰ It’s a timely reminder for employers to double check they are paying their employees correctly. There have been significant changes in the last 3 years. Don’t get caught out. If you need help with this book an appointment with Melisa Raven 🐦⬛ at Raven HR.

🚨🐶 An employee set up a puppy fence & tripped while WFH - can they claim workers compensation? What happened? 🔹 The employee set up a temporary 60-centimetre metal pet fence across the doorway to her sunroom, where her home office was set-up, to allow her to look after a colleague's puppy while working from home on 19 September 2022. 🔹 The fence had been put in place to keep the puppy away from her pet rabbit. 🔹 The employee was permitted to work from home from time to time with prior notice. 🔹 The employee tripped and fell when she got up to make a cup of coffee between 9am and 9:30am, after starting work at 8.30am. 🔹 She suffered a humerus fracture and injured her right knee when she landed on her right side. 🔹 She made the claim against the Local Government Association Workers Compensation Scheme. 🧑⚖️ Findings: Deputy president Magistrate Jodie Carrel of the South Australian Employment Tribunal found: 🔸 the fall occurred during an "authorised coffee break at her place of employment". 🔸 when the employee took her paid coffee break, she needed to "walk through the doorway across from where she had erected the pet fence". 🔸 the employee had not discussed the pet fence with anyone from the council (her employer), but had told the tribunal there was "nothing that limits the application of the workers compensation scheme by reason of an injury occurring due to a feature of the workplace not known or authorised by an employer". 🔸 the injuries sustained "arose out of her employment" and that "the physical workplace hazard, being the pet fence" was a "significant contributing cause of her injuries". 🔗 I’ll put the link to the ABC article in the comments below. —————————————————————————————— If you found this post useful follow Melisa Raven 🐦⬛ and click the 🔔 to ensure you see all my posts. Raven HR #HR #IR #Consulting #Outsourcing

🎉 It’s our birthday, Raven HR is 2! 🥳 A massive THANK YOU to our clients, team, referrers, followers, supporters, family and friends! We would not be here without you! It has been an absolute pleasure and privilege to be able to support our clients of all sizes, in a wide range of industries. ✨Want to work with us? Book an appointment using the link under Melisa Raven 🐦⬛ #HR #IR #Consulting #Business

✨Wish you had someone to call for complex HR/IR questions and advice? 🏗️ Need someone who understands you and your business to help with HR or compliance projects? 📚 Looking for someone to train your team or leaders on HR and employment law topics? Contact Melisa Raven 🐦⬛ at Raven HR we are booking in projects for the end of year and for 2025! Availability is limited, don’t miss out!

🤔 Can rudeness and inept social skills be bullying behaviour? 👋 Have you ever worked with someone who doesn’t acknowledge others or say hello? ❓Have you heard people in the workplace say things like “oh that’s just how they are” or “they don’t mean any harm, they’re just like that with everyone”? ⚖️ A recent Fair Work Commission (FWC) decision considered the findings of an external workplace investigation which found an employee engaged in workplace bullying due to: 🔹 the employee “frequently ignores” the complainant’s greetings, “does not engage in conversation with her or acknowledge her work or exchange pleasantries with her.” 🔹 the employee being generally "rude" and that he has "always been like that" and "does not respect women very much". 🔹 the fact that he (the employee) treats everybody in the same way he treats the complainant “does not excuse his conduct or behaviour, but rather is an indication of a person who is simply socially inept”. 🔹 the employee failed to treat the complaint “with courtesy, civility, respect and dignity, belittled her contributions and failed to create a safe, encouraging, supportive and respectful environment.” The investigator found these behaviour to be unreasonable and creates a risk to health and safety which amounts to bullying behaviour. 👨⚖️ The FWC in its decision agreed this behaviour amounted to bullying behaviour. 🥡 Key takeaways: ✅ The FWC findings in this case should give comfort to employers to be able to address these types of behaviour which may have been brushed aside in the past as “that’s just how they are”. ✅ “rudeness” and “inept social skills” can cause harm in the workplace by amounting to bullying behaviour which can also cause risk to health and safety (e.g. psychological safety). ✅ In this case having an experienced external investigator conduct the investigation gave credibility to the findings by ensuring a fair investigation had been conducted. 🔗 I’ll put the link to the case in the comments. —————————————————————————————— If you found this post useful follow Melisa Raven 🐦⬛ and click the 🔔 to ensure you see all my posts. Raven HR #HR #IR #Consulting #Outsourcing

🏡 WFH v Return to the Office 🏪 Part 2 Further to my post yesterday: 👩🏭 The 5-day workweek originated with Henry Ford in 1926 and applied to manufacturing employees. Today’s modern workforce, primarily comprised of knowledge workers, has dramatically different needs and responsibilities that require more flexible options. 🇦🇺 In Australia there is no right to work from home (WFH), however employees who meet certain criteria (e.g. pregnant, have caring responsibilities etc) can make a request to work from home as part of a flexible working arrangement. 👩🏻⚖️ The Fair Work Commission (FWC) is currently reviewing whether the Clerks-Private Sector Award covering administrative workers, should include the right to work from home. The review will decide whether to include a general right to work from home in the award, which could then be expanded to other Modern Awards and flow on to enterprise agreements across Australia. 👩🏻💻 This has the potential to extend WFH rights to approximately 91,000 administrative and clerical employees. This could potentially impact over a million workers nationally and will be decided by the FWC in 2025. ABS data shows around 37% of Australian's work from home regularly, which is 5% higher from pre-pandemic levels. 🇺🇸 In America, Amazon’s decision to mandate a return to the office 5 days a week drew a lot of attention and controversy among employees. A survey conducted by the professional social network Blind showed that 91% of workers are dissatisfied with the mandate, and 73% are searching for new jobs. According to Forbes the data speaks for itself: 🔹 Return to the office mandates lower engagement, morale, productivity and retention, all without benefiting the bottom line. ⚠️ 🦘 Employers in Australia need to be cautious about following the mandates in America as they could face a rise in indirect discrimination claims from employees and likely many high performing employees will leave. 🔹 Instead of forcing employees back to the office, listen to what they want and need. 🔹 Then collaborate with them to find the best solution. Only then will you cultivate a culture of trust and respect that benefits everyone and promotes diversity and inclusion. —————————————————————————————— If you found this post useful follow Melisa Raven 🐦⬛ and click the 🔔 to ensure you see all my posts. Raven HR #HR #IR #Consulting #Outsourcing

🏡 WFH v Return to the Office 🏪 Part 1 The pandemic forced many employers to embrace working from home (WFH), even in roles where they had previously said it could not be done. Post pandemic many employers have adopted a hybrid approach allowing the employees to choose the working arrangements that allow them to be most productive or mandating that a certain number of days needs to be worked from the office. 🏪 Recently a number of large employers have mandated a full return to the office, abandoning the hybrid model completely. These include: 🔹 Amazon 🔹 Dell 🔹 Flight Centre 🔹 NSW Public Service ❓What does the data say? 📊 According to KPMG's 2024 global CEO survey, of 1325 chief executives: ♦️ 78% of global CEO’s "would likely" reward employees who came into the office with pay rises, promotions, and better opportunities. ♦️ 83% of the chief executives expect a full return to the office within three years, up from 64% the year before. 📈 HR software company Rippling surveyed managers at Australian businesses with 20 to 500 employees, finding: 🔸 67% endorse a work-from-anywhere policy. 🔸 Exactly two-thirds want a four-day working week. 🔸 44% of HR leaders agree a four-day work week can increase productivity 🔸 65% of IT and 62% of finance leaders think a four-day week would boost output. 🏡 Which employers are supporting WFH forever? ✅ Atlassian announced in 2020 it would allow employees to work from home "forever" however has offices so employees can choose whatever combination of office or remote working suits them. ✅ Telstra has also told employees they are able to work wherever they will be “most productive” including WFH. What are your thoughts? Let me know in the comments. —————————————————————————————— If you found this post useful follow Melisa Raven 🐦⬛ and click the 🔔 to ensure you see all my posts. Raven HR #HR #IR #Consulting #Outsourcing

🤔 What do you think? No two people are the same. While the sentiment is good, it has flaws. It’s better not to assume how people want to be treated and ask. Just because I like things a certain way or how I prefer to communicate doesn’t mean you have the same preferences. Treating others as they want to be treated is a more inclusive approach. ✨ Be curious. Let me know what you think in the comments. —————————————————————————————— If you found this post useful follow Melisa Raven 🐦⬛ and click the 🔔 to ensure you see all my posts. Raven HR #HR #IR #Consulting #Outsourcing

🌟 Amazing FREE resource launched! The Fair Work Commission (FWC) has published the Sexual Harassment Disputes Benchbook on 1 October 2024! 📑 The FWC Benchbooks are a fantastic resource with guidance to help employers, employees, HR practitioners, lawyers and business owners understand Fair Work legislation. ⏰ This latest Benchbook applies to alleged sexual harassment in connection with work that happened (or started) on or after 6 March 2023. ❓What’s in the Benchbook? 🔹 It explains the FWC processes and provide examples of how Commission Members have interpreted the legislation in previous cases to make decisions. 🔹 It deals with changes to how the Commission deals with sexual harassment disputes as a result of provisions in the Secure Jobs Better Pay Act that expanded the Commission’s sexual harassment jurisdiction. #sexualharassment #SecureJobsBetterPay #FairWorkCommission —————————————————————————————— If you found this post useful follow Melisa Raven 🐦⬛ and click the 🔔 to ensure you see all my posts. Raven HR #HR #IR #Consulting #Outsourcing

⚠️ Dismissing an employee on the last day of probation? Think again! ⚖️ In a recent Federal Court case, an employer hastily terminated an employee for serious misconduct at 4:40pm on the last day of the minimum employment period. The employer made the decision to terminate following an executive committee meeting and before an investigation report into the conduct of the employee had been finalised. The employee sought an interim order for reinstatement pursuant to section 545 of Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (FW Act). 👩🏻⚖️ The Court found that the employers actions gave rise to a prima facie case of unlawful adverse action and reinstated the employee pending a final hearing. While this was an interim decision only it gives rise to the notion a dismissal like this during the probation/minimum employment period could result in unlawful adverse action and the court accepted this without questioning it in the decision. ❓What is the minimum employment period? An employee is only able to make a claim for unfair dismissal once they have completed the ‘minimum employment period’ which is: 🔹 6 months from commencement of employment if the employer has 15 or more employees; or 🔹 12 months if the employer is a small business with less than 15 employees. 🤷🏻♀️ What is adverse action? Adverse action is where a person (usually an employer) takes, plans or threatens to take action against an employee (e.g. dismissing an employee) because they exercised a workplace right or to prevent them from exercising a workplace right. Adverse action claims have a reverse onus of proof meaning, the employer needs to prove that they did not take adverse action (which assumes that the employer is guilty until they prove they are not). 🔍 What workplace right applied in this case? It's unlawful to dismiss an employee if a main reason for doing so is to prevent them from exercising a workplace right. When the employer in this case terminated the employee at 4:40pm, just 7 hours before the minimum employment period ended, they had dismissed the employee to arguably prevent them from being able to exercise their workplace right to make an application for unfair dismissal. 🔗 I’ll put the link to the case in the comments. —————————————————————————————— If you enjoyed this post follow Melisa Raven 🐦⬛ and click the 🔔 to ensure you see all my posts. Raven HR #HR #IR #Consulting #Outsourcing