Fired- well that was unexpected.

[Cdro]

Was there 2.5-3 years.

Wasn't 'fired' was made redundant effective immediately. Am curious to see what the package is (will see it on Monday) My contract states 3? weeks minimum notice. Is this on top of the redundancy or part of it.

It was definitely directly related to the meeting as we weren't schedule to finish for another 1-2 months, and I was the one expected to go last as I knew what was going on.

Sorry, didn't mean to cause offence by using the word "fired". I meant redundant.

If you have a contractual notice period, this is in addition to any redundancy payment. So assuming you are eligible for a payment (ie. you're an employee of the company and they employ more than 15 people), the package should look something like:

3 weeks notice
Redundancy payment: 6 weeks pay (doesn't include allowances, bonuses etc., just your base pay)
Annual leave: any balance you have accrued

In contrast, a worst case scenario unfair dismissal claim would be worth the lesser of 6 months pay or $60K. You could threaten this (again, assuming you're eligible - ie. you're an employee and earn less than $123Kpa) and ask for a payment in return for an agreement that you won't lodge any claim. But if they call your bluff, you don't want to go there because FWA favours reinstatement.

(As an aside, they might tell you that doesn't apply in a redundancy scenario, but that isn't always true. Anyway, you only need more info on that if you decide to go the unfair dismissal route).

Hope the package looks ok when you get it on Monday.

 

[Intrinsic_Value]

I don't know how to phrase this in a political correct way that is suitable for you.

But at the end of the day, you are in control of your own destiny. In my opinion you have to conduct yourself in a way that maximises your own personal goals.

For some that involves a stable job, for others not.

I remember some 18 odd years ago (the last time I was in an employee paid position), I had just told my direct manager (although they couched it nicer, he was my mentor), that I was going to resign to go into my own business.

As a good employee he immediately set the 'exit' rungs in progress, notifying the HR department etc. (No hard feelings on this from my behalf, I understand the logic in his decision making).

Anyway the next day I get a phone call from the HR manager, telling me I am still employed for the next 4 weeks, and as such I am expected to work the hours required ( I cant go into too much detail here, but there were periods in the year when work loads go through the roof and we were expected to work the hours required).

I told her that I had effectively given my resignation notice. I will work the standard 9-5. But if they demand I work overtime, then I require a letter of indemnity from the partners of the firm, insuring any loss I incur from my future business will be covered by the partners of the firm.

She went blue in the face, and this 'gossip' spread trough the office like wildfire.

But I said with a straight face, I am resigning, this now becomes a straight commercial contract. I am investing my life savings in this business. You cannot expect me to risk my future business, without providing some insurance to me.

If you want that insurance, then get me the written signatures of the partners.

In the end she backed down and never spoke to me again.
In my own small way I think I really made the day of many of the other office workers in the firm.

Funny thing is I learnt a lot from this experience.
The senior employees who worked for me in my own businesses have for the vast majority shown long tenure.

 

[geoffw]

Redundancy only applies where there is a genuine need to reduce the work force. Redundancy cannot be used as a substitute for dismissal otherwise. Unfair dismissal applies otherwise, and would appear to apply here. Your boss got mad and thought that he had the power to dismiss you immediately. Unless you have done something drastically wrong (Eg against the law) you cannot legally be terminated in the way that you have.

I know somebody who was made "redundant" because she was pregnant. They were foolish enough to have said so. The payment would have been a deposit for a small unit.

 

[china]

This is the problem with the industrial laws in this country, making it hard to run effective small businesses. A small business owner cannot dismiss anyone immediately. You cannot just say " you are fired" without financial repercussions. You have to go through the rigmarole of several warnings, providing remediation, etc. All this is costly and disadvantageous to small business owners. Coupled with high hourly wages, super payments, workcover payments - the pain goes on for employers.

 

[redwing]

I know you said you were leaving anyway, but it seems the companies process and managers leave a lot to be desired?

Redundancy generally refers to a situation in which an employer no longer requires a role. This may arise following an organisational restructure. The question of whether part or all of a role is still required following a restructure requires examination of its impact on all of the key features of the role, including its title, reporting lines and the level of autonomy and responsibility.

See more at: http://www.employmentl...and-classification-remain-the-same/#more-3168

“Employers must understand that making use of redundancy as a pretext for getting rid of an undesired employee is not an option, if the reasons for wishing to get rid of that employee would be proscribed by the Fair Work Act.” Justice Gray

You only have 21 days if you want to take it further with the FWC

 

[Sylvester]

this story just reminds me once again an employee is subservient to an employer...and that there will always be a higher number of employees around than employers...governments and lawyers are not Gods, and will never change human nature.

 

[redwing]

This is the problem with the industrial laws in this country, making it hard to run effective small businesses. A small business owner cannot dismiss anyone immediately. You cannot just say " you are fired" without financial repercussions. You have to go through the rigmarole of several warnings, providing remediation, etc. All this is costly and disadvantageous to small business owners. Coupled with high hourly wages, super payments, workcover payments - the pain goes on for employers.

Very pain-full, but current rules of the game

More recently, the Senate has just passed without any changes the Government's Fair Work Amendment Bill 2013, which introduces a bullying jurisdiction within the FWC, expands the right to request flexible working arrangements, and allows unions to use workplace lunchrooms for discussions with employees.

Let's see what happens when the new team comes in

 

[geoffw]

This is the problem with the industrial laws in this country, making it hard to run effective small businesses. A small business owner cannot dismiss anyone immediately. You cannot just say " you are fired" without financial repercussions. You have to go through the rigmarole of several warnings, providing remediation, etc. All this is costly and disadvantageous to small business owners. Coupled with high hourly wages, super payments, workcover payments - the pain goes on for employers.

As an employer, I had no trouble with this.

An employee could be terminated immediately during probation, that's generally enough to determine if an employee is of no value. If an employee was stealing or doing something grossly wrong, you could fire them immediately. Or you could give them a couple of warnings, give them the chance to make good, and then fire them if they didn't work out. That's fair.

Young people will remain more loyal to a workplace where they have a workplace where they like to be, and one where they are treated fairly. You will build a much better team with fair than fear.

 

[pinkboy]

Young people will remain more loyal to a workplace where they have a workplace where they like to be, and one where they are treated fairly. You will build a much better team with fair than fear.

I love this bit Geoff. All my permanent employees are all aged under 30. I am the oldest at work at 30 (and 2 months). I have been in business 7 years, and I have 2 staff that have been permanent for 6 and 5 years respectfully. I have a permanent part time guy who is 34 who I FIFO for work either at the mines or in my workshops. I am not discriminatory, I just have a certain 'criteria' for employees.

I have over the years had to dismiss employees for gross misbehaviour, which is not favourable for the company. I have also dismissed employees in a probationary period. Ive never dismissed an employee at the completion of the 3 month probationary period...I already know well before their suitability for the position. Ive also managed to even dismiss an employee whilst on full Work Cover benefits....but that's a long story for another day.

pinkboy

 

[nhg]

When I worked at Subway, the turnover rate was about 5 years. We started beginning of uni, most of us had much higher income professional roles halfway through, accountants, engineers, lawyers, but we kept working there. Bosses were some of the best I've worked for.

I've never had a bad boss to be honest, perhaps that's why I felt I could voice some concerns of mine regarding lack of communication. This is the first time I've had anything short of absolute respect for my peers. As stated before, am going back Monday (I live 3 hrs away) to go to work and do a proper handover, would hate to let the team down.

 

[geoffw]

I've only had to dismiss an employee after probation once apart for gross negligence. This was after bullying of foreign born employees, and after two previous warnings.

I saw her less than two weeks after dismissal, at a place where we expected to see each other. She told me that he dismissal was fair.

She was otherwise an excellent employee. Bu it was impossible to keep her and have a lot more badly treated employees.

I don't believe she was racially motivated- she just had a low tolerance to anybody new and untrained.

 

[nhg]

Ive also managed to even dismiss an employee whilst on full Work Cover benefits....but that's a long story for another day.

pinkboy

Now that is impressive. Would love to hear how. I've had and seen this problem over the last few years.

 

[pinkboy]

Now that is impressive. Would love to hear how. I've had and seen this problem over the last few years.

OK, seeing as you asked and all Ill do the short version.

Had a guy break his foot at work, just above where the steel cap is (guy was doing a stupid heavy lift, presumably trying to be the hero he always tried to be). Of course, being at work, Work Cover ensued. Crutches and the whole shebang for approx. 6-8 weeks.

I am an employer with a belief in active recovery.

Strike 1. Tried to set tasks at week 3 including coming to work even for 2-4hrs doing extremely light duties. Duties like cleaning spray guns at a desk with toothbrush like instruments etc, repacking said guns, testing and tagging equipment, engraving equipment ect...all at a desk. After the first day (all of 2hrs), he convinced a doctor that no duties would be suitable for 6 weeks. So no active recovery or anything to do with work.

Strike 2. Couldn't manage to come to work, but managed to go night clubbing/pubs etc for many hours during both weekdays and weekend nights. One night, before he went out he got himself totally blind, cut his cast off, danced half the night, walked several kilometres home...and managed to re-fracture his foot. Another 6 weeks!

Strike 3 (and out). Turned up to workshop in his car. By this stage I was pretty fed up with his inability to attend work due to all the excuses. I basically told him he should not be driving, and he was holding my other staff up from work chatting to them. He got the $h!t$ and tore off spinning the wheels etc. I had a staff member complain they felt in slight danger due to the behaviour.

I contacted Work Cover and my Soli who all agreed that I had grounds for termination, so I did. Did the whole exit interview with the guy, and he didn't believe it to be a big deal at the time, but with no income, with a broken foot, in an expensive town, I think he learned the hard way - fast. Ive never seen the guy again since, presumably moved away.


pinkboy

 

[wylie]

Strike 2. Couldn't manage to come to work, but managed to go night clubbing/pubs etc for many hours during both weekdays and weekend nights. One night, before he went out he got himself totally blind, cut his cast off, danced half the night, walked several kilometres home...and managed to re-fracture his foot. Another 6 weeks!

Just WOW! Would you have been expected to pay him for the extended time he was off having caused the new fracture by his own stupidity? Or is he somehow paid via some sort of workcover insurance? (I have no idea how it works.)

I would have thought if you were paying him, that taking off his cast to go clubbing would be good enough reason for any sensible person to say "enough" and he can fund himself from then on, but I suppose it doesn't work like that .

 

[Deltaberry]

This is the problem with the industrial laws in this country, making it hard to run effective small businesses. A small business owner cannot dismiss anyone immediately. You cannot just say " you are fired" without financial repercussions. You have to go through the rigmarole of several warnings, providing remediation, etc. All this is costly and disadvantageous to small business owners. Coupled with high hourly wages, super payments, workcover payments - the pain goes on for employers.

John Howard only comes once every 20 years or so.

 

[china]

Very pain-full, but current rules of the game

More recently, the Senate has just passed without any changes the Government's Fair Work Amendment Bill 2013, which introduces a bullying jurisdiction within the FWC, expands the right to request flexible working arrangements, and allows unions to use workplace lunchrooms for discussions with employees.

Let's see what happens when the new team comes in

More nails in the coffins of small businesses. Please bring on Clive Palmer.

 

[china]

John Howard only comes once every 20 years or so.

Badly missed by all employers.

 

[The Y-man]

Sorry, didn't mean to cause offence by using the word "fired". I meant redundant.

Well, nhg did make the title of this thread "Fired"

The Y-man

 

[cimbom]

This is the problem with the industrial laws in this country, making it hard to run effective small businesses. A small business owner cannot dismiss anyone immediately. You cannot just say " you are fired" without financial repercussions. You have to go through the rigmarole of several warnings, providing remediation, etc. All this is costly and disadvantageous to small business owners. Coupled with high hourly wages, super payments, workcover payments - the pain goes on for employers.

Then maybe don't be an employer? Since you are one, you're clearly still getting the better end of the deal. I'm not sure anyone would be silly enough to waste their time and effort running a business if that wasn't the case.

 

[geoffw]

Badly missed by all employers.

Actually John Howard's laws added considerably to my expenses as an employer. Employment agreements become more onerous. People who were only available to work outside of normal hours found it harder to get employment as there was no longer a provision for people who wanted work and were happy to work at normal rates. Overtime rates were enforced for these people. I had to reduce my hours to survive.