Why be an employer ?

[natmarie73]

Correct.

Years ago one of my golf colleagues caught one of his staff (an apprentice) tickling the till, and sacked him on the spot.

Now; to me that is fair and reasonable, and I reckon you should have to repay the money no matter what - garnish their wages for ever until it's paid..

My mate didn't ask for the money back; just said get lost.

Guess what? He was sued for unfair dismissal and ended up paying the loser $7k out of court settlement.

Shame he didn't take it to the magistrate. It's perfectly legal (at this time but who knows how long for) to sack someone for stealing or any other criminal behaviour but you may need to jump through hoops depending on the size of your business.

http://www.hospitalitymagazine.com.au/management/misconduct-how-to-sack-misbehaving-staff

Like others have said, even as an employee I am all for businesses employing staff as casuals. My employer did so on a recent OAG shutdown and luckily as they had to sack a hell of a lot of incompetent, unsafe and generally cr@p "workers" (ie lazy bums who did little more than whinge all day about how hard done by they were despite earning over $3000 in the hand each week)

 

[redwing]

As an update on whether someone is an employee or a sole trader

A sole trader is a person who provides services to you as part of a business that the worker carries on. This person is described at law as an independent contractor.

It is an offence under the Fair Work Act to represent that you have an independent contractor arrangement with a worker when you are actually in an employment relationship.

In On Call Interpreters and Translators Agency Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Taxation (2011), the fact that the worker provided services to a number of different 'clients' did not mean they were a sole trader. The Court said that this feature was, on its own, no different to that of a casual or part-time employee working for a small number of employers.
A worker might be a sole trader and still trigger the same obligations for you as if they were an employee, e.g. you may have to pay payroll tax, SGC and WorkCover premiums.

 

[Peter 14.7]

As an update on whether someone is an employee or a sole trader


It is an offence under the Fair Work Act to represent that you have an independent contractor arrangement with a worker when you are actually in an employment relationship.

I had the reverse. SOmeone who represented to me he was company, fully legit and even gave invoices etc...and then when workcover auditted me, well, he lied.

Sadly it is not and offence for him to misrepresent only for the poor sucker employer to do so.

I dont mind onerous rules but it is all one side. It risk was shared as to who is lying get the book, then the rules would be fair and the spurious claims drop to 10% IMO.

Peter

 

[moyjos]

I have now had our new staff on for a month. They are employed through a workplace solutions mob. www.haycroft.com.au

We advertised for staff and chose the most suitable applicant, then passed it all off to Haycroft.

So far it is all working well. I love the "non-hassle" of it all. I just fill in the time sheet and Haycroft send me a bill, which I can then pay by credit card...
That will add up to a nice stack of points over the course of the year

 

[Ace in the Hole]

We just signed up with www.employsure.com.au
Highly recommended to small businesses.
It's a great service for covering all HR aspects.
2 mil insurance cover for representation if you follow your policies provided.
Custom letters drafted in real time to submit to employees.
Eg, we just got surveillance cameras, so they write up a letter stating 14 days notice required to employees, to be submitted to all new employees.
Also prepare all custom employment contacts and conditions, etc.
We're putting on 3 more full time staff this month, so this stuff is so valuable.
Small business owners don't have time for this stuff, so this service fills a massive gap, which could destroy small biz if neglected.

 

[redwing]

That's a new one and sure to cause ongoing issues

Porn emails at work not automatic sacking offence, Fair Work Commission rules


ABC News

Sending pornography through the work email system is not an automatic sacking offence, the Fair Work Commission has ruled.

Three Victorian postal workers were dismissed after using the Australia Post email system to distribute sexually explicit material in their Dandenong workplace.

They appealed, and the full bench of the Fair Work Commission - in a non-unanimous judgement - found the terminations were harsh and the workers could be reinstated.

Cont...

 

[china]

That's a new one and sure to cause ongoing issues

Porn emails at work not automatic sacking offence, Fair Work Commission rules


ABC News

Next our employees will be openly watching porno at work, followed by porno creation and distribution, at employers expense.

Not really a Fair Work Commission, should be called No Work Commission.

Another slap in the face for employers

 

[Aaron_C]

Not really surprised given the kind of people who are stacked in these tribunals.

 

[geoffw]

All they're saying is that they should have followed the rules. Warning given. If offence is repeated then the sack. They are not condoning porn in the work place- but the rules for fair dismissal were not followed. Also no consideration was taken of many years of unblemished service.

 

[china]

All they're saying is that they should have followed the rules. Warning given. If offence is repeated then the sack. They are not condoning porn in the work place- but the rules for fair dismissal were not followed.

I think that the workplace is not being treated as such.

When employees are using employers time and resources to engage in porn, this should surely be considered as theft and fraud. They are being paid to work. Their work descriptions surely does not involve porn distribution. Hence, the employer is being deceived, stolen from and this amounts to grounds for summary sacking like other forms of theft.

 

[geoffw]

I think that the workplace is not being treated as such.

When employees are using employers time and resources to engage in porn, this should surely be considered as theft and fraud. They are being paid to work. Their work descriptions surely does not involve porn distribution. Hence, the employer is being deceived, stolen from and this amounts to grounds for summary sacking like other forms of theft.

If they sacked anybody who used email of phone for private purposes in work time there would be no more workforce.

 

[Aaron_C]

If they sacked anybody who used email of phone for private purposes in work time there would be no more workforce.

Taking a private phone call is very different from sending porn. Let's look at the facts.

 

[geoffw]

Taking a private phone call is very different from sending porn. Let's look at the facts.

I was answering China's statement that the employees were stealing and therefore should be sacked.

I don't condone what they did. But if the empoyer had previously stated that porn cannot be sent they would have been able to sack. Of if they had been previously warned they could have been sacked. But they did something which they had apparently been doing for a long time without any statement that it was not acceptable, and suddenly they were sacked.

I've seen people being sacked immediately butthe situation was different. The porn was solid hard core. The institution was a law enforcement agency. Everybody had been warned previously- and in fact been told that porn detection software was in place. And the person was a contractor, where the unfair dismissal provisions did not apply. (Under the circumstances though no tribunal would have supported an employee).

 

[china]

And it is not just pure theft and fraud. What about bringing the employer into disrepute? There can't be many workplaces wherein employees distributing porn could be good for business. Not unless you are at the Playboy mansion wherein it could be legitimate work activity.

 

[geoffw]

And it is not just pure theft and fraud. What about bringing the employer into disrepute? There can't be many workplaces wherein employees distributing porn could be good for business. Not unless you are at the Playboy mansion wherein it could be legitimate work activity.

I'm not sure Australia Post's reputation has ever been very high.

That aside, it's not a sackable offence to be bad for reputation.

As an employer the solution is simple. Warn. Then sack if repeated.

 

[geoffw]

And it is not just pure theft and fraud. What about bringing the employer into disrepute? There can't be many workplaces wherein employees distributing porn could be good for business. Not unless you are at the Playboy mansion wherein it could be legitimate work activity.

I'm not sure Australia Post's reputation has ever been very high.

That aside, it's not a sackable offence to be bad for reputation.

As an employer the solution is simple. Warn. Then sack if repeated.

 

[Peter 14.7]

As an employer what I distress over is this:

• if I don't act, a female employee will claim I condoned sexual harassment and sue me
  
• if I do sack, I unfairly dismiss and get sued

Dammed if you do, dammed if you don't.

Honestly, it is a joke.

And we are breeding a workplace of nothingness. Lazyness wins. And we wonder why international companies done set up here? yeah right.

Peter

 

[Peter 14.7]

FYI I have about a 50 page works contract. Use of phone for incidental private purposes is acceptable. Use for porn is not.

Peter

 

[geoffw]

As an employer what I distress over is this:

• if I don't act, a female employee will claim I condoned sexual harassment and sue me
  
• if I do sack, I unfairly dismiss and get sued

Dammed if you do, dammed if you don't.

Honestly, it is a joke.

And we are breeding a workplace of nothingness. Lazyness wins. And we wonder why international companies done set up here? yeah right.

Peter

The law is quite clear on what you should do.

If the offender is on probation you may sack. Otherwise you must give a warning to the offender. Ensure it's a written warning.

If the behaviour is repeated you are in your rights to sack.

With up to 40 employees at any one time, it is something which I've had to deal with, several times. Usually after complaints from other employees. Sometimes the offence was repeated, sometimes not. They were racial harassment allegations each time. The employee, each time, was given the chance to present their side of the story- but did not dispute what I had presented- I try to find facts from as many people as possible first to ensure that it's not a spurious complaint. The one who ended up getting sacked was a very valuable employee and I was sorry to lose them- but my hands were tied, and that employee later told me I had acted appropriately.

The ugliest sacking was with somebody on their third ever shift. I was well within my rights to terminate them- halfway through a shift. They threatened me with legal actions, and cast all sorts of aspersions on my business, my age and my parentage. But I knew exactly what I could and couln't do, so the extremely disgruntled employee didn't have a leg to stand on. I found out later that this employee had a rape conviction, but was out pending appeal. Nice guy.

 

[Peter 14.7]

The law is quite clear on what you should do.

If the offender is on probation you may sack. Otherwise you must give a warning to the offender. Ensure it's a written warning.

If the behaviour is repeated you are in your rights to sack.

With up to 40 employees at any one time, it is something which I've had to deal with, several times. Usually after complaints from other employees. Sometimes the offence was repeated, sometimes not. They were racial harassment allegations each time. The employee, each time, was given the chance to present their side of the story- but did not dispute what I had presented- I try to find facts from as many people as possible first to ensure that it's not a spurious complaint. The one who ended up getting sacked was a very valuable employee and I was sorry to lose them- but my hands were tied, and that employee later told me I had acted appropriately.

The ugliest sacking was with somebody on their third ever shift. I was well within my rights to terminate them- halfway through a shift. They threatened me with legal actions, and cast all sorts of aspersions on my business, my age and my parentage. But I knew exactly what I could and couln't do, so the extremely disgruntled employee didn't have a leg to stand on. I found out later that this employee had a rape conviction, but was out pending appeal. Nice guy.

Hi Geoff

But why Geoff why?

Are we breeding such, selfish, cruel, ignorant yobbos that they think it is acceptable to steal, smoke drugs, cheat, lie, bully, sexually harass, watch porn , offend others etc etc etc at the workplace? Are we?

That is why it is so hard for us small businessmen/women that it is simply, not worth it. Not the money you make, the lifestyle you have, the freedom, it not worth the stress of having to suffer fools who have legal rights to be abose you and they system.

And the gov rules are : hey that is ok.

The worst case I every heard is a bunch of old unionised miners who bullied a younger non union colleague so much because he was not one of them: call him fag, etc and then masturbated in front of and in some reports on him in the lift going into the mine. Company sacked them on the spot.

Went to WF full appeal court with support of the Union who argued to get them to get their job on Fair Work back as " a bit of fun gone to far" and drinking was well known at the mine.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/10/18/3040695.htm?site=newcastle

I am must be old fashioned but that is never right, in no way, in no circumstances.

Peter 14.7