Work Place regulations

[Macca]

I have been trying to find this on Fair Work Australia web site but no luck. Could someone up on the current employment laws comment please.

My wife works with the disabled as a carer and part of her work is to pick up the clients in a supplied work mini bus and take them on outings. Her employer is seeking to bring in new rules that will make the employee/ driver responsible for the excess on any insurance claims.

This would not only apply to any accident while driving but also any damage done while the vehicle is parked, either on the street or in a car park.

Having employed many people in the past I find this shocking, I only ever had one problem and he was all apologetic and we moved on. I find this attempt to make people on really low wages pay for a genuine accident all rather poor.

I doubt that it is legal but would like to be able to prove or disprove their right to do this.

 

[DaveM]

Unless the employee was negligent, they generally cant be held liable for insurance excesses on vehicles

 

[Hoffy]

No chance unless wilful damage.

 

[ok180]

Even if she did have an accident just dont pay the excess. I bet the employer backs down first. As an employer the last thing you want to is be investigated by fair work.

 

[AlmostBob]

write fwa a letter requesting an 'in principal' decision, as you would with the ATO under similar circumstances, being told you would be responsible for employer's taxes
it (the letter) can also be sent to the employer, usually sufficient notice of what the result of any dispute would be, stop stupid in its tracks

 

[jrc]

Employees Liability Act covers the situation in NSW, the employer cannot do this where the employer is vicariously liable for the actions of the employee.

 

[Macca]

Employees Liability Act covers the situation in NSW, the employer cannot do this where the employer is vicariously liable for the actions of the employee.

After reading this act I am thinking that

If the employee was not there, the employer would have to do it themself, which means it is a delegated authority situation and as such, assuming no deliberate act of negligence, the employer is responsible should an accident occur.

This is what I expected but my wife and her workmates are all quite concerned as it was announced on Friday and they have been worrying over the weekend.

Many phone calls between friends on Saturday

Any other advice or references appreciated .........

 

[redwing]

See 324 Link

As far as I know you cannot deduct any money (including insurance excess) from your employees wages for damage to a vehicle (that's what their insurance is for).

I have worked with someone many years ago who threatened employees with this and at least one person paid the excess

 

[Macca]

Thanks for that link, Monday was interesting, apparently some staff were simply going to leave the organisation because of the new ruling.

A very strong demand for experienced disability carers may see the rule changed before it even comes in.

The opposition is circling all ready

 

[BayView]

My business insurance covers all drivers for this sort of stuff.

Should be standard, I would have thought.

Putting it on the employees is a gouge, and they will vote with their feet, I suspect.

 

[marg4000]

If your wife is in a union, this is a good place to start.

Otherwise their best course of action is to band together and all staff refuse to agree to the changed conditions. Do not resign. If push comes to shove, let them fire you, then you can take things much further.
Marg

 

[moyjos]

My business insurance covers all drivers for this sort of stuff.

Should be standard, I would have thought.

Putting it on the employees is a gouge, and they will vote with their feet, I suspect.

Yeah our business insurance does too. I DO however, tell the boys that i do NOT pay for speeding tickets, and that if an accident is caused by proven speeding I will sue them in a civil case Of course thet also know about no insurance payout for drugs or alcohol as well.

 

[Macca]

Up till now it has been the staff pay their own fines, which I think is fair enough as they are responsible for their immediate actions but an accident is just that, an accident.

It seems to me that the employer is assuming that a driver hits things on purpose and to say that the driver who parked the vehicle is responsible if it is damaged while they are away from the vehicle is ludicrous.

I suspect FWA would explain it in very clearly to them.