An employer\u2019s ignorance of the law is no excuse, and its failure to comply with a Fair Work Commission (FWC) order is reprehensible. That is the conclusion of the Federal Circuit Court, which recently levied a \u201csignificant penalty\u201d against\u00a0Agad\u00a0Property Consulting Pty Ltd\u2014practically doubling the employer\u2019s financial obligation in an unfair dismissal matter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Agad originally recruited an employee from Abu Dhabi for their Sydney office. All went well\u2014with no performance issues\u2014but in a year\u2019s time Agad dismissed the employee with no reason given. The employee filed an unfair dismissal complaint with the FWC.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There, Commissioner John Ryan determined that Agad\u2019s dismissal of the employee was in retaliation for the employee\u2019s declining to remain in Sydney for an additional day to assist Agad\u2019s managing director with matters unrelated to Agad Property business. Ryan ruled the dismissal \u201charsh and unfair\u201d, and awarded the employee $48,651.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In his finding, Commissioner Ryan acknowledged his responsibility to make allowances for Agad\u2019s obvious lack of human resources (HR) knowledge, but observed that an employer\u2019s lack of HR management experience or specialisation does not exempt the employer from the legal necessity to treat an employee fairly.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Agad failed to pay the ordered unfair dismissal award to the former employee, who, as a result, was forced to depend on social security to support himself and his family. The employee then filed a complaint in Federal Circuit Court (FCC). Steven Amendola, a partner with the Ashurst law firm, represented the employee on a pro bono<\/em> basis.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

FCC judge Norah Hartnett confirmed that Agad\u2019s management had been made aware of Commissioner Ryan\u2019s unfair dismissal order and had refused to comply. She determined that the employer\u2019s noncompliance resulted in additional \u201cstress and financial hardship\u201d to the employee. Judge Hartnett assessed a penalty of $40,000, which is 80% of the maximum allowed by law.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Amendola, the employee\u2019s lawyer, usually works on the other side of labour disputes, representing the employer. In this unfair dismissal case, though, he called the employer\u2019s contempt \u201cegregious\u201d. \u201cThey treated this guy appallingly\u201d, he said. His next steps are to immediately act to collect the original award, plus the FCC judgment (in addition to legal costs) from the employer.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

An employer’s ignorance of the law is no excuse, and its failure to comply with a Fair Work Commission (FWC) order is reprehensible.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":217,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[5,9],"tags":[],"featured_image_src":{"landsacpe":["https:\/\/awdr.com.au\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/10\/Employment-Law.jpg",668,445,false],"list":["https:\/\/awdr.com.au\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/10\/Employment-Law.jpg",463,308,false],"medium":["https:\/\/awdr.com.au\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/10\/Employment-Law-300x200.jpg",300,200,true],"full":["https:\/\/awdr.com.au\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/10\/Employment-Law.jpg",700,466,false]},"yoast_head":"\n