|
HR manager severely criticised over constructive dismissal
As reported by Workplace Express, Fair Work Australia, in determining an unfair dismissal ruling, has found that it is “beyond belief” that the HR manager of a multi-national company notified management that there was no basis to a sales manager’s claims of bullying and harassment, despite the fact that she had not conducted an investigation into the circumstances surrounding the case.
Workplace Express reported that on July 1, 2009 a business development executive employed by Aristocrat Technologies Australia Pty Ltd resigned after receiving notification that required him to show cause why he should not be dismissed.
In the notification he received, issues regarding his sales performance and customer relationships were raised by the company, but the employee claimed that he was in fact being targeted unfairly by his supervisor.
However, Commissioner Barbara Deegan determined that he had been constructively dismissed.
Commissioner Deegan found that Aristocrat Technologies Australia Pty Ltd should have actually investigated the executive's claims that he had been bullied and harassed by a company state sales manager and that the unsubstantiated allegations raised by the sales manager should not have been accepted in the context they were submitted.
The Workplace Express report stated that the Commissioner was particularly critical of the role of HR management, saying a "proper investigation" of the executive's allegations was required.
The Commissioner said "It was clear on the evidence of [the HR manager] that she was either uninterested in investigating the complaints properly or had no idea how to conduct such an investigation”.
"That [the HR manager] notified senior management that the [executive's] claims were unsubstantiated having interviewed no-one (including the [executive and the sales manager]) about those claims is beyond belief”.
"The very odd survey of other [business development executives] that she did conduct (concerning their relationship with [the sales manager]) was of no assistance and could not have enabled her to reach such a conclusion", said Commissioner Deegan.
Commissioner Deegan also said there was no valid reason for the executive’s dismissal, and that he performed his role well "in very trying internal, and external, circumstances".
Commissioner Deegan said "I accept that he was subjected to a deal of harassment about petty matters and treated poorly by [the sales manager] despite performing as well as, or better than, most of the other [business development executives]".
Commissioner Deegan also noted that Aristocrat Technologies Australia Pty Ltd was a multinational company "that has no excuse for the deficiencies in procedure which accompanied the termination of the [executive’s] employment" and has ‘dedicated human resource management specialists’ and, again, has no excuse for the appalling manner in which this entire matter was handled."
The Commissioner determined in this case that reinstatement was not appropriate and ordered Aristocrat Technologies Australia Pty Ltd to pay the employee the maximum of six months compensation.
Adam James Harley v Aristocrat Technologies Australia Pty Ltd [2010] FWA 62 (7 January 2010)
|
