Qantas Taken To Court.
Problem with your argument is that you can take annual leave and then replace it with sick leave if you get sick. So the fact that you don't have any work on is irrelevant.
It's just that lowering the annual leave balance has a benefit to the company while sick leave does not, which I would suggest is why QF are doing it.
It's just that lowering the annual leave balance has a benefit to the company while sick leave does not, which I would suggest is why QF are doing it.
The KRviatrix is an accountant and everything to them is an "Asset" or "Liability". Employees are Liabilities because they (eventually) cost money. Accrued leave is a liability because it has to be paid eventually, and budgeted for accordingly. AL/LSL goes up at the %-age of your EBA increases and thus, becomes more valuable (to us) and more expensive (to them) if you don't take it year onyear. Let's say you have 1000 hrs AL owing, at $100/hr for round figures. Your AL liability to the company is, $100,000. But if you don't take that this year, then next year, that liability becomes $102,500 (or whatever %-age your EBA increase is), so of course the company - any company - wants you to use your AL/LSL as soon as you can.
But, if you don't take your AL/LSL, you're eligible for the $1,500/FN payment, which is enough to live on for most people if you can suspend your mortgage as well as keeping your accrued leave balances. I know what I'd rather do.
They don’t, when they are not happy with the situation they can insist you see a company approved specialist at their cost, the downside being that they agree as they did in this case with the patient.
I’m not on AL at the moment. I’m stood down. I can elect to be paid my annual leave entitlements in lieu of being stood down unpaid. A subtle but important distinction.
An employee may take paid or unpaid leave (for example, annual leave) during all or part of a period during which the employee would otherwise be stood down under subsection 524(1).
It’s unfortunately this simple.
If a workplace agreement includes stood down provisions, those provisions apply, not the FWA. Not one stood down legislation in the FWA is relevant. The only thing that matters are those EA stood down clauses.
In most QF agreements I’ve read, the stood down provisions include that annual leave may be offered. There is no mention of personal leave or sick leave. So it’s not payable. It’s one of the few instances where our agreements are worse than the FWA legislation.
I expect Qantas will win.
If a workplace agreement includes stood down provisions, those provisions apply, not the FWA. Not one stood down legislation in the FWA is relevant. The only thing that matters are those EA stood down clauses.
In most QF agreements I’ve read, the stood down provisions include that annual leave may be offered. There is no mention of personal leave or sick leave. So it’s not payable. It’s one of the few instances where our agreements are worse than the FWA legislation.
I expect Qantas will win.
Nunc est bibendum
Nev, does that section that you quote apply to us given we are on an EA? Will it apply to the TWU employee? As you say Neville, a judge will decide.
Spare me the ‘Kool Aid’ accusation though. I’m just reading the relevant legislation and the LHEA and giving it a ‘best guess’ like most other contributors here. A mate who has far more legal experience flicked me a message and he disagrees with my assessment. I respect his opinion.
I hope I am wrong. I’d like nothing better than to schedule in a couple of minor procedures needed whilst things are quiet at the moment and to switch from AL to SL.
Spare me the ‘Kool Aid’ accusation though. I’m just reading the relevant legislation and the LHEA and giving it a ‘best guess’ like most other contributors here. A mate who has far more legal experience flicked me a message and he disagrees with my assessment. I respect his opinion.
I hope I am wrong. I’d like nothing better than to schedule in a couple of minor procedures needed whilst things are quiet at the moment and to switch from AL to SL.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: SYD
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Court dismisses stood down Qantas staff's sick leave bid
A Federal Court judge has dismissed a union-led bid to have Qantas workers paid sick leave during the coronavirus crisis.Some 20,000-odd Qantas workers stood down in mid-March have been able to legally access some entitlements including annual leave but they've been prevented from accessing sick, carers and compassionate leave.
The company's position on Monday was backed by Justice Geoffrey Flick.
He agreed with Qantas that the stand-down power served two important purposes: offering businesses financial relief and protecting workers from termination.
Allowing staff to access sick leave while lawfully stood down because there is no work would "go against the very object and purpose of conferring those entitlements - namely an entitlement to be relieved from the work which the employee was otherwise required to perform", Justice Flick said.
AAP
Last edited by CaptCloudbuster; 18th May 2020 at 11:36.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Skating away on the thin ice of a new day.
Posts: 1,116
Received 13 Likes
on
8 Posts
There's 2 guys there I used to work with that have terminal illnesses. They must be gutted.
Join Date: May 2020
Location: Sydney
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If they have terminal illnesses then they wouldn't have been on sick leave. They would have been medically terminated and have been able to claim through loss of license / loss of income policies.
