[meteor_slideshow slideshow=”adssa” metadata=”height: 126, width: 630″]
Practical Employment Law
Assignment Two – Problem-based assessment – 30 marks (30%)
Length –2,000 – 2,500 words including all footnotes
BERNARD BOLSHIE is a teacher at the Beanstown Regional Institute of Technical Educa-tion (BRITE) and works in the role is that of Team Leader – Teaching Excellence. He is also President of the BRITE branch of the Teacher’s union (Union). During 2013, BRITE was preparing for an audit on its accreditation. Auditors were due at BRITE in early 2014. As part of his role, BOLSHIE was responsible for ensuring that the BRITE courses were and remained accredited.
In late January 2014, BOLSHIE sent an email to some of his fellow teachers (those who were union members). Among other things, the email included the following, “…you should avoid any attempt to create false documentation in relation to the education audit being done on BRITE. Several members had previously been asked to be part of such activity or had witnessed it”. (In the months preceding these events, some other members of the union ap-proached BOLSHIE to raise concerns about inaccurate information that had been included on accreditation documents. Each time the informer told BOLSHIE they they did not want to take things any further).
Senior management and the Board of BRITE became aware of the email and were immedi-ately concerned that it had the potential to damage BRITE’s reputation. BOLSHIE’s imme-diate supervisor attempted to discuss the matter with him but BOLSHIE refused to provide any details of the staff members referred to in the email.
The next day, BOLSHIE was called to a meeting with the CEO of BRITE, DR LEONIE LU-CID and was given a letter which stated (in part) that the allegations about improper conduct in his email required a full independent investigation which she, DR LUCID, was arranging. The letter also informed BOLSHIE that disciplinary proceedings were being commenced against him because of the way he had raised the allegations, the fact he had not raised it with management, and BOLSHIE’S refusal to give details of the allegations. BOLSHIE is upset and concerned that BRITE is now victimizing him and arranges a meeting the Union to consider his options.
Using the four step process and referring to the Fair Work Act and relevant case law, dis-cuss the likely outcome to this issue. Include a consideration of the following:
i. any relevant contractual terms (whether express or implied) which may have been breached (by either party);
ii. whether BOLSHIE and or the Union could bring a General Protections claim against BRITE;
iii. in your conclusion, briefly identify any other dispute resolution strategies which could be used to resolve this issue.
The referencing style for this assessment (and this unit) is the Australian Guide to Legal Cita-tion (3rd Ed) (AGLC). The Blackboard site provides links to information on The AGLC.
Penalties will be applied for assignments which run over 2,500 words (inclusive of all foot-notes). A penalty of 10% (3 marks) for every 100 words over the maximum word limit of 2,500 (including all footnotes) will be applied.
Penalties will also be applied for late submission – 10% (3 marks) for each calendar day that the assignment is late. An assessment more than seven (7) days late will not be marked.
No Bibliography or Reference List is required but please ensure that you footnote correctly and in accordance with the AGLC.
[meteor_slideshow slideshow=”best” metadata=”height: 126, width: 630″]