Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

AUSTRALIA

AUSTRALIA PART TWO BASIC RIGHTS PERTAINING TO LABOUR High Court of Australia Board of Bendigo Regional Institute of Technical and further Education v. Barclay Victimisation ­ engaging in industrial activity ­ causal connection between trade union activity and suspension and other action ­ onus of proof HEADNOTES Facts Mr Barclay was an employee of the Bendigo Regional Institute of Technical and Further Education (`BRIT'). He was also President of the BRIT Sub-Branch of the Australian Education Union (`AEU'). In late January 2010 he sent an email to union members at BRIT stating that several union members had advised him that they had been asked by members of management to produce false and fraudulent documents for purposes of an audit which was being conducted by the relevant regulatory authority as part of a re-accreditation process. The email went on to warn members not to `agree to be part of any attempt to create/false documentation'. Mr Barclay did not attempt to discuss his members' concerns with management before sending the email. The email came to the attention of Dr Harvey, who was the Chief Executive Officer of BRIT. On 2 February 2010 she suspended Mr Barclay on full pay, suspended his http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png International Labour Law Reports Online Brill

Loading next page...
 
/lp/brill/australia-R0QvcgbXzP

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Brill
Copyright
© Copyright 2014 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
ISSN
0168-6526
eISSN
2211-6028
DOI
10.1163/22116028-90000088
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

PART TWO BASIC RIGHTS PERTAINING TO LABOUR High Court of Australia Board of Bendigo Regional Institute of Technical and further Education v. Barclay Victimisation ­ engaging in industrial activity ­ causal connection between trade union activity and suspension and other action ­ onus of proof HEADNOTES Facts Mr Barclay was an employee of the Bendigo Regional Institute of Technical and Further Education (`BRIT'). He was also President of the BRIT Sub-Branch of the Australian Education Union (`AEU'). In late January 2010 he sent an email to union members at BRIT stating that several union members had advised him that they had been asked by members of management to produce false and fraudulent documents for purposes of an audit which was being conducted by the relevant regulatory authority as part of a re-accreditation process. The email went on to warn members not to `agree to be part of any attempt to create/false documentation'. Mr Barclay did not attempt to discuss his members' concerns with management before sending the email. The email came to the attention of Dr Harvey, who was the Chief Executive Officer of BRIT. On 2 February 2010 she suspended Mr Barclay on full pay, suspended his

Journal

International Labour Law Reports OnlineBrill

Published: Dec 2, 2014

There are no references for this article.