The employee is not determined by a statement in a contract in a contract, says a Federal Court decision. WorkPac v Skene turned out to be just as explosive as the original. Same company, slightly different type of employee, but same outcome. In WorkPac v Rossato, the Federal Court of Australia confirmed that labelling an employee as
As a Human Resource professional, I spend my days working with SME Businesses and with employees, surrounding matters such as recruitment, contracts, onboarding, disciplinary matters, dismissals, Fair Work Commission matters, policies and procedures and changes to laws, just to name a few. I will provide you with solutions to help you with concerns regarding human resources and your business, you will know what you can do and what you can not do, you will have access to the skills knowledge and resources available to me.
Get in Touch with Northlakes Most
Well Known HR Center
The first set of restrictions applies when someone requires another person to download or use COVIDSafe. Subsection 9(1) of the Biosecurity Determination provides that a person must not require that another person: download COVIDSafe to a mobile telecommunications device; have COVIDSafe in operation on a mobile telecommunications device; or consent to uploading COVID app data
WorkPac applied to the Federal Court in the wake of the Skene ruling for declarations that the worker was a casual employee by common law and under sections 86, 95 and 106 of the FW Act, and that he was a ‘casual field team member’, not a ‘permanent field team member’, under its EA. Late this