Tuesday, May 5, 2020

Australian Law Paper

Question: Discuss about theAustralian Law Paper. Answer: Introduction The National Employment Standard is the basic standard that all the companies operating in Australia will have to abide by in terms of employment and provide the employees minimum employment entitlements. The National Employment Standard could be regarded as the guidelines for the companies for organising the employment process effectively and provide the employees the basic services which will help to have a contented relationship with the companies as well as will help to abide by the rules and regulations as per the National Employment Standards and the Fair Work Act 2009 (Creighton Stewart, 2010). There are basic ten entitlements that an employee must be provided with by the company so that there is no breach in the basic guidelines laid down by the Australian government in the context of employment. Every kind of employment contract, an award contract, enterprise agreement cannot provide anything less than the laid down entitlements for the employment of an individual. The enti tlements are: The work hours will have to be between ordinary hours (7 AM 7 PM).Anything beyond this is not considered ordinary and will come under overtime rates. Flexible working hours for certain employees like parent with school aged child or disability. Maternity leave will have to be provided if an employee has adopted or has given birth and their spouses are also eligible. An employee except casual employees is eligible to get annual leaves of around4 weeks and it has to be paid. An employee can get personal sick leaves and or someone close in the family has faced illness could avail this entitlement. For community works employees could take leaves as it is for the good of the society. The long service leave is available for an employee working for an employer for a long period of time. Employees are entitled to get public holidays based on their region of work. Notice period and final pay will have to be cleared by the employer and employee for the end of a service. Each and every employer is obligated to provide its employees with the fair work information statement which will help the employee to know different aspects of employment (Gostencnik et al., 2009). As a HR manager of engineering firm it is important for me to understand the essentiality of these aspects and make sure that the company doesnt contravene these above laid down rules. In case any employee is asked to work for an extra hour he or she is provided with overtime rates so that it doesnt hurt the interest of the employees. Flexibility is provided and employees are well informed about their entitlements so that the company is not accused of keeping the employees in dark which will serve the companys interest and will help to carry on with its work effectively (Briggs Buchanan, 2005). In this case Rebecca might apparently seem to be in the back foot but Rebecca has scope to work on her claim against the plumber. It is important to mention firstly for argument that Rebecca is new in Australia and she hardly speaks English. It is very clear from the case that in circumstances the claimant Rebecca was in a situation which from the parlance of law is called unconscionable conduct as per the section 21 of the Australian consumer law and the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 which was experienced by her from the plumber (Peter Geil, 2010). It is important to note that the Rebecca has already stated and confessed that she succumbed to the pressure put in by the plumber and thats what made her purchase the water filter which cost her AU$2000. In this case the constant probing and convincing of the plumber clearly highlights his intentions of selling the water filter and he also pressurised the client Rebecca to consider waiving off that period so that he can fix the filt er that doesnt have any use for the client which also comes under the unconscionable conduct of the person (Nottage, 2009). As stated by the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 under the Australian consumer law that the bargaining strength of the parties is one key aspect and in this case Rebecca didnt have that and under the section 21 of the act she was also financially affected by the purchase of a certain good which doesnt have any need or requirement from her side and this establishes her grounds to ask for complete refund of the payment of $2000 that she made. As the act of unconscionable contract highlighted in section 21 of the Australian Consumer Law that no person should take the advantage of the disability of the other person which in this case was the lack of knowledge of Rebecca. The case reflects unconscionable conduct in equity which is shown in the case of Commercial Bank of Australia v Amadio (1983) 151 CLR 447; [1983] HCA 14 where Amadios parents remained uneducated about the terms and conditions of the bank about the mortgage and clearly the court ruled in favor of the defendant Amadio Family that was stated under the legislation of unconscionable conduct. Apart from this Rebecca could also get legal relief since this contract is an unsolicited contract where the person was not invited and clearly cold calling to get a sale which is enough to sue the plumber (Corones, 2013). References Briggs, C., Buchanan, J. (2005). Work, commerce and the law: a new Australian model?.Australian Economic Review,38(2), 182-191. Corones, S. G. (2013).The Australian consumer law. Thomson Reuters, Lawbook Co.. Creighton, B., Stewart, A. (2010).Labour law. Federation Press. Nottage, L. (2009). Consumer law reform in Australia: Contemporary and comparative constructive criticism.Queensland U. Tech. L. Just. J.,9, 111. Paterson, J. M. (2009). The Australian Unfair Contract Terms Law: The Rise of Substantive Unfairness as a Ground for Review of Standard Form Consumer Contracts.Melbourne University Law Review,33(3). Peter, W., Gelis, A. (2010). Consumer Law: ACCC Issues Its First Warning Notice.Keeping good companies,62(9), 550..

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.