“Can Employers Still Say, ‘Toughen Up’?” – Landmark High Court Decision Shakes Up Workplace Law

[fusion_builder_container type=”flex” hundred_percent=”no” equal_height_columns=”no” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” background_position=”center center” background_repeat=”no-repeat” fade=”no” background_parallax=”none” parallax_speed=”0.3″ video_aspect_ratio=”16:9″ video_loop=”yes” video_mute=”yes” border_style=”solid” padding_left=”0px” padding_right=”1px”][fusion_builder_row][fusion_builder_column type=”1_1″ layout=”1_1″ align_self=”auto” content_layout=”column” align_content=”flex-start” valign_content=”flex-start” content_wrap=”wrap” spacing=”yes” center_content=”no” column_tag=”div” target=”_self” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” sticky_display=”normal,sticky” order_medium=”0″ order_small=”0″ margin_top=”0px” margin_bottom=”0px” hover_type=”none” border_style=”solid” box_shadow=”no” box_shadow_blur=”0″ box_shadow_spread=”0″ z_index_subgroup=”regular” background_type=”single” gradient_start_position=”0″ gradient_end_position=”100″ gradient_type=”linear” radial_direction=”center center” linear_angle=”180″ lazy_load=”avada” background_position=”left top” background_repeat=”no-repeat” background_blend_mode=”overlay” sticky=”off” sticky_devices=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” absolute=”off” filter_type=”regular” filter_hover_element=”self” filter_hue=”0″ filter_saturation=”100″ filter_brightness=”100″ filter_contrast=”100″ filter_invert=”0″ filter_sepia=”0″ filter_opacity=”100″ filter_blur=”0″ filter_hue_hover=”0″ filter_saturation_hover=”100″ filter_brightness_hover=”100″ filter_contrast_hover=”100″ filter_invert_hover=”0″ filter_sepia_hover=”0″ filter_opacity_hover=”100″ filter_blur_hover=”0″ transform_type=”regular” transform_hover_element=”self” transform_scale_x=”1″ transform_scale_y=”1″ transform_translate_x=”0″ transform_translate_y=”0″ transform_rotate=”0″ transform_skew_x=”0″ transform_skew_y=”0″ transform_scale_x_hover=”1″ transform_scale_y_hover=”1″ transform_translate_x_hover=”0″ transform_translate_y_hover=”0″ transform_rotate_hover=”0″ transform_skew_x_hover=”0″ transform_skew_y_hover=”0″ transition_duration=”300″ transition_easing=”ease” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ animation_delay=”0″ last=”true” border_position=”all” first=”true”][fusion_text content_alignment=”justify” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” sticky_display=”normal,sticky” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″

“Can Employers Still Say, ‘Toughen Up’?” – Landmark High Court Decision Shakes Up Workplace Law

Unfair dismissal cases are as Aussie as a snag on the barbie, but the High Court’s recent decision involving Adam Elisha might just have employers choking at the sausage sizzle. This groundbreaking case has swung the pendulum firmly towards recognising the psychological toll of workplace disputes, which should leave business owners rethinking “toughen up, mate” for good.

The Adam Elisha Case in a Nutshell

  • Adam Elisha worked for Vision Australia (“VA”) but was dismissed by his employer under contentious circumstances involving a decision to commence disciplinary action against him while he was on leave, a prolonged workplace investigation, and a “show cause” process.
  • After Elisha was terminated by VA, he commenced unfair dismissal proceedings against his former
    employer with the case eventually being settled out of court. This is a common and prudent tactic used by employers when unfair dismissal claims are brought against them, because on a cost-benefit analysis, fighting it out in court sees the organisation get hung up in court for years and amass legal fees and stress along the way – sometimes it is better to bite your lip and give your ex (employee) a small win and importantly a swift and certain exit.
  • While this is how it usually works, and surely how VA thought it would play out, this was not the end of the fight, as Elisha then brought another case alleging that the drawn-out dismissal process caused him a recognised psychiatric injury rendering him unable to work for years to come.
  • After five years of litigation, the case found its way to the High Court, where a decision was handed
    down earlier this month allowing Elisha to claim damages for the mental health impact of the unfair
    dismissal process to the tune of $1.4 million.
  • This decision sets a new precedent, recognising psychiatric injuries as compensable in unfair dismissal claims overturning the previous legal authority on the matter set out in the English case of Addis v Gramophone Company Ltd from 1909.

For the full scoop, check out the Sydney Morning Herald article. Sydney Morning Herald Article

The Key Takeaways from the Decision

  • Employees can now claim damages for psychiatric injuries against their employers in certain
    circumstances, which is a significant shift in Australian employment law.
  • Employers conducting workplace investigations, show cause events, and disciplinary procedures will face heightened scrutiny relating to the psychological and psychiatric impacts that these have on their employees.
  • We anticipate that this landmark case will have a ripple effects that will likely influence the introduction of insurance and business policies, HR training, and workplace culture across Australia.
    While some may cry that this case is the latest example of ‘PC gone mad’, laws tend to follow society’s whims like a hungry seagull on chips. For now, the current emphasis on mental health in Australia is reshaping employer obligations for good or ill.

Lessons for Employers Dealing with the New Reality

The classic Aussie mantra of ‘toughen up’ is on notice and employers will need to mental health being a
critical consideration when dealing with employees through the good times and the bad.
To protect themselves, in the new year, employers should look to develop and implement mental health
policies and strategies to address psychological risks when any kind of workplace dispute arises from
investigations to disciplinary actions to dismissals.
Even if the employer knows that such platitudes will be rejected or ignored by the ‘trouble employee’,
even something as simple as offering counselling or mental health support during a workplace dispute
could save the organisation a lot of headaches (and court dates) if the employee cries foul.
Employers should equip their leadership team and HR departments with the skills to manage sensitive
processes compassionately and legally.

Why This Case Matters

This decision is a game-changer because it recognises that employment relationships don’t end at “you’re fired” with the fallout potentially extending far beyond the termination notice. While it is yet to be seen though whether this heralds a brave new world of employee protections or if it will add more red tape to an already complex system, one thing is clear: regardless of how you feel about it, employers can no longer afford to ignore the mental health implications of their actions even if they see their employees as in dire need of a ‘cement pill’.

The challenge for employees now is to adapt swiftly to avoid being the next $1.4M cautionary tale. As for
employees, it’s a step towards recognition that toxic work environments and antiquated policies run by out-oftouch stuffed shirts are no longer acceptable.

Whether you are a business owner or an employee, if you’re grappling with how to navigate these landmark legal changes, our team of employment lawyers is here to help. Contact us today to help you seek justice or to future-proof your policies and keep your workplace running smoothly without the legal drama.

Author Steve Hodgson

[/fusion_text][/fusion_builder_column][/fusion_builder_row][/fusion_builder_container]

Author

Litigation and dispute resolution

Litigation within the agribusiness sector refers to legal disputes and court actions that arise in connection with agricultural operations. These cases often require in-depth understanding of both the legal system and the unique regulatory landscape of agriculture. Our firm has extensive experience with the full gamut of legal disputes such as:

The key areas that we can assist with include:

  • Contractual Issues: Disagreements often arise from contracts involving supply chains, land leases, share farming, agistment arrangements, partnerships, joint ventures, and various other commercial agreements typical in the agricultural industry.
  • Land Access and Compensation: Conflicts may occur over access to land for activities like mining, gas exploration, or infrastructure development, often involving compensation claims for landowners.
  • Workplace Disputes: Litigation may stem from matters such as wrongful termination, employment agreement breaches, or occupational health and safety concerns on farms or in agribusiness operations.
  • Environmental and Biosecurity: Disputes may be triggered by non-compliance with environmental regulations, pollution events, water contamination, animal and plant health including pest and disease control measures or debates surrounding water usage and rights.
  • Intellectual Property Rights: Conflicts might arise over ownership or use of agricultural intellectual property such as plant variety rights, trademarks, and other proprietary innovations.
  • Farm Succession and Inheritance: Disputes over the division of farming assets, family trusts, or the interpretation of wills often lead to litigation in the context of generational farm transfers.

Rural property acquisitions and sales

The purchase or sale of rural land involves a broad spectrum of legal considerations that require careful attention. Key issues often include legal access to the property, the existence of easements, water rights and entitlements, land zoning regulations, potential land contamination, and the impact of native title, mining interests, and cultural heritage protections. It is also essential to assess the tax implications of the transaction, particularly in relation to Goods and Services Tax (GST) and Capital Gains Tax (CGT).

Salerno Law has extensive experience navigating the complexities of rural property matters at local, national, and international levels. We provide comprehensive support throughout the entire transaction process—from initial due diligence and review of contractual documentation to stakeholder engagement and final settlement. Our goal is to ensure that every legal aspect is addressed thoroughly and efficiently, safeguarding your interests every step of the way.

×

Acquisition and leveraged finance

Opportunities in a tightening market

Borrowers and lenders face increasing pressure as leveraged finance markets tighten in the face of higher interest rates, inflation and geopolitical uncertainty. To explore new opportunities at the outset of any deal, market participants require the support of experienced, detail-oriented advisers who understand the competitive and potentially complex nature of this sector.

Expert advisers with an innovative approach

Ashurst’s global leveraged finance team advises major financial institutions, private equity houses, alternative asset managers, mezzanine financiers and corporations. Leveraged finance is a core area of expertise for Ashurst. Our team has institutional knowledge across sponsors, credit funds and banks, which means we can streamline the process for you. We have experience in the full range of leveraged.