Combo Offer 35% Off + 10% Extra OFF on WhatsApp

Employment Law Assignment Sample

  • Plagiarism & Error Free Assignments By Subject Experts
  • Affordable prices and discounts for students
  • On-time delivery before the expected deadline

No AI Generated Content

62000+ Projects Delivered

500+ Experts

Enjoy Upto 35% off
- +
1 Page
35% Off
AU$ 11.83
Estimated Cost
AU$ 7.69
Securing Higher Grades Costing Your Pocket? Book Your Assignment At The Lowest Price Now!
X

Employment Law

Get Free Samples Written by our Top-Notch Subject Expert Writers known for providing the Best Assignment Help Services in Australia

Introduction

In this presentation, the main discussion will be based on the employment law of Australia in light of a case where the employment laws will be applied. In this assignment, this discussion will be supported through different sub-discussions where they all will be contributing towards understanding and applying the employment law of Australia. The facts of the problem will be discussed in this assignment case along with the legal issues raised in this scenario according to the law of Australian employment. Applicable case law and statutory will be discussed in this assignment in light of students' arguments for applying the law. Then there will be a discussion of a real-world example of a similar problem to explain the problem-solving along with the proper conclusion by stating the answer to the main question.

Discussion

No, Davis was not correct if he says that Girl was not an employee of the Sweet Ice Company, because from the provided case scenario it is clear that Gail was an employee of the company. Davis is saying that Girl is not an employee of the Sweet Ice Company because she was not a full-time employee in the company and she used to work on her school holidays, but the Australian employment act every employee comes under the Australian employment act, whether it is part-time or full time. This is the legal issue that is raised here in this scenario because this case is a clear example of employment law and its valuation by the organizational owner (Sternlight, 2019). This Australian employment act says even though it is part-time, the employees come under the employment act and that is the reason Gail is also an employee of the Sweet Ice Company. According to the law of employment, every employee in the organization needs to be provided with a healthy and safe workplace environment, which is mentioned in the "Work Health and Safety Act 2011" Sweet Ice Company failed because it did not provide a healthy and safe work environment to Gail. According to the "Work Health and Safety Act 2011" the workplace should provide a framework for protecting the health, safety, and employment welfare that work, and according to this law the student's argument for applying the law is correct (Estlund, 2018). That is the reason Gail fell in the organizational workplace and broke her wrist. In this situation, David and his company Sweet Ice is liable to pay penalty and compensation to Gail. The Sweet Ice Company failed to comply with the employment laws, where David needed to pay compensation to Gail, or he would be under the guise of Australian employment law to violate this. Although Davis may not be correct in saying that Girl was not an employee of the Sweet Ice Company because she worked on her school holidays, it is clear from the scenario that she was an employee of the company. Davis' argument that Girl was not a full-time employee in the organization, as well as his suggestion that Girl had worked on her school holidays, is irrelevant to this issue as every employee in an organization needs to be provided with a healthy and safe workplace environment regardless of whether their duties are full-time or part-time.

Our Australian employment law states that every employee in an organization needs to be provided with a healthy and safe workplace environment. This is the reason why Gail is also an employee of the company because from the provided scenario it is clear that Girl was using her school holidays to work at the company. All employees need to be treated equally, whether they are full time or part-time employees. There cannot be any discrimination towards any employee by his/her employer.Davis is correct in saying that Girl was not a full-time employee because she used to work on her school holidays. However, Gail was an employee of the Sweet Ice Company. Severance pay law in Australia states that employers shall provide employees with accrued annual leave immediately upon receipt of a final notice from an employee regarding resignation or termination of employment. This requirement is modified by local laws like in Victoria state where employers are only required to pay three months’ worth of severance if the business has been operating for at least 12 months when the notice is received by the employer.In the case scenario, I say that Girl is an employee of the Sweet Ice Company because she was given full time work. The Australian employment act provides for part-time and full-time employees. According to the Australian employment act, all employees including girls are employees of the organization, whether it is a part-time or full-time employee.This Australian employment act says even though it is part-time, the employees come under the Australian employment act and that is the reason Gail is also an employee of Sternlight. According to the law of employment, every employee in the organization needs to be provided with a healthy and safe workplace environment.Even though Girl was not working full-time in the company, she still comes under the Australian employment act because of her being used to work on school holidays, but she used to work only on her parent’s leave days. This means that the Sweet Ice Company is bound to treat all their employees fairly and equally (Sternlight, 2019). The example above clearly shows that even if you have a part-time employee, they have to be provided with an equal opportunity and a healthy workplace environment i.e., they should not be discriminated against in any way or form be it age, race or any other factor (Lewis & Lewis Limited v Payne Fox Trucking Pty Ltd. If the girl was an employee of the company and went on part-time work she would have been an employee. Even though Gail was only providing ice for 1 day per week, this does not negate the fact that she was being paid a wage by Sternlight. The Australian employment act is clear that every full-time employee needs to be provided with a healthy and safe workplace environment, which is why Sternlight has been ordered to provide Girl with an environment where she can feel safe at all times (Sternlight, 2019). In Australia we are fortunate enough to have good employment laws, however it is important to remember that many countries do not and employers should always check their countries laws before dealing with employees.

The Australian employment act says that every employee that work in the organization is an employee of the company and they will come under the employment act. The law also states that every employee needs to be provided with a healthy and safe workplace environment. In this case, it is mentioned that Gail was a student who works only during her school holidays and her main role in the factory is packaging the ice creams packs in the carton box, where Gail was told by the owner of the organization of Sweet Ice that, she is free to work on any day and she doesn't need any show-up and can get to the work without any notice. She was being paid by the owner of the organization of Sweet Ice 120 dollars per day for completing the given jobs by her supervisor. In this scenario one day Gail slips over a dry place that fell on the floor of the organizational workplace and Gail breaks her wrist (Elsarinda, et al. 2021). When the time came to give compensation to Gail, David said that Gail was not an employee for them and they cannot file the worker's compensation claim, where the main problem arose. According to David, Girl is not an employee of the Sweet Ice Company since she used to work during her school breaks and was not a full-time employee. However, under the Australian Employment Act, all employees, whether they are employed full- or part-time, are covered. This case is a clear illustration of employment legislation and the organizational owner's assessment of it, therefore this is the legal issue that is raised in this situation. Gail also works for the Sweet Ice Company since according to the Australian employment act; even part-time employees are covered by the employment statute (Weiner, et al. 2018). In this case, the legal issues raised in the scenario are because in an organization it's mandatory to provide a framework for safeguarding the health, safety, and welfare of those who work, and David and his organization failed to do so. Gail broke her wrist when she tripped and fell in the workplace's organized environment. In this case, Gail is entitled to a fine and restitution from David and his business, Sweet Ice.

In an organization, a fair work environment is also necessary according to the “Fair Work Act 2009”, which says there shouldis a fair environment in the workplace in terms of resisting all types of discrimination. In this case, David and his organization Sweet Ice have failed to maintain this act also, where they have failed to establish a fair environment of the organizational workplace and Gail had to suffer for them (Jardine, 2021). A similar case can be considered make related to this case, where the main issue is also providing healthy and secure work culture, and this case is all about preventing workers from falling from trucks “Preventing workers falling from trucks - AAT case study available at https://www.safeworkaustralia.gov.au/resources-and-publications/case-studies/preventing-workers-falling-trucks-aat-case-study". David and Sweet Ice Company also need to prevent their workers from falling in danger and provide a safe and secure workplace for their employees. They have failed to maintain the guidelines and the policies of organizational safety and security and that is the reason they are liable for the punishment and penalty under Australian laws. After a discussion of these acts, it is clear that David and his organization are not following the Australian organizational rules and policies, and they are liable to give a penalty for that. In order to avoid violating Australian employment law (Narula, 2022). The Sweet Ice Company was required to give Gail compensation. Had they done so, David would have been in violation of the law.

Conclusion

The primary topic of discussion in this lecture was Australian employment law in the context of a case in which the laws were put into practice. This topic in the assignment was supported by a number of side talks, each of which added to our understanding and application of Australian employment law. In this assignment case, the problem's facts and the legal difficulties brought up by this hypothetical situation in light of Australian employment law were explored. In this assignment, relevant case law and the statute were also reviewed in light of the students' justifications for applying the legislation. In order to clarify the problem-solving process, a discussion of a real-world example of a problem identical to the one at hand followed. After discussion of the above sections, it could be stated that Davis was wrong and the Sweet Ice Company failed to comply with the employment laws, where David needed to pay compensation to Gail, or he would be under the guise of Australian employment law to violate this.

Reference list

Journal

Elsarinda, L.N., Sindiawaty, O. and Pratama, F.A., 2021. The Role of Immigration and Employment Law as a Media for Licensing and Supervision of Foreign Workers in the Republic of Indonesia. Budapest International Research and Critics Institute (BIRCI-Journal): Humanities and Social Sciences4(3), pp.5339-5346.

Estlund, C., 2018. What should we do after work? Automation and employment law. The Yale Law Journal, pp.254-326.

Jardine, G., 2021. Costs in employment law cases: An overview. Precedent (Sydney, NSW), (164), pp.30-33.

Narula, M., 2022. Employment Law Violations. Am. Crim. L. Rev.59, p.667.

Sternlight, J.R., 2019. Mandatory Arbitration Stymies Progress Towards Justice in Employment Law: Where To,# MeToo?. Harv. CR-CLL Rev.54, p.155.

Weiner, B., Saba, C., Roessler, S. and Fraimow, B., 2018. Employment Law Violations. Am. Crim. L. Rev.55, p.1049.

Recently Download Samples by Customers
Our Exceptional Advantages   Order Now   Live Chat
Get best price for your work

offer valid for limited time only*

© Copyright 2024 | New Assignment Help | All rights reserved