|
|
此文章由 亚雷特 原创或转贴,不代表本站立场和观点,版权归 oursteps.com.au 和作者 亚雷特 所有!转贴必须注明作者、出处和本声明,并保持内容完整
本帖最后由 亚雷特 于 2015-4-13 12:54 编辑
修STRESS LEAVE是一个很不确定性的方法,在应对bullying的时候,最简单明了的是根据公司的policy以及fairwork的流程走,而修stress leave应该放在最后的选项。不是很多人不知道,而是选修这个有可能更麻烦。
修stress leave顺利话就好,如果不顺利的话将会给你带来很多不必要的麻烦,甚至更深程度的争斗。
It is part of employer responsibilities to identify what might be causing the problems in the first place, rather than just permitting workers to go on 'stress leave'. One issue with 'stress' leave is that it can often be difficult to prove whether the symptoms are genuine - requesting medical certification is a way of helping to reduce this doubt. Note that stress is not an actual medical condition - often a workers' compensation medical certificate will use terms such as anxiety or depression in order to enable the claim to pass through the workers' compensation system.
另外你的雇主会有无数个理由顺利将你炒掉
以下是一个严重的workplace bullying成功反日老板的例子,当然这个是很严重的,但是如果这姐们当时选修了stress leave就啥都没了。
In Trolan v WD Gelle Insurance and Finance Brokers (2014), an employee made a claim in negligence and sought damages for psychological injury against her former employer. The employee alleged that on numerous occasions, her boss, Mr Gelle, systematically sexually harassed, intimidated and bullied her. The employee stated that, on each occasion, she actively discouraged the behaviour.
Despite her complaints to another director, nothing was done to address the conduct. It continued unabated and became increasingly offensive to the employee, with the result that she developed a psychological illness.
What happened?
The conduct included Mr Gelle:
• shouting at people in the office, at least several times per week;
• positioning himself behind the employee and rubbing himself on her bottom and on the small of her back;
• calling the employee into his work area, placing his hand under her shirt and grabbing her breast;
• making gratuitous remarks to the employee about the dress she was wearing, and suggesting that she should wear dresses more often to show off her legs;
• placing his hand up the back of the employee’s dress and squeezing her on the bottom while she was trying to enter the access code to the car park at the end of a working day;
• approaching the employee from behind and placing a pencil between her buttocks; and
• turning up at the employee’s house uninvited and seeking to obtain entry to her home to talk to her.
As a result, the employee took sick leave due to a psychological illness. While she was on leave, she was contacted by Mrs Gelle, who was another director and Mr Gelle’s wife. The employee informed Mrs Gelle of the reason for her sick leave. Mrs Gelle responded by saying that she would “sort it out”.
However, Mr Gelle’s conduct did not change. Three months later, the employee made a workers’ compensation claim and was assessed as having post-traumatic stress disorder, depression, anxiety and social withdrawal as a result of Mr Gelle’s conduct.
What did the Court find?
The Court determined that the employer had breached its duty to take reasonable steps to prevent harm to the employee by:
• failing to provide the employee with a safe place of work;
• failing to take reasonable steps to care for her psychological wellbeing; and
• exposing her to continuing and repeated harassment.
The employer was found to have been negligent because it:
• was notified of the harassment;
• could reasonably foresee that this conduct was likely to be detrimental to the employee’s wellbeing; and
• despite this, failed to take action.
The Court noted that the consequences of the conduct could have been avoided by facilitating counselling or mediation between the employee and the perpetrator.
Therefore, the employer was liable to pay the employee damages for her workplace injuries in the net sum of $733,723. This was made up of:
• lost income ($285,000);
• lost superannuation ($31,350);
• future loss of earning capacity ($353,812);
• future loss of superannuation ($49,710); and
• tax paid on her weekly workers' compensation payments ($13,851).
|
评分
-
查看全部评分
|