000			01858nam a22002537a 4500
003			ZW-GwMSU
005			20240604101415.0
008			240604b |||||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
022			_a00221856
040			_aMSU _bEnglish _cMSU _erda
050	0	0	_aHD8391 JOU
100	1		_aCatanzariti, Joseph _eauthor
245	1	0	_aMajor tribunal decisions in Australia in 2012/ _ccreated by Joseph Catanzariti and Christopher Kane
264	1		_aLondon: _bSage, _c2013.
336			_2rdacontent _atext _btxt
337			_2rdamedia _aunmediated _bn
338			_2rdacarrier _avolume _bnc
440			_aThe journal of industrial relations _vVolume 55, number 3
520	3		_aThis article examines a number of decisions of Fair Work Australia, the High Court of Australia and the Federal Court of Australia from 2012 regarding the application of the Fair Work Act 2009. In the decision of Bendigo v Barclay, the High Court considered how the courts should approach a determination as to whether an employer has engaged in adverse action for a prohibited reason. The Endeavour Coal decisions of Fair Work Australia and the Federal Court have addressed the good-faith bargaining provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009. Further, Fair Work Australia has resolved conflicting authority regarding the approval of enterprise agreements containing ‘opt-out’ clauses. In other decisions, Fair Work Australia has considered an appeal from unfair dismissal proceedings regarding an employee who was terminated on the basis of an offensive Facebook page, and the Federal Court has confirmed the existence of an implied term of mutual trust and confidence in an employee's contract.
650			_aAdverse action _vFair Work Act 2009 _xGood-faith bargaining _zAustralia
700	1		_aKane, Christopher _eauthor
856			_uhttps://doi.org/10.1177/0022185613480745
942			_2lcc _cJA
999			_c165880 _d165880