Worker was verbally informed of the change and given a termination letter, but not provided written information for discussion, as required
An electronics engineer with just over a year of service challenged his dismissal after his employer advised that his role was no longer required following an internal operational restructure of research and development resources.
The worker contended that no redeployment options were provided to him, and there was no consultation about the redundancy, meaning his dismissal was unfair.
The employer maintained the worker's role was genuinely redundant because the products he had been working on had moved into production, significantly reducing the need for further development engineering work in Australia.
The worker also raised concerns about a connection between his dismissal and feedback he had previously given about a bullying culture in the office.
A meeting was held between the worker, the employer's global chief technology officer (CTO) and the worker's line manager, the head of engineering and design.
At this meeting, the CTO explained that the employer had undertaken an internal operational restructure, and the worker's role as an electronics engineer in Melbourne was no longer required because the products he had been working on had moved into production. The worker was advised that ongoing support for those products would be handled by the employer's existing engineering teams...
Donald Trump posted a wild set of false and misleading claims about today's Minnesota ICE shooting in a bid to distract attention from the incident. Video of the incident showed at least five agen...