An employee’s entitlements to return to work after unpaid parental leave (UPPL) are often not given much thought until an employee is due to return. Being aware of your obligations as an employer is instrumental to making sure you are able mitigate potential discrimination and general protections claims.
Section 84 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (FW Act) states that upon ending UPPL, an employee is entitled to return to their pre-parental leave position. It also states that, if an employee’s position no longer exists, they must be offered an available job they are qualified and suited for, which is of similar status and pay to the pre‑parental leave position. It is important to note that any reduction in hours or transfer to a ‘safe job’, to accommodate the employee’s pregnancy whilst working, does not constitute the employees pre-parental leave position. Putting it simply, an employee returning to work after a period of UPPL, is entitled to, and has a right to, the position they had before commencing UPPL.
So what happens if my employee wants to return to work on a different basis?
An employee’s return to work can become complicated when an employee requests to return on a modified basis, otherwise known as a flexible working arrangement (FWA). FWA’s can only be requested on specific grounds. An employee who has the caring responsibilities of a child (school age or younger), can for this reason request an FWA, as long as the employee has completed 12 months continuous service with the employer. The request must be in writing, clearly outline the changes sought and the reason for the changes. The FWA requested will differ from employee to employee, as it will depend on individual circumstances, however, a FWA could include changes such as:
Do I have to accept these new changes?
If your employee wants to change their working arrangements, they have a right to request changes, but they do not have a unilateral right to be granted any changes. Employers can refuse FWA requests if they have reasonable business grounds, as outlined in section 65(5A) of the FW Act. When determining if the FWA can be accommodated, employers need to consider:
Your employee can be directed to return to their pre-parental leave position if you refuse the FWA request on reasonable business grounds. A refusal must outline the reasons why the FWA cannot be accommodated, including the reasonable business grounds for which the employer made their decision. The refusal must be in writing and must be given to the employee no later than 21 days after receiving the request from the employee. Employers should also be aware of any additional requirements under a modern award, enterprise agreement, contract of employment, or policy that provides FWA entitlements more beneficial than the FW Act. If you are unsure what award your employees are covered by, you can contact CCIWA’s Employee Relations Advice Centre on 9365 7660 or firstname.lastname@example.org.
Case Example – Fair Work Ombudsman v A Dalley Holdings Pty Ltd
A Dalley Holdings Pty Ltd (A Dalley), operated an aged care facility in Geelong where an employee held a part time personal care assistant position. Prior to going on UPPL, the employee worked six afternoon shifts and one sleepover shift per fortnight. While the employee was on UPPL, a new roster was introduced reallocating the employee’s afternoon shifts to other workers, without the employee being consulted. Issues arose when the employee attempted to return to work, initially being told the facility had no hours to give her. After making complaints to the employer, the employee was subsequently offered two sleepover shifts per fortnight. When the employee brought up concerns about her inability to do these shifts, because of her family and carer responsibilities, the employer said that if she refused to accept the shifts, they would take her refusal as resignation. A Dalley found to have breached the FW Act on multiple grounds and was fined $27,720. Andrew Dalley, who manages and part-owns the centre, was personally fined a further $3,168. The company was also ordered to compensation the affected employee $5,000.
This case highlights that it is a serious breach of workplace laws to discriminate against employees on the grounds of pregnancy and family and caring responsibilities. The employer was found to have failed within its obligation to;
Written By Jenny Thomas – Employee Relations Adviser
“REEFWA are an exceptional corporate body that provides real time advice, advocacy and detailed information on all industrial relations matters pertaining to our industry. They operate with professionalism and personal service. Beneficially for you, they have a broad range of highly experienced personnel that work in the industry and offer years of knowledge.”
This website does not give legal advice. The content found on this website is intended to give you general information in summary form on legal topics, not legal advice. The law differs in each jurisdiction and even similar laws may be interpreted differently in different courts or places and will often change depending on your individual circumstances. Laws are often complex and the general information that has been provided on this website will not fit every circumstance. You should consult a legal professional to get formal advice regarding your situation or particular matters. Nothing on this website constitutes legal advice and it should not be relied upon as such. You use this site and any content found on this site at your own risk. To the maximum extent permitted by law, REEFWA, the Chamber of Commerce and Industry Western Australia Limited and Business Law WA Pty Ltd are not responsible for any direct or indirect loss, injury, claim, damage or liability (including, without limitation, any liability arising from fault, negligence or negligent misstatement) related to your use of, or reliance on, the site or its contents, whether from errors or omissions in the content of our site or any other linked sites, from the site being down or from any other use of the site.