High Court rules in favour of employers on personal leave accruals
The High Court of Australia has preserved the long-standing industry practice regarding personal/carer’s leave accruals in a significant ruling that has been welcomed by employers that were potentially set to face a substantial back-pay bill.
The High Court of Australia has granted the appeals by Mondelēz International and the Australian government against the previous decision of the Full Federal Court, clarifying the quantum of personal/carer’s leave entitlements for millions of employees.
The Full Federal Court’s 2019 ruling against Mondelēz found the Fair Work Act’s minimum 10 days of paid personal leave should be given to permanent employees regardless of the number of days worked per week or number of hours per day.
But a summary issued by the High Court of Australia on Thursday revealed that a majority of the High Court rejected the “working day” construction and instead held that what is meant by a “day” or “10 days” must be calculated by reference to an employee’s ordinary hours of work.
“Because patterns of work do not always follow two-week cycles, the entitlement to ‘10 days’ of paid personal/carer’s leave can be calculated as 1/26 of an employee’s ordinary hours of work in a year,” the summary reads.
Commenting on the outcome, Innes Willox, chief executive of national employer association Ai Group, said the High Court’s judgment preserves widespread industry practice.
“If the Federal Court’s interpretation of the expression ‘10 days of paid personal/carer’s leave’ in section 96 of the Fair Work Act had been upheld, there would have been major cost implications for a very large number of businesses,” Mr Willox said.
“In addition, a major barrier would have been imposed on employers agreeing to part-time employment arrangements, including for employees returning from parental leave.”
Mr Willox noted that the case was brought on because of action relating to “12-hour shift workers at the Mondelēz International plant in Claremont, Tasmania”, but the Federal Court’s ultimate ruling had implications for most employers in Australia.
In turn, the interpretation adopted by the High Court ensures that all employees are entitled to take up to two weeks off work each year for personal/carer’s leave regardless of how many ordinary hours an employee works in that two-week period.
“A full-time employee who works 38 ordinary hours per week is entitled to 76 hours of personal/carer’s leave per year, and a part-time employee who works 20 hours per week is entitled to 40 hours of personal/carer’s leave per year,” Mr Willox explained. “The court’s judgment ensures equity among full-time and part-time employees, and among eight-hour and 12-hour shift workers.”
Tracy Angwin, CEO of the Australian Payroll Association, also welcomed the final outcome of a case that had cast a shadow over some 1 million shift workers around the country, noting that the “outcome will come as a major relief to employers and payroll professionals”.
Ms Angwin said: “The original decision would have placed significant additional financial burden on companies, and also created a disparity in entitlements for part-time employees, and a level of complexity that could lead to employers re-considering flexible working arrangements.
“We are pleased to see that the historical understanding of personal leave accruals has been upheld.”
‘Win for employers’
Employsure managing director Ed Mallett referred to the ruling as a win for employers who have already been stretched to breaking point over the past year due to COVID-19.
He advised employers to communicate with their staff on the outcome of the High Court’s decision, to avoid any potential confusion.
“If an employer changed how personal leave operates following the original Federal Court ruling last August, they need to update their payroll system accordingly,” Mr Mallett said.
“Staff need to be assured that they don’t need to do a thing, and that when personal or carer’s leave is taken, the business will comply with the governing legislation.
“If an employer did not change how personal leave operates as a result of last August’s decision, the employer should still reiterate with staff that the way they operate personal or carer’s leave in the business is accurate, and no further action is needed.”
Maja Garaca Djurdjevic
14 August 2020
accountantsdaily.com.au
Hot Issues
- FBT Reminder – Odometer Reading
- ATO’s debts on hold campaign prompts new IGTO guidance
- A comprehensive collection of small business benchmarks
- The 2025 Financial Year tax & super changes you need to know!
- Underperforming employees: When can you terminate?
- A comprehensive list of guides to industry specific tax deductions.
- ‘Renewed concerns’ about economy sees consumer sentiment dip: Westpac
- Oldest Buildings in the World.
- Small businesses may ‘collapse under strain of payday super’, IPA warns
- ATO’s hands tied with scrapping on-hold debts, expert says
- What Drives Your Business Growth and Profits?
- Australian Taxation Office (ATO) shifting to firmer debt collection activity
- Why employee v contractor comes down to fine print
- Sharing economy reporting regime for platform operators
- Countries producing the most solar power by gigawatt hours
- Illegal access nets $637 million
- Accessing superannuation benefits.
- Does your business have a company Power of Attorney?
- Labor tweaks stage 3 tax cuts to make room for ‘middle Australia’
- GrantConnect
- 2 in 3 SMEs benefit from instant asset write-off, survey reveals
- Updated guidance on R&D claims
- Do you know how to recover debts?
- Wheat Production by Country
- Types of small business benchmarks
- Vimeo test
Article archive
- January - March 2024
- October - December 2023
- July - September 2023
- April - June 2023
- January - March 2023
- October - December 2022
- July - September 2022
- April - June 2022
- January - March 2022
- October - December 2021
- July - September 2021
- April - June 2021
- January - March 2021
- October - December 2020
- July - September 2020
- April - June 2020
- January - March 2020
- October - December 2019
- July - September 2019
- April - June 2019
- January - March 2019
- October - December 2018
- July - September 2018
- April - June 2018
- January - March 2018
- October - December 2017
- July - September 2017
- April - June 2017
- January - March 2017
- October - December 2016
- July - September 2016
- April - June 2016
- January - March 2016
- October - December 2015
- July - September 2015
- April - June 2015
- January - March 2015
- October - December 2014
July - September 2020 archive
- September update of latest COVID-19 initiatives.
- ATO JobKeeper 2.0 guidance surfaces
- Expats Return to Australia – Travel Expenses
- Profession to be relied on for post-JobKeeper turnover certificates
- Update of Superannuation contribution rules from July 1, 2020
- Expats & COVID-19 Impacts on tax residency
- Economic recovery could be slower than anticipated: RBA
- High Court rules in favour of employers on personal leave accruals
- JobKeeper Phase 2 - Latest Update
- Payroll Tax 2020 concessions and JobKeeper
- High alert issued over myGov tax time scam
- Extended director penalty regime to catch out ‘zombie companies’
- SG amnesty deadline - 7 September
- ‘Hundreds’ to be contacted in ATO early super compliance blitz
- 90,000 SMEs to benefit from new JobTrainer program
- Work Related expenses – 2020
- ‘Everyone is now on notice’: ATO acquires COVID-19 data on 3m Aussies
- Extra Tools & Resources for our clients.
- Year End Tax Deductions – “equipment”
- Home Office Claims 2020
- Early release of super sees ‘high take-up’
- Tax time 2020: ATO homes in on rental deduction claims
- ATO announces Div 7A COVID-19 assistance
What our clients say about us