| Summary |
INJUNCTION – Applicant sought injunction compelling respondent to allow return to work, although applicant not dismissed – Applicant absent from work for considerable period of time due to illness – Applicant claimed received medical clearance to return – Claimed improperly precluded from returning to work due to unjustified actions by respondent – Respondent claimed exercising rights in employment agreement or, alternatively, actions fair and reasonable given duty to provide applicant with safe workplace – Applicant issued with final written warning week after unrelated incident – Another incident occurred next day, applicant allegedly dealt with colleagues inappropriately and issued with final written warning – Authority noted warnings subject of separate Authority proceedings - Applicant required to attend meeting with lead educator (“A”) to discuss action plan – Applicant claimed stressed and bullied at meeting and later placed on sick leave by doctor - Applicant advised would be fit to return to work in month and requested be returned to safe environment away from false allegations from other staff to prevent relapse – Respondent insisted medical certificate provided before any discussion of return to work – Applicant claimed would be at work next day in accordance with mediation agreement and would provide medical certificate same day – Advised respondent refusing return would be construed as lockout – Authority noted applicant’s earlier evidence noted no agreement on return to work reached at mediation – Applicant claimed when reported to work ordered by respondent to leave – A claimed applicant arrived at work unannounced and refused to come into A’s office – A claimed told applicant needed to leave as parties had not agreed on return to work – Medical certificates provided by applicant not on letterhead, not signed and provided no reasons why applicant fit to return to work - Respondent claimed applicant’s medical certificates inadequate and applicant not to return to work until all issues resolved – Applicant refused respondent’s request applicant attend independent medical assessment and arranged for further assessment with own doctor – Respondent claimed doctor’s report still inadequate and had right to seek opinion of physician chosen by respondent – Applicant claimed had provided more than enough evidence could return to work – Respondent proposed restructure decreasing number of teachers – Applicant claimed crucial returned to work so new lead educator selecting candidates could witness applicant’s capabilities – Applicant claimed no alternative remedy as restructure imminent and no further medical assessments necessary as applicant already rehabilitated – Claimed respondent paying for medical assessment affected report’s independence - Respondent claimed Authority did not have jurisdiction to hear matter as applicant had not successfully established personal grievance – Claimed contractually entitled to insist on additional medical assessment – Authority noted not application for interim reinstatement as applicant not dismissed – Found respondent incorrectly assumed applicant sought interim reinstatement – Found given context Authority had jurisdiction to hear matter although not application for interim reinstatement – Found respondent entitled to obtain further medical assessment of applicant’s health – Found as medical certificates provided by applicant not substantive arguable applicant’s health cleared - Found no evidence respondent attempted to influence outcome of medical assessment – Found, as respondent had legal and contractual duty to provide safe workplace, entitled to be satisfied could do so and request substantive medical assessment – Found applicant did not have right to assert return to work without attending independent medical assessment as requested – Application dismissed - Teacher |