Elena's Movie Review Madness

Reviews from my 11-year old mind!

Does the nature of the worker`s actions or comments go, in another way, beyond the scope of the freedom granted? If this is the case, it is probably no longer a question of whether or not the worker has breached the provisions of the enterprise agreement, since the agreement itself does not apply to such behaviour, so that the employee remains open to standard investigations and disciplinary procedures. The National Tertiary Education Union accepts that the JCU was within its legal rights to search Professor Ridds` email account, but argues that the university violates a principle of academic freedom. Professor Ridd was fired last month for allegedly making disrespectful comments about his colleagues on Sky TV and in private emails he sent to his university account. The Federal Court of Australia (“FCA”) has overturned a Federal Circuit Court of Australia (FCCA) decision to fire a university researcher, raising questions about the boundary between freedom of mind and gross misconduct. The ACF found that the obligations of freedom of mind under section 14 were not absolute and by expectations and limits with respect to “respect for the rights of others… and maintenance of professional standards by staff.” The ACF noted that some of the academic`s behaviours are the expression of “personal opinions and frustrations” and “general criticisms of the JCU or the broader academic sector.” Professor Peter Ridd was Head of Physics at the University from 2009 to 2016. At the time of his release, Professor Ridd had led the university`s marine geographic laboratory for 15 years. Professor Ridd was subject to the provisions of the university`s enterprise contract and code of conduct. Does your freedom of mind clause or a broader enterprise agreement include a restriction on the freedom granted? In light of the Ridd Tribunal`s review of the primacy of an enterprise agreement over a code of conduct, the text of the agreement must first be used to determine whether a worker`s behaviour or comments may have been contrary to relevant restrictions. It is interesting to note that there was a corresponding sub-clause in the university`s enterprise agreement, which required Mr. Ridd to “respect the rights of others”; In 2016, Peter Ridd received an official warning for critical comments he sent to a reporter through a colleague. “What we expect is that thanks to the (academic) code of conduct and our enterprise agreement, we will have a secure, respectful, ethical and professional job,” Said Vice-Chancellor Iain Gordon on 7.30.

Like those at James Cook University, any enterprise agreement for The Group of 8 Australian universities contains similar provisions that guarantee the practice of intellectual freedom for their academics. While employers must approach these clauses with new care in light of Ridd`s decision, the case itself does not support the proposition that workers are “untouchable” when they characterize their comments as an exercise in intellectual freedom. The academic attempted to invoke section 14 of the James Cook University 2016 (JCU Enterprise Agreement) enterprise agreement to challenge the decision to terminate his employment.

Categories: Uncategorized

Comments are closed.