Company fined $30k for age-based termination threat

    EWIN HANNAN
    The Australian
    April 08, 2014


A QUEENSLAND restaurant worker who was told he would be sacked on his 65th birthday has been awarded $10,000 in compensation and the restaurant’s operators fined almost $30,000.      

The case is the first time the federal workplace watchdog, the Fair Work Ombudsman, has taken legal action against a company on the basis of age discrimination.

After raising questions about his pay, Cheng Peng Lee was informed by his employers that it was company policy to sack workers once they reached retirement age.      

The company, Theravanish Investments, operate Thai restaurants on the Gold Coast.

A letter from the company accountant said it was “the policy of the company that we do not employ any staff that attain the retirement age, which in your case is 65 years”.

Mr Lee, 64-years-old at the time, had worked full time for the company for 15 years until taking long-service leave. After returning from leave to part-time work in 2011 and questioning his pay rate, he was told he would be terminated.    

In his written response, Mr Lee said termination of his employment was “irrefutably an act of blatant discrimination”.

“It must be pointed out, my effectiveness as a food and beverage attendant when I turn 65 is no less than my effectiveness at the age of 64,’’ he said.

After the company stood firm, Mr Lee lodged a complaint with the FWO. The Federal Court yesterday fined the company and its owners $29,150 for contraventions of age discrimination and record-keeping laws. The company has been fined $20,790, and its joint directors and equal shareholders, Nopporn Theravanish and Michael Theravanish, have also been penalised a further $4180 each.

They operate two Thai restaurants at Broadbeach and Surfers Paradise, and previously operated restaurants at Nobby Beach and Robina.

Judge Michael Burnett ordered Theravanish Investments to pay $10,000 compensation to Mr Lee.

Fair Work Ombudsman Natalie James said discrimination against employees on the grounds of age was unlawful and the outcome of the case served as a warning to employers that age discrimination would not be tolerated.         

“Limiting employment opportunities of workers because of their age is totally unacceptable and we take such conduct very seriously because of the impact it has on individual workers and the labour market generally,’’ Ms James said.

There is a reason for doing this though. Their insurance is age discriminatory. My mother was sacked when she turned 80 because the salvos insurance didnt cover ppl over 80. Of course they could always change their insurance but nobody is going to do that are they.

SOB

After raising questions about his pay, Cheng Peng Lee was informed by his employers that it was company policy to sack workers once they reached retirement age.      

Bobby. wrote on Apr 8^th, 2014 at 6:28am:


so true.....sadly a lot of people who come here and never improve their English...they dont know their rights.. and these people take advantage of them time and time again..

I am sick of reading about it to be honest...

But the Audit Commission warns any changes must be phased in to ensure Australians can plan with certainty for their retirement. Mr ­Hockey has backed moves to ­increase the pension age to 70.             

let me see, at 65 there is much less chance of having to pay another lot of long service leave, and if its a woman not much chance of parental leave.

The employer mentioned was an idiot to get caught out doing that.
Other employers will learn and find other ways to get rid of people, like changing shifts and generally making life miserable for the person.
That is also illegal but a lot harder to prove than having written confirmation that the employer is a drongo like in this case.
In the future however employers are going to need older staff as a lot of jobs the young ones wont do.

In the meantime I think employers will dabble with employment contracts which are open ended and can be terminated at any time (if it can be done legally)

Hmmm, 2 Thai Restaurants - one in Surfers, and one at Broadbeach.  Hey!  Could it be the one that is attached to Crown Towers, and the other one close to Goldcoast HWY?  I always go there when our family goes up for holidays.  Very nice food.

Quote:




He was a full-time employee, and they made a unilateral decision to make him a part-time worker.

Can't do that either.

This mob sound shonky as.