Section 119(1)(a) of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) states that an employee is entitled to be paid redundancy pay by the employer  if the employment is terminated at the employer’s initiative because the employer no longer requires the job done by the employee to be done by anyone, except where this is due to the ordinary and customary turnover of labour (the Exception).

The Exception was most recently considered by a Full Bench of the Fair Work Commission in December 2015 in Compass Group (Australia) Pty Ltd v National Union of Workers and another [2015] FWCFB8040 (Compass) in the context of employees whose employment was terminated as a result of the employer no longer holding a particular client contract, which those employees were specifically employed to service.  The employer, Compass,  provided  fire rescue services to the Department of Defence and in the circumstances of this case, had made a commercial decision not to tender for a replacement contract in respect of those services.  Compass relied on the Exception and withheld redundancy pay from the terminated employees.

The Full Bench said that in order to determine whether the Exception applies in a given case it is necessary to:

  1. Consider the normal features of the business; and
  1. Then determine whether the relevant terminations are properly described as falling within the ordinary and customary turnover of labour in that particular business.

The ECJ has delivered its decision in a case based on the interpretation of collective redundancies and how to determine the term “establishment”. It has held that the UK legislation does correctly implement the EU directive on collective redundancies and therefore that the term “establishment” must be interpreted as referring to the entity to which

The legal background

In the context of an economic dismissal, even when the employer claims to have strong economic grounds for justifying the termination of the employment contracts, it is still required to comply with the general reclassification obligation applicable to all economic dismissal procedures.

Such obligation consists in trying to seek alternative positions to

Employers may have granted entitlements to redundancy pay through enterprise agreements in wider situations than provided by the National Employment Standards (NES). The Full Bench of the Fair Work Commission has ruled that the entitlement to redundancy pay in an enterprise agreement should not be ‘read down’ to exclude the ‘ordinary and customary turnover of labour’ concept, which can be found in the redundancy provisions of the NES.

In Colombia, companies are not obliged to request authorization from the unions to carry out downsizing processes.

However, it is advisable to review if the collective bargaining agreements entered into with the unions include any obligation in this regard.

According to Colombian labor law, redundancy, economic reasons and the fact that a role is no

In the province of Québec, the concept of “redundancy” shall be understood as terminations of employment or layoffs (individual or collective), all as stated in and within the meaning of section 82 and following of the Act Respecting Labour Standards (the ALS).[1] That being said, employers have no formal and legal obligations with

General comments

Under French employment law, employees’ representatives benefit from a right to be consulted on a very wide range of matters concerning the running of the company. In particular, the works council must be informed and consulted on any matter relating to the organisation, the management and the general running of the company, which

In the UK, under the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 (which implements an EU directive), if an employer intends to dismiss 20 or more employees as redundant within a period of 90 days or less at one establishment, the employer will have a duty to collectively consult with employee representatives. The meaning

When job redundancies arise in an organization, whether as result of a merger, restructuring, or downsizing, employers need to remain aware of duties under human rights legislation, such as the Ontario Human Rights Code.

To meet these expectations, an employer’s decision regarding which employees will lose their jobs can not be tainted in any