Skip to main content

Indian mission told to follow Aussie laws: Sydney consulate fined $10,620 for "unfair" dismissal of employee

Sydney Consul general
By A Representative
In what is being interpreted by the Indian diaspora across Australia as “not a very bright event” for the community, the Indian consulate in Sydney has been fined $10,620 over “unfair dismissal” of an employee, who claims to be a whistleblower, Hitendra Kumar, an immigrant working with it as a driver.
A report published in the “South Asia Times (SAT)” (June 2016), a periodical published from Melbourne, Australia, has said that after Kumar’s employment was terminated, he challenged “the unfair dismissal” in the Fair Work Commission court.
Talking about what went wrong, Kumar has been quoted as saying, “When I began to highlight serious issues and discrepancies in what was going on at the consulate, I was sacked on a trumped up charge. I’m delighted that I’ve been vindicated by the Courts.”
The judgement went in favour of the employee after the consulate put up stiff resistance despite the court providing the option for an out-of-course settlement, which could have “saved a lot of money and embarrassment and litigation for the consulate.”
Based on documents obtained by Ashok Kumar of the “Indian Subcontinent Times, Sidney, the report said, the consulate “opted to go ahead with the court with proceedings and thereby incurring three times the cost and ended up paying 12 weeks’ salary $10,620.”
Ashok Kumar
“The consulate ignored the fact that working laws are different in Australia than in India and it had to follow Australian procedures when dealing with any Australian citizen or permanent resident as the employee of the consulate”, the report said.
The report quoted Transport Workers’ Union acting secretary Richard Olsen welcoming the decision by the Fair Work Commission to award a driver “unfairly” dismissed by the Indian consulate, saying that it would send “a clear message that no employer is above the law.”
Olsen said, “This decision sends a message to all workers in Australia, especially foreign migrants, that you have rights no matter who your boss is or what they tell you. It also sends a message to employers that even if you have diplomatic immunity, you still have to play by Australian workplace laws.”
He further said, “There are systematic problems with the exploitation of foreign workers in Australia”, adding, “From 7-Eleven, the transport industry and all the way up to foreign embassies, we have seen foreign migrants underpaid, exploited and sacked by their bosses if they speak up.”

Comments

  1. AnonymousJune 14, 2016

    Discuss the actual case's details mate rather than beating around the bush or at least give the link to the case order itself.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

NOTE: Hateful, abusive comments won't be published. -- Editor

TRENDING

The Nazia Elahi Khan controversy and the normalisation of hate

By Mohd. Ziyaullah Khan   The registration of two FIRs in the Mumbai Metropolitan Region against BJP Minority Morcha leader and social media influencer Nazia Elahi Khan for allegedly making derogatory remarks about Prophet Muhammad is not merely another isolated controversy. It is a disturbing reminder of how hate speech and communal provocation have become increasingly normalised in contemporary India.

Congress leader Gohil "misinformed" about the OBC caste status of Modi, contend senior Gujarat academics

Shaktisinh Gohil By A Representative Did senior Gujarat Congress leader Shaktisinh Gohil display his poor understanding of the caste system in Gujarat when he declared that Gujarat chief minister Narendra Modi does not belong to the other backward class (OBC) but to an upper caste? At least two top senior experts, known for their proficiency in sociology and history of Gujarat, have wondered “how could Gohil go so wrong” on Modi’s caste status. Gohil, who all-India Congress spokesperson, has created a ripple by “disclosing” that Modi included his caste, modh ghanchi, into the OBC list three months after he came to power through a government resolution dated January 1, 2002.

Incarceration of Prof Saibaba 'revives' the question: What is crime, who is criminal?

By Kunal Pant* In 2016, a Supreme Court Judge asked the state of Maharashtra, “Do you want to extract a pound of flesh?” The statement was directed against the state for contesting the bail plea of Delhi University Professor GN Saibaba. Saibaba was arrested in 2014, a justification for which was to prevent him from committing what the police called “anti-national activities.”