Goswami v BPL Adelaide Pty Ltd

In *Goswami v BPL Adelaide Pty Ltd*, heard by Judge Heffernan, the dispute concerned alleged contraventions and breaches of the *Fair Work Act 2009* (Cth) by the respondent employer. The applicant, a Distribution Employee Level 3, alleged that following an incident on 5 March 2019, the respondent unilaterally demoted him, changed his employment classification, and transferred him to a different work site without consultation. The proceedings were bifurcated, with the court first determining liability.

The legal issues before the court were whether the respondent had breached sections 50 and 323 of the *Fair Work Act 2009* (Cth). Specifically, the court was required to determine if the disciplinary action taken by the respondent exceeded the scope permitted by Clause 11 of the relevant Enterprise Agreement, if the applicant was not paid correctly as a Level 3 Distribution employee under Clause 15.1 of the Enterprise Agreement, and if the respondent failed to consult the applicant before changing his work location from the Hakkinen Road site to the Moss Road site.

The court found that the respondent had committed breaches of sections 50 and 323 of the *Fair Work Act 2009* (Cth). This was based on the determination that the disciplinary action taken was beyond the permissible scope of Clause 11 of the Enterprise Agreement, that the applicant was not paid in accordance with his Level 3 Distribution employee classification as required by Clause 15.1, and that the respondent failed to consult the applicant before transferring him to the Moss Road site. The matter was adjourned for further consideration of damages and penalties.