, urging the Federal Court to dismiss the case because the allegations are “vague” and, should the matter continue, says it had grounds to sack the employee as he was medically unfit to work.The defence is responding to action launched by former general manager of flight operations and chief pilot, Michael Fitzgerald, who last month said the airline “bullied and threatened” him and falsified misconduct claims. He was on an extended period of personal leave when sacked earlier this year.
However, Virgin said Mr Fitzgerald was not sacked because he was exercising his workplace rights, but because two medical professionals had declared him unfit to work for the “foreseeable future”.
By late January, the defence said Mr Fitzgerald had attended a medical exam that found he had a severe mental illness and “should remain off work until an independent review by a psychiatrist deemed him fit to return”.The independent psychiatrist review, conducted in February, stated much the same, and said “it was unlikely [Mr Fitzgerald] would be able to return to his position in future” and “it was unlikely the applicant’s condition would improve within six months”.
“The applicant was declared unfit for work by two independent medical practitioners. The sole reason for the respondent’s dismissal of the applicant was the applicant’s ongoing unfitness for work as a result of his medical condition.”
Law Law Latest News, Law Law Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Source: smh - 🏆 6. / 80 Read more »