Morrell v CEVA Logistics (Australia) Pty Ltd
[2024] QIRC 284
To print this judgment please return to the case and click on the PDF icon
next to the
case name. For court use, a full PDF copy is required or preferred.
Exit Distraction Free Reading Mode
Please Note: You are about to print a copy of the onscreen
version of
this judgment. For court use, a full PDF copy of the judgment is required or preferred. Please
return to
the case for PDF printing options.
- Unreported Judgment
- Morrell v CEVA Logistics (Australia) Pty Ltd[2024] QIRC 284
- Add to List
Morrell v CEVA Logistics (Australia) Pty Ltd[2024] QIRC 284
Morrell v CEVA Logistics (Australia) Pty Ltd[2024] QIRC 284
QUEENSLAND INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION
CITATION: | Morrell v CEVA Logistics (Australia) Pty Ltd [2024] QIRC 284 |
PARTIES: | Morrell, Deanna Lee Haromi and CEVA Logistics (Australia) Pty Ltd |
CASE NO: | B/2024/63 |
PROCEEDING: | Recovery of pro rata long service leave |
DELIVERED ON: | 4 December 2024 |
MEMBER: | Caddie IC |
HEARD AT: | On the papers |
ORDERS: | CEVA Logistics (Australia) Pty Ltd is to pay Deanna Lee Haromi Morrell the sum of $8,847.75 (gross), being the amount of pro rata long service leave owed to her, within 14 days. |
CATCHWORDS: | INDUSTRIAL LAW – RECOVERY OF PRO RATA LONG SERVICE LEAVE – Employee resigned from employment – whether the employee is entitled to proportionate long service leave – whether the employee terminated employment because of illness – employee terminated employment because of an exacerbation of existing anxiety and depression – application granted. |
LEGISLATION: | Industrial Relations Act 2016 (Qld) ss 95, 475. |
CASES: | AWU v Sunshine Coast Private Hospital [2003] QIR Comm 241; (2003) 172 QGIG 1097. Buchholz, Justus Paul v Uniting Care Health trading as The Wesley Hospital [2021] QIRC 006. Chapman v A1 Rubber (Aust) Pty Ltd [2019] QIRC 105. Gibbons v eBet Ltd [2015] QIRC 007. Johnson & Johnson Pty Ltd v Amalgamated Metals Workers Union (1987) 21 IR 457. |
Reasons for Decision
Introduction
- [1]Ms Deanna Morrell commenced employment with CEVA Logistics on 12 December 2016. She resigned on 24 May 2024, effective 31 May 2024.[1] Ms Morrell served a period of approximately 7.5 years. She had accrued a total of 245.6473 hours of long service leave, with the total accrual at termination being valued at $8847.75. The period of Ms Morrell's employment and the value of her long service leave accrual are not in dispute.
- [2]Ms Morrell applies for an order for the proportionate payment of long service leave pursuant to s 475(1) of the Industrial Relations Act 2016 (Qld) ('IR Act'). She contends that she is entitled to pro rata long service leave in accordance with s 95(4)(b)(i) of the Act, which provides for proportionate payment to an employee with more than seven but less than ten years' service, where the employee terminates their employment due to illness.
- [3]The issue requiring determination is whether Ms Morrell resigned due to illness arising from a pay dispute, or due to dissatisfaction with the outcome of that pay dispute.
- [4]The following questions provide guidance to the considerations relevant to my determination as to whether Ms Morrell has an entitlement to claim proportionate long service leave under s 95(4)(b)(i):
- Was the reason for Ms Morrell's termination one which fell within the section?
- Was the reason genuine and not simply a rationalisation of another reason which did not fall within the section; or a reason that while having the appearance of truth or right, is in reality a pretence or a deception; or a frivolous reason?
- Although the reason claimed may not be the sole ground which caused Ms Morrell to terminate her employment, was it the real or motivating reason?
- Did the reason claimed cause Ms Morrell to terminate her employment?
- Did the reason claimed affect Ms Morrell in relation to the particular service she terminated?
- Was the situation which Ms Morrell was in at the point of the termination, one in which a reasonable person might have felt compelled to seek to resolve by terminating their employment?[2]
What was the reason for resignation?
- [5]Ms Morrell's notice of resignation stated the following:
I am writing to tender my resignation from my position of PM Fleet Allocator with effect Friday 24th May 2024.
The reason for resignation is that I am currently paid significantly lower than all Allocators on all shifts. I have requested this be rectified and have been advised this will not change at this time. I do not feel able to work under these conditions.
Therefore I would be grateful if you could confirm receipt of my notification and my leaving date.
- [6]Ms Morrell submits that she suffered from illness due to increased stress and anxiety levels caused by attempting to resolve alleged pay inequality. In her application she states that between the dates of 19th April 2024 and 20 May 2024 she had been involved in pay discussions with the State Manager and HR Officer culminating in an email from the HR Officer on 20 May, advising there would not be a salary rise at that time. Ms Morrell states 'she did not feel able to work under these conditions' due to the negative impact of the process and decision on her self-worth, wellbeing, and her underlying medical condition.
- [7]In support of her illness claim, Ms Morrell provided a medical letter from Dr Deniece Chapman (GP), dated 12 July 2024, stating that Ms Morrell was treated on 23 May 2024 (the day prior to her resignation) for "an exacerbation, of her anxiety & depression, related to her working conditions." The letter further stated that Dr Chapman was advised by Ms Morrell that she resigned because she felt undervalued, increasing her anxiety and depression symptoms.
- [8]Ms Morrell reinforced in her submissions that she terminated her employment because of her anxiety and depression, as the pay issues she identified affected her condition. She believed her condition would worsen if she remained, so she resigned. She further provided an affidavit stating she was being treated by Dr Chapman for ongoing depression and anxiety since 20 April 2024. She states:
- Further exacerbation of my medical condition of depression and anxiety is the reason for resigning from my employment which is the grounds of requesting Proportionate Payment of Long Service Leave.
- [9]A second medical letter from Dr Chapman provided by Ms Morrell, dated 20 November 2024, confirms that while she was treated on 20 April and 23 May 2024 for her recurrent symptoms of anxiety and depression, she was also previously treated for depression in 2019. Dr Chapman noted in the letter that depression is often a recurring illness.
- [10]CEVA submits that Ms Morrell's resignation was solely due to her dissatisfaction with the decision to deny her pay increase request at a pay review on 20 May 2024. They note her resignation was tendered four days later and makes no reference to her illness.
- [11]They state Ms Morrell's salary was reviewed in a fair and reasonable way and that Ms Morrell had indicated she would stay employed with CEVA if her pay increase request was granted.
- [12]CEVA also notes that at no point during her employment has Ms Morrell raised mental health issues. They further indicate that when Ms Morrell met with HR on 13 May 2024 to discuss what CEVA characterises as her concerns and frustrations, Ms Morrell did not mention any issues pertaining to mental health, depression or anxiety.
- [13]Finally, CEVA submits that Ms Morrell only raised mental health, anxiety and depression after she was advised by CEVA on 13 June 2024 that pro rata long service leave is only paid out in Queensland under special circumstances, including resignation due to illness.
- [14]I note it is not disputed that the grievance around pay was the backdrop for the events that unfolded. It is also the case that CEVA could not be expected to know there may have been a relevant underlying medical condition in circumstances where that had never been disclosed. Their submissions reflect what they knew. Ms Morrell confirms she did not disclose any information regarding her medical condition as she was 'embarrassed and ashamed,'[3] and it was not required and personal.[4]
- [15]I am satisfied that the medical evidence supplied confirms Ms Morrell was suffering a medical condition prior to her resignation and the underlying condition had existed since at least 2019. Having established that, the next issue to be determined is whether illness was the genuine reason for terminating her employment.
Was Ms Morrell's illness a genuine or motivating reason for her termination?
- [16]CEVA argues that the claim in relation to illness only materialised after Ms Morrell was informed on 13 June 2024 that she would need to meet a special circumstance to receive pro rata long service leave. While it is objectively correct the Ms Morrell's application on the basis of illness did follow this information,[5] that does not mean her illness was not the genuine or motivating reason for the resignation in May 2024. I do not consider these circumstances to be mutually exclusive.
- [17]I base this view on the fact that in April 2024, following commencement of the pay review process, Ms Morrell had seen her GP about her recurrent symptoms of anxiety and depression. She was prescribed daily medication. She again attends her doctor following the pay review outcome due to the exacerbation of her condition in May 2024. This evidence supports the contention that the pay review process was having a direct impact on her health, and this evidence pre-dates the advice that she would need to demonstrate an illness to qualify. She did not know that she would need to do this until she was given that advice, two months after she started seeking treatment. This timeframe has been independently confirmed by her treating doctor.
- [18]The fact that the resignation letter does not directly identify illness as the reason, or that Ms Morrell decided not to disclose any details to her employer of her illness, do not prevent illness being established as her motivating reason.[6] The appropriate enquiry is whether the reason claimed by the employee for their termination is the reason upon which the employee placed the most weight in making the decision to terminate their employment.[7]
- [19]This involves consideration of what was in Ms Morrell's mind at the time the resignation was given – not when she lodged the current application. It is clear from Ms Morrell's application and submissions that the pay grievance was relevant. Ms Morrell's beliefs that she was underpaid compared to her peers, and that she would be expected to continue to perform the same work but for less pay, with no clear indication when the situation might again be reviewed, led to her presentation to her doctor with an exacerbation of her anxiety and depression. Whether or not her belief about the outcome of the pay review was correct, there can be no doubt it caused distress sufficient for her to seek medical assistance. The doctor's visit the day before she handed in her resignation suggests a temporal connection (at least) between the impact on her health and the resignation decision.
- [20]For these reasons, I determine that illness was the genuine and motivating factor for Ms Morrell's resignation.
Did the illness impact Ms Morrell's ability to perform her role?
- [21]It is not required to prove the illness prevented Ms Morrell from working, only that it impacted on her ability to perform the role, and so is the likely reason for the resignation.[8] I have found that the manifestation of Ms Morrell's symptoms was linked to the process and outcome of the pay dispute, and her fear that she would deteriorate if she continued working. The nature of her illness and its exacerbation, linked to her perception of being undervalued in her role, impacted her capacity to continue in the role safely. That is, because Ms Morrell felt the way that she did, continuing to work at CEVA risked further aggravating her depression and anxiety. In these circumstances, removing herself was a likely response and a reasonable one.
Conclusion
- [22]Having considered the evidence and applicable legal principles, I am satisfied that:
- a)Ms Morrell worked for CEVA on a continuous basis between 12 December 2016 and 31 May 2024. The total period of employment undertaken by Ms Morrell was 7 years, 5 months and 20 days;
- b)Ms Morrell was suffering from an exacerbation of her existing anxiety and depression, constituting an illness for the purpose of s 95(7) of the IR Act;
- c)The illness affected Ms Morrell's capacity to perform her role and work; and
- d)Ms Morrell's illness was the real and motivating reason behind her decision to terminate her employment.
- [23]I am satisfied this application meets the requirements under ss 95(3) and (4)(b)(i) of the IR Act.
- [24]I order accordingly.
Orders
- 1.CEVA Logistics (Australia) Pty Ltd is to pay Deanna Lee Haromi Morrell the sum of $8,847.75 (gross), being the amount of pro rata long service leave owed to her, within 14 days.
Footnotes
[1]Respondent's submissions filed 8 November 2024, [6]; Email sent by the Respondent on 21 November 2024.
[2]Gibbons v eBet Ltd [2015] QIRC 007 ('Gibbons'); AWU v Sunshine Coast Private Hospital [2003] QIR Comm 241; (2003) 172 QGIG 1097, 1101-1102; Chapman v A1 Rubber (Aust) Pty Ltd [2019] QIRC 105;
[3]Applicant's submissions filed 29 October 2024, [2]
[4]Applicant's submissions filed 19 November 2024, [1].
[5]The application was filed on 17 July 2024.
[6]Johnson & Johnson Pty Ltd v Amalgamated Metals Workers Union (1987) 21 IR 457.
[7]Buchholz, Justus Paul v Uniting Care Health trading as The Wesley Hospital [2021] QIRC 006 at [25], referring to the decision in Gibbons (n 2).
[8]Ibid at [30].