Talk:Fair Work Ombudsman v Quest South Perth
Latest comment: 3 months ago by Rjjiii in topic Did you know nomination
 | Fair Work Ombudsman v Quest South Perth is currently a Law good article nominee. Nominated by — MaxnaCarta ( 💬 • 📝 ) at 23:55, 11 March 2024 (UTC) Anyone who has not contributed significantly to (or nominated) this article may review it according to the good article criteria to decide whether or not to list it as a good article. To start the review process, click start review and save the page. (See here for the good article instructions.) Short description: 2015 judgment of the High Court of Australia |
 | A fact from Fair Work Ombudsman v Quest South Perth appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 29 January 2024 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=logo}
Did you know nomination edit
- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by Rjjiii talk 09:41, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
( )
- ... that in Fair Work Ombudsman v Quest South Perth, the High Court of Australia found the use of a labour-hire company to deprive employees of minimum entitlements constituted a sham? Source: https://www.smh.com.au/business/small-business/high-court-finds-quest-engaged-in-sham-contracting-mischief-20151203-gle1fe.html
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Letter to the American people
- Comment: * I am very welcome to suggestions for a different hook. The facts in summary are: a hotel tried to convince three employees to sign an agreement to work as contractors. This deprived them of their minimum entitlements. This sort of arrangement is called 'sham contracting' in australia. I do not love my hook. Proposed amendments welcome.
- QPQ Template:Did you know nominations/Letter to the American people
Moved to mainspace by MaxnaCarta (talk). Self-nominated at 22:50, 3 December 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Fair Work Ombudsman v Quest South Perth; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.
- Not a review but a potential alt hook:
- ALT1: ... that an Australian High Court case found a hotel chain to have used third-party contractors to avoid paying employees their required benefits? ––– GMH Melbourne (talk) 12:26, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks! I prefer this hook. — MaxnaCarta ( 💬 • 📝 ) 08:24, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
New enough, long enough. ALT1 short enough, interesting, and sourced AGF; might be worth naming the case but I'll let the prepbuilder decide that. Every paragraph ends with a cite. No neutrality issues found, no maintenance templates found, no valid copyright complaints. QPQ done. Let's roll.--Launchballer 09:35, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks! I prefer this hook. — MaxnaCarta ( 💬 • 📝 ) 08:24, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
