TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT – casual – s.394 Fair Work Act 2009 – application for unfair dismissal remedy – casual care support worker for not for profit charitable organisation – applicant rostered to work 128 hours every month subject to additional shifts and swaps – applicant advised casual employees to change from rostered in advance to being offered work on’call in’ basis – applicant requested permanent employment – respondent confirmed status as casual employee – respondent decided not to offer applicant shifts due to application to Commission – respondent argued jurisdictional issue – considered whether applicant actually dismissed and whether casual employee – applicant rostered regular and systematic hours over long period – expectation that hours would continue to be rostered in advance – regular and systematic rostering identified applicant as permanent part-time employee not casual employee [Blue Line Cruises] and [Cetin] – found applicant was dismissed – applicant not provided with valid reason or procedural fairness – dismissal harsh, unjust and unreasonable – applicant sought reinstatement, back pay and continuity of employment – respondent argued no entitlement to reinstatement and loss of trust and confidence – no evidence to support claim of lost trust and confidence – reinstatement appropriate – applicant reinstated to role on permanent/part-time basis for 128 hours in four week cycle – order for continuity of employment and four weeks back pay. Perry v Nardy House Inc.
