GENERAL PROTECTIONS – costs – ss.365, 375B, 611 Fair Work Act 2009 – Mr Cadd made application under s.365 FW Act in August 2016, which was resolved by way of settlement – application under s.365 filed again on 8 March 2017 – respondent first notified of application on 14 March 2017 – application discontinued on 22 March 2017 – application for costs order under s.375B filed by respondent on 27 March 2017 – Commission noted costs application only related to costs incurred between 14 March 2017 and 22 March 2017 – respondent submitted it intended to seek costs under s.611 as well but the box on Form F6 was not marked – as s.611 application for costs made outside 14 days after Commission finished dealing with matter, unable to be considered – respondent submitted s.375B was broad enough to permit Commission to order costs in the present matter – interpretation of s.375B and Explanatory Memorandum – held costs provisions of the FW Act clearly draw a distinction between actions which involve starting a matter and actions which involve the conduct of a matter or the continuation of a matter – held s.375B had narrow operation and Parliament did not intend it would apply to costs incurred by respondent solely arising from application being filed under s.365 or s.372 – noted applicant’s conduct in lodging application in present matter was conduct that would have led to costs order being made against him under s.611 as it should have been reasonably apparent that application had no prospect of success – Commission noted the only conduct of applicant that caused respondent to incur any costs was the action of making application under s.365 – there was no other action nor any act of omission, whether reasonable or unreasonable, in connection with conduct or continuation of dispute which would cause costs to be incurred – Commission held s.375B did not permit costs order to be made where the only costs incurred were in responding to the initial application – application for costs dismissed. Cadd v Millennium Cleaning (Vic) P/L
May 22, 2017
TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT – minimum employment period – ss.383, 384, 394 Fair Work Act 2009 – applicant employed as support worker for people with mental health issues on basis of personal experience with mental illness – applicant made unfair dismissal application – respondent raised jurisdictional objection that applicant had not completed six month minimum employment period – submitted applicant was absent for a total of 160 days comprising of periods of unauthorised and unpaid leave – further submitted absences were excluded from calculating service for purpose of minimum employment period – applicant submitted that he was employed for over eight months – claimed that respondent was aware applicant would be absent to manage mental health – applicant claimed experience of mental health was prerequisite of employment meaning relevant absences were paid and authorised – claimed at least three weeks of absence was result of respondent’s refusal to let him return to work following hospitalisation – Commission noted that minimum employment period assessed on basis of ‘continuous service’ – found applicant’s periods of unpaid leave were excluded from period of continuous service – held that applicant’s absence on respondent’s direction was unpaid leave – Commission found that directed absence could not be considered a stand down – Commission deducted 14 weeks unpaid leave from eight and half months service – found that excluded periods of service meant applicant had not met the minimum engagement period – application dismissed. Powell v Centacare Catholic Family Services
May 22, 2017
TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT – minimum employment period – casual – ss.383, 384, 394 Fair Work Act 2009 – application for an unfair dismissal remedy – applicant employed as a casual personal care assistant – respondent raised jurisdictional objection that applicant had not met the minimum employment period as she was a casual and not employed to work on a regular and systematic basis – Commission adopted the approach in Ponce that there must be sufficient evidence to establish a continuing relationship between the employer and the employee – employment must be on a regular and systematic basis which does not mean the hours or days of work must be regular and systematic – respondent submitted a table of shifts worked by the applicant – submitted the applicant had no regular shifts and the total hours worked each week significantly varied throughout the period of employment – applicant submitted she was regularly offered and accepted work – evidence provided by applicant led Commission to conclude the roster was more a statement of intention of what would occur rather than a fixed commitment by the employer to provide work – Commission concluded whilst applicant may have been offered work regularly, there was no real system to her employment and she did not expect to be offered work each week – found applicant was not employed on a regular and systematic basis – found applicant had not completed minimum employment period – jurisdictional objection upheld – application for unfair dismissal remedy dismissed. Tsakiridou v The Community of Cypriots of The Northern Suburbs of Melbourne Inc t/a Grace of Mary
May 19, 2017
Anglicare North Queensland Limited is to defend a s.739 (Application to deal with a dispute) before Commissioner Simpson in his Brisbane chambers at 11am (McEwan).
May 19, 2017
Doctors are reluctant to raise concerns about problems in the public health system, their South Australian union has warned. “The current environment in SA Health is just shutting that down, to the point where clinicians really don’t get any support in raising problems when they recognise them,” Dr David Pope of the Salaried Medical Officers Association said. He urged health managers to be made more accountable.
May 19, 2017
UnitingCare Wesley Port Adelaide Incorporated will fight a s.394 (Application for unfair dismissal remedy) lodged by Csepregi.
May 19, 2017
The sister of a woman whose death was partly caused by inadequate care in the Royal Hobart Hospital’s emergency department fears others could suffer because of short-staffing in hospitals. Anne Woulleman-Jarvis, 62, died in July 2015 from a head injury, six days after she fell and struck her head. Her death came less than 24 hours after she was discharged from the emergency department (ED) where she had complained of headaches and nausea after the fall. Tasmanian coroner Rod Chandler yesterday found Mrs Woulleman-Jarvis’ death was partly caused by inadequate care in the ED due to short-staffing.
May 19, 2017
Centacare Community Services is facing a s.394 (Application for unfair dismissal remedy) before Deputy President Clancy in his Melbourne chambers (Kim).
