Frank Whiddon Masonic Homes of New South Wales Pty Ltd has a s.739 (Application to deal with a dispute) before Commissioner McKenna in Hearing Room 12-2-Level 12 in Sydney (Weaver).
August 8, 2016
Christina Adams has failed to persuade the Fair Work Commission that Blamey Community Group dismissed her unfairly. Senior Deputy President Hamberger held the termination to be a genuine redundancy.
August 8, 2016
The Health Services Union and Latrobe Regional Hospital are arguing a s.739 (Application to deal with a dispute) before Commissioner Cribb in the Latrobe Valley Law Courts 134 Commercial Road Morwell.
August 8, 2016
The Fair Work Commission has allowed a s.319 (Application for an order relating to instruments covering new employer and non-transferring employees) by Anglican Retirement Villages (Diocese of Sydney) T/A Anglican Retirement Villages.
August 8, 2016
The Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation and the Royal Flying Doctor Service of Australia Central Operations are locked in a s.739 (Application to deal with a dispute) stoush before Commissioner Platt in Conference Room 6b – Level 6 in Adelaide.
August 8, 2016
Ngaanyatjarra Health Service (Aboriginal Corporation) T/A Ngaanyatjarra Health Service has failed to persuade the Fair Work Commission to allow it costs against Andrew Roberts and Others.
August 5, 2016
TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT – costs – ss.400A, 401, 611 Fair Work Act 2009 – application for costs order against former employee and his solicitors – employee discontinued unfair dismissal application after conciliation but prior to arbitration – employer argued costs incurred as original application not made in time, did not pertain to termination of employment, was made with ulterior motives, and employee did not dispute misconduct allegations – Commission found power to order costs under s.611 of FW Act required clear evidence of unreasonable conduct – ‘without reasonable cause’ means ‘so obviously untenable that it cannot possible succeed’, ‘manifestly groundless’ or ‘discloses a case which the Court is satisfied cannot succeed’ [Keep v Performance] – Commission held original application not commenced unreasonably nor made without reasonable cause – employee’s contentions regarding timing of application had reasonable prospects of success – questions relating to the nature and characterisation of the dismissal could reasonably and properly be dealt with in hearing – nothing out of the ordinary, unreasonable, vexatious or lacking in prospects – application dismissed. Ngaanyatjarra Health Service (Aboriginal Corporation) t/a Ngaanyatjarra Health Service v Roberts and Ors
August 5, 2016
TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT – genuine redundancy – ss.389, 394 Fair Work Act 2009 – application for unfair dismissal remedy – respondent contended dismissal genuine redundancy – applicant covered by Victorian Public Health Sector (Health Professionals, Health and Allied Services, Managers & Administrative Officers) Enterprise Agreement 2011-2015 – Agreement contained consultation term which provided for discussion about reasons for proposed redundancy and consideration of measures to avert or mitigate – applicant’s salary claimed against BRAF project grant with three year funding – respondent obtained a separate program grant for period of five years – distinguishable from project grant in that provided funding across several teams rather than one project – respondent contended it was communicated to applicant that BRAF project would not continue beyond current project timelines and reinforced message in meeting with applicant in April and December 2014 – meeting in May 2015 applicant advised position would be made redundant in December 2015 – applicant claimed she was not consulted adequately – Commission satisfied applicant aware in May 2015 position would be redundant – satisfied intention to discontinue BRAF project clearly communicated to applicant – rejected applicant’s claim that subject to coercion to sign deed of release – respondent provided evidence based on rationale for decision to reduce priority on BRAF project – Commission accepted operational rationale for decision – satisfied various options about alternatives to redundancy discussed in number of meetings – found lack of real effort on part of respondent to achieve redeployment and that applicant could have been redeployed to one or other vacant positions – would have been reasonable in circumstances to redeploy applicant – found dismissal was for reasons of redundancy and consultation obligations met however not genuine redundancy due to failure to comply with redeployment requirements – applicant did not seek reinstatement – order for compensation $9570.73 taking into account viability of respondent and long service of applicant. Ferrao v Peter MacCallum Cancer Institute
