GENERAL PROTECTIONS – extension of time – ss.365, 366 fair Work Act 2009 – application to deal with contraventions involving dismissal – application lodged four days outside 21 day time period – Commission to determine whether exceptional circumstances exist before granting extension of time – applicant was delayed in making application due to effect of medication she was taking for her medical condition and having difficulty obtaining legal advice – application is some 160 page long – Commission determined delay in making application was mainly a consequence of preparing the lengthy application – no evidence the application disputed the dismissal – prejudice to employer a neutral factor – merits of application do not give weight to the existence of exceptional circumstances – Commission not satisfied exceptional circumstances exist to warrant granting an extension of time to file application – application dismissed. Downie v Naladra P/L t/a Park Road Medical & Cosmetics.
January 18, 2016
TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT – extension of time – s.394 Fair Work Act 2009 – applicant contended his employment was terminated upon receipt of an email from respondent on 21 October 2015 – respondent contended it – applicant contends to never received text message – respondent representative provided a number of screenshots of text messages purportedly between the respondent and applicant between 16 July 2014 and 7 September 2015 and a witness statement – extract reveals a text message dated 15 July 2015 which purports to terminate applicant but this is prior to the meeting of 8 October 2015 – Commission found no evidence to support respondent contention that applicant’s employment was terminated by text message – unable to determine when the employment was terminated by respondent – satisfied applicant first became aware that his employment had terminated on 21 October 2015 – extension of time granted – matter to be relisted for conciliation. Janik v Calson P/L t/a Chapel of the Holy Family.
January 18, 2016
GENERAL PROTECTIONS – extension of time – s.365 Fair Work Act 2009 – application to deal with contraventions involving dismissal lodged four days out of time – applicant submitted she raised issues concerning under-payment of wages with Fair Work Ombudsman – assumed FWO would deal with issues covering dismissal – further relied on medical condition and delay in obtaining legal advice – Commission not satisfied of exceptional circumstances – application dismissed – order issued. Seckold v Kingscliff Family Medical Services P/L t/a Kingscliff Family Medical Services.
January 18, 2016
A man and woman have been charged with assaulting three staff members at the Royal Hobart Hospital. Police say the couple was trying to remove a patient from the first floor of the hospital against the advice of medical staff. Police allege the pair then turned on three hospital attendants before being restrained by staff. None of the attendants were seriously injured.
January 18, 2016
An application for approval of the Good Shepherd Lodge – Nurses Enterprise Agreement 2015 will be determined by Fair Work Commissioner Lee in Melbourne.
January 18, 2016
Karingal Inc is facing a s.394 (Application for unfair dismissal remedy) initiated by an industrial recidivist (Carroll).
January 18, 2016
Eastern Health is in an industrial arm-wrestle with a staff member (armstrong) who has taken the altercation into the public arena to raise the odds of a self-satisfying outcome.
January 15, 2016
TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT – valid reason – alleged misconduct – criminal charge – s.394 Fair Work Act 2009 – application for unfair dismissal – applicant employed as disability support co-ordinator – dismissed after charged with production of a dangerous drug – respondent claimed dismissed due to loss of trust and confidence – Commission found no valid reason for dismissal – implicit that respondent believed applicant involved in drug related criminal conduct – Commission not satisfied, on balance of probabilities, that applicant had knowledge of or involvement in production of a dangerous drug – did not accept that on material before it, respondent could have reasonably concluded applicant involved in criminal activity or that applicant dishonest or not forthcoming – applicant complied with requirement to inform respondent of criminal charge to extent could lawfully and reasonably have been required to do so – did not accept that applicant brought respondent into disrepute – long and otherwise unblemished work record – entitled to benefit of the doubt, instead respondent formed adverse view about criminal charge and set out to dismiss – applicant’s quadriplegia heightened adverse consequences of dismissal for personal and economic situation – dismissal harsh due to consequences particularly given disability – unjust as not guilty of misconduct on which respondent acted and decided on inferences not reasonably drawn – applicant unfairly dismissed – reinstatement not appropriate as applicant’s conduct destroyed trust and confidence and applicant no longer met suitability conditions for position – matter to be relisted to address question of compensation. Carrick v Life Without Barriers.
