NEWS-HR

Community Accommodation & Respite Agency Inc is fighting a s.394 (Application for unfair dismissal remedy) before Commissioner Hampton in Hearing Room 6.1 – Level 6 in Adelaide (Noble).

TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT – termination at initiative of employer – s.394 Fair Work Act 2009 – application for an unfair dismissal remedy – four jurisdictional objections by respondent – applicant is a Student (Subclass 500) Visa and is studying a Bachelor of Nursing at the Australian Catholic University – worked in excess of the 40 hour per fortnight condition of her Student Visa – applicant suspended without pay – evidence amounted to the applicant completing some notes outside of her normal rostered shift, in doing so she inadvertently ‘worked’ – held not a serious and deliberate breach of a Visa condition or the contract of employment – Commission found respondent repudiated applicant’s employment contract by suspending her without pay – when applicant accepted the repudiation it brought the contract and the employment relationship to an end – found the termination of employment was at the employer’s initiative – applicant unfairly dismissed – remedy to be considered. Devi v Doutta Galla Aged Services Limited

Specialist Surgical Supplies has a s.394 (Application for unfair dismissal remedy) with which it must deal before fair Work Commissioner Hampton in his Adelaide chambers (Pethick).

Trustees for the Roman Catholic Church, Archdioceses of Canberra and Goulburn are facing a s.394 (Application for unfair dismissal remedy) before Deputy President Dean in the Bega Valley Commemorative Civic Centre Zingel Place Bega (Crowley).

Sunshine Coast Independent Living Service has a s.394 (Application for unfair dismissal remedy) to answer before Commissioner Booth in his Brisbane chambers (James).

The Community and Public Sector Union and the Department of Human Services will argue the respective merits of a s.739 (Application to deal with a dispute) before Fair Work Commissioner Simpson in his chambers in Brisbane.

ENTERPRISE AGREEMENTS – ambiguity or uncertainty – s.217 Fair Work Act 2009 – application by Sunfresh Health P/L for Commission to use discretion to vary Sunfresh Health Enterprise Agreement 2017 Variation to remove ambiguity – applicant submitted interaction between clauses 12 and 13 of Agreement created ambiguity – applicant described ambiguity as overlap between ordinary hours for day workers and shift workers resulting in possibility that employees could fall under both definitions – lack of clarity about whether day worker could be entitled to shift loadings – applicant sought to vary clause 13(b) of Agreement to provide definition of ‘shift worker’ that excludes workers performing day work under clause 12 of Agreement – proposed variation clarifies employees performing day work as provided in clause 12 of the Agreement were not shift workers – Commission made objective assessment about whether, on proper construction of Agreement, it was susceptible to more than one meaning – satisfied there was ambiguity on the basis that clauses 12 and 13 were susceptible to more than one meaning – satisfied proposed variation reflected proper construction of Agreement – appropriate to use discretion to vary Agreement to resolve ambiguity – Agreement to be varied to delete clause 13(b) and replace with proposed variation. Sunfresh Health Enterprise Agreement 2017 Variation

An application for approval of the Northern Suburbs Housing Community Inc Enterprise Agreement 2017 (s.185 – Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement) is the preserve of Fair Work Commissioner Platt in his Adelaide chambers.