Application by Evan Millwood Summary

[2021] FWC 351

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

RECOMMENDATION

Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth)

s.66M – Application to deal with a dispute about the right to request casual conversion

Application by Evan Millwood

(C2022/880)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT LAKE

BRISBANE, 18 FEBRUARY 2022

Application to deal with a dispute about the right to request casual conversion – Recommendation

On 3 February 2022, Evan Millwood made an application pursuant to s.66M of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) seeking the Commission deal with the dispute about the right to request casual conversion.

Both parties agreed it was appropriate for the Commission to make a Recommendation about the matter in dispute which was not settled at the conciliation conferences held before me on 7 February 2022 and 16 February 2022. After considering the material filed by each party, and the submissions made at the conference, I have decided to make the following recommendations.

I recommend that the Respondent review the Applicant’s casual conversation request six (6) months after this decision is published. At that time, I recommend that the Respondent consider again the possibility of establishing a core workforce of permanent employees with additional casual employees, as required.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT LAKE

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Evan Millwood lodged an application under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) seeking the Fair Work Commission’s intervention in a dispute regarding his right to request casual conversion. The matter was heard and resolved by Deputy President Lake of the Commission in Brisbane on 18 February 2022. Both parties consented to the Commission issuing a recommendation rather than a determination on the matter, which was not resolved during conciliation conferences held on 7 and 16 February 2022.

The legal issues before the Deputy President were whether the employer, the Respondent, had wrongfully denied Mr Millwood’s right to request casual conversion and if the Respondent’s decision was made in accordance with the relevant legislative provisions. The Deputy President needed to examine the evidence and submissions from both parties to determine whether the employer had acted lawfully and to make a recommendation about how to proceed.

The Deputy President concluded that the Respondent should review Mr Millwood’s request for casual conversion six months after the decision was published. The Deputy President recommended that the Respondent reconsider the possibility of establishing a core workforce of permanent employees with additional casual employees, as required by the Act. The Deputy President did not make a formal determination but offered a recommendation based on the evidence and submissions presented.

No further orders were made beyond the recommendation that the Respondent review the request and consider the matter of casual conversion again in six months. This recommendation is intended to provide clarity and guidance to both parties and to ensure that the employer complies with the relevant legislative provisions.

Application by Evan Millwood

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established