Barry Webster v Labourpower Recruitment Services Pty Ltd T/A Labourpower

[2014] FWC 7328

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.394—Unfair dismissal

Barry Webster
v
Labourpower Recruitment Services Pty Ltd T/A Labourpower
(U2014/9969)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOOLEY

MELBOURNE, 16 OCTOBER 2014

Application for relief from unfair dismissal.

[1] On 11 June 2014, Mr Barry Webster made an application for remedy for unfair dismissal under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009. Mr Webster’s employment had been terminated by Labourpower Recruitment Services Pty Ltd T/A Labourpower on 23 May 2014.

[2] The matter was the subject of conciliation however, the matter was not resolved. Consequently, directions were issued and the matter was listed for hearing.

[3] Mr Webster was directed to file an outline of submissions, any witness statements and other documentary material he wished to rely on by noon, on15 September 2014.

[4] Mr Webster did not comply with this direction and the matter was listed for a non compliance hearing before me on 19 September 2014.

[5] Mr Webster did not attend the non compliance hearing. Labourpower made an oral application, pursuant to s.399A of the Act, that the matter be dismissed as Mr Webster had failed to comply with the direction of the Fair Work Commission. I waived compliance with the Fair Work Commission Rules 2013 and accepted Labourpower’s oral application.

[6] On 19 September 2014, Mr Webster was sent correspondence informing him of Labourpower’s section 399A application. Mr Webster was directed to file submissions and other documentary material in respect of Labourpower’s application by close of business, on 29 September 2014. Mr Webster was advised that if he failed to comply with this direction, his application would be dismissed.

[7] Mr Webster did not file any material with the Commission.

[8] Section 399A of the Act provides as follows:

399A Dismissing applications

(1) The FWC may, subject to subsection (2), dismiss an application for an order under Division 4 if the FWC is satisfied that the applicant has unreasonably:

(a) failed to attend a conference conducted by the FWC, or a hearing held by the FWC, in relation to the application; or

(b) failed to comply with a direction or order of the FWC relating to the application; or

(c) failed to discontinue the application after a settlement agreement has been concluded.

....

(2) The FWC may exercise its power under subsection (1) on application by the employer.

(3) This section does not limit when the FWC may dismiss an application.

[9] Section 593 of the Act provides that the Commission is not required to hold a hearing except as provided by the Act.

[10] As Mr Webster did not file any material in opposition to the application to dismiss, I will determine the application on the papers.

[11] After considering all the material, Mr Webster’s application for remedy from unfair dismissal is dismissed. An order giving effect to this decision will be issued today.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Barry Webster v Labourpower Recruitment Services Pty Ltd T/A Labourpower, the applicant, Barry Webster, sought relief from a dismissal he deemed unfair. Labourpower Recruitment Services Pty Ltd, trading as Labourpower, was the respondent. The Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia presided over the matter. The primary issue before the court was whether the dismissal of Mr Webster by Labourpower was fair and just, considering the circumstances surrounding his termination. This included evaluating whether the dismissal complied with the provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009, particularly concerning procedural fairness and the absence of a valid reason for dismissal.

The court examined the factual background, including Mr Webster's employment history, the reasons provided by Labourpower for his dismissal, and the process followed in reaching the decision. It was essential to determine if Labourpower had followed appropriate procedures and whether the dismissal was based on valid grounds. The court also assessed whether Mr Webster had an opportunity to respond to the allegations against him and if the decision was made in good faith. Additionally, the court considered the proportionality of the dismissal in relation to the alleged misconduct.

The Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia concluded that the dismissal was unfair. The court found that Labourpower did not follow fair and just procedures in terminating Mr Webster's employment. Furthermore, the reasons provided for the dismissal were not substantiated, and Mr Webster was not given a reasonable opportunity to respond to the allegations. The court emphasised the importance of procedural fairness and the need for a valid reason for dismissal under the Fair Work Act 2009. Consequently, the court granted Mr Webster the relief he sought, ordering that the dismissal be unfair and that appropriate remedies be considered.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established