Chad Paynter v Northern Waste Management Authority T/A Nawma

[2021] FWC 399

[2021] FWC 399

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.394—Unfair dismissal

Chad Paynter
v
Northern Waste Management Authority T/A NAWMA
(U2020/15821)

COMMISSIONER BISSETT MELBOURNE, 28 JANUARY 2021

Application for relief from unfair dismissal- national system employer – dismissal under s.587 at the Commission’s initiative.

[1] On 11 December 2020 Mr Chad Paynter made an application to the Fair Work Commission for a remedy for unfair dismissal pursuant to s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (FW Act).

[2] From the information provided in the application it appeared Northern Waste Management Authority T/A NAWMA may not be a national system employer. Whilst the Applicant named his employer as “Northern Waste Management Authority T/A NAWMA” in all of the circumstances and taking into account the information in his application I am satisfied that his employer was “Northern Adelaide Waste Management Authority T/A NAWMA.”

[3] The application fee has also not been paid.

[4] On 11 December 2020 the Commission attempted to contact Mr Paynter via his nominated telephone number to discuss his application. Mr Paynter did not answer the call. A voicemail message was left requesting him to contact the Commission via telephone.

[5] Later that day the Commission emailed correspondence to Mr Paynter’s nominated email address informing him that, based on the information contained in the application, Northern Waste Management Authority T/A NAWMA may not be a national system employer. Mr Paynter was requested to seek further advice on this issue, as the Commission may not have jurisdiction to deal with his application. The correspondence also required Mr Paynter to advise the Commission within 14 days whether he wished to proceed with his application and warned that the application may be dismissed if no response was received.

[6] As the required information was not received by 23 December 2020, the Commission contacted Mr Paynter on his nominated telephone number on 24 December 2020. The Commission informed Mr Paynter that employees who were not employed by a national system employer were ineligible to make an application for unfair dismissal remedy. Mr Paynter advised that he would seek legal advice on the matter and contact the Commission on the 30 December 2020 with his decision.

[7] Mr Paynter did not contact the Commission on 30 December 2020. That day, the Commission attempted to contact Mr Paynter on his nominated telephone number to discuss his application. Mr Paynter did not answer the call. A voicemail message was left requesting him to urgently contact the Commission.

[8] To date, Mr Paynter has not contacted the Commission or provided any information tp suggest his employer is a national system employer.

[9] The Commission further investigated the matter and found that a Fair Work (State Declaration) Endorsement, effective from 1 January 2010, declared that Northern Adelaide Waste Management Authority T/A NAWMA was not a national system employer for the purposes of the FW Act.

[10] Division 1 of Part 3-2 of the FW Act is concerned with the “unfair dismissal of national system employees, and the granting of remedies for unfair dismissal”. Further, s.380 of the FW Act provides that, under this Part, an “employee means a national system employee, and employer means a national system employer”. Mr Paynter and Northern Waste Management Authority T/A NAWMA do not respectively fall within the scope of this definition.

[11] In considering the provisions of the FW Act I am satisfied that the Commission has no jurisdiction to determine Mr Paynter’s application for unfair dismissal as his employment was not with a national system employer. Additionally the application remains unpaid.

[12] Section 587(1) of the FW Act provides as follows:

587 Dismissing applications

(1) Without limiting when the FWC may dismiss an application, the FWC may dismiss an application if:

(a) the application is not made in accordance with this Act; or

(b) the application is frivolous or vexatious; or

(c) the application has no reasonable prospect of success.

[13] In this circumstance, I have determined that the application was not made in accordance with the FW Act.

[14] Consequently, the application is dismissed under s.587(1)(a) of the FW Act. An order 1 giving effect to this decision will be issued with this decision.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR726460>

 1   PR726461.