Dougal John McLay, Liquidator of A.C.N. 115687057 Pty Ltd (In Liquidation), Formerly known as Promet Engineers Pty Ltd
[2013] FWC 8291
•24 OCTOBER 2013
[2013] FWC 8291 |
FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.120—Redundancy pay
Dougal John McLay, Liquidator of A.C.N. 115687057 Pty Ltd (In Liquidation), Formerly known as Promet Engineers Pty Ltd
(C2013/4756)
DEPUTY PRESIDENT MCCARTHY | PERTH, 24 OCTOBER 2013 |
Variation of redundancy pay.
[1] This is an application by Dougal John McLay, Liquidator of Promet Engineers Pty Ltd (In Liquidation) (the Applicant) for an order pursuant to s.120 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the FW Act) reducing the amount of the redundancy entitlement otherwise payable to David Cantoni; Jeff West; Christopher Welsh; Anh Vuong and Kristine Edwards (collectively the Employees).
[2] The Applicant seeks a reduction in the redundancy entitlement payable under s.119 and relies on s.120 which provides for variation of redundancy pay if, as is asserted here, the employer obtains other acceptable employment for the employee.
[3] On application by the employer, the FWC may determine that the amount of redundancy pay is reduced to a specified amount (which may be nil) that the FWC considers appropriate.
[4] Here the precedent conditions are satisfied. The Employees concerned were entitled to redundancy pay pursuant to s.119 and the employer obtained suitable alternative employment.
[5] The Employees here are entitled to a redundancy payment of either 4 or 8 weeks pay.
[6] Importantly, in this application the Applicant does not seek for the entitlement to be reduced to zero but rather proposes a reduction to 50% of the entitlement. I sought the views of each of the Employees. Most of the Employees requested that the entitlement not be reduced at all mainly because of varying degrees of a reduction in remuneration. One employee indicated that a reduction to 50% was reasonable.
[7] The non-transferable credits of Employees here would amount to substantially less than what the redundancy entitlement would be. The Employees were generally out of work for a very short period in the transition period. It is also relevant in my view that employers in Promet’s and the Applicant’s circumstances be encouraged to find acceptable alternative employment.
[8] I consider that an amount of 50% of the redundancy entitlement would be appropriate. An order to that effect is issued.
DEPUTY PRESIDENT
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<Price code A, PR543627>
0
0
0