Eren Yildirim v George Staikos

[2019] FWC 3612

[2019] FWC 3612

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.394—Unfair dismissal

Eren Yildirim
v
George Staikos
(U2019/4112)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT DEAN SYDNEY, 27 MAY 2019

Application for an unfair dismissal remedy.

[1] On 10 April 2019, Mr Eren Yildirim made an application for a remedy for unfair dismissal under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009.

[2] Mr Yildirim’s application states that he commenced employment with George Staikos on 6 November 2018 and that his dismissal took effect on 1 February 2019.

[3] Section 382 of the Act provides that a person is protected from unfair dismissal if they have completed a period of employment of at least the minimum employment period.

[4] Section 383 of the Act sets out the minimum employment period:

383 Meaning of minimum employment period

The minimum employment period is:

(a) if the employer is not a small business employer—6 months ending at the earlier of the following times:

(i) the time when the person is given notice of the dismissal;

(ii) immediately before the dismissal; or

(b) if the employer is a small business employer—one year ending at that time.

[5] On 12 April 2019, correspondence was sent to Mr Yildirim advising him that on the basis of the information contained in the application, he had not served the minimum employment period. The correspondence required Mr Yildirim to advise the Commission within 14 days whether he wished to proceed with his application. No response was received from Mr Yildirim.

[6] On 13 May 2019 further correspondence was sent to Mr Yildirim allowing him a further 7 days to reply. He was advised that a failure to respond may result in his application being dismissed.

[7] To date, Mr Yildirim has not responded to any of the Commission’s correspondence.

[8] Section 587(1) of the Act provides:

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 prospects of success.

[9] In the circumstances of this matter, I am satisfied Mr Yildirim has not completed the required minimum employment period and his application has no reasonable prospects of success.

[10] Consequently, the application is dismissed under s.587(1)(c) of the Act. An order to that effect will issue with this decision.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR708678>