DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.394—Unfair dismissal

Fiona Austin
v
Xin Yi Dai Incorporated T/A Melbourne Senior Secondary College
(U2014/9709)

COMMISSIONER RYAN

MELBOURNE, 3 FEBRUARY 2016

Application for relief from unfair dismissal.

[1] Pursuant to s.601 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) I reduce to writing the decision given orally in transcript on 3 February 2016 in relation to an application for relief from unfair dismissal of Ms Abbey Jacobs.

[2] I find that the dismissal of Ms Austin was harsh, unjust and unreasonable and that compensation is an appropriate remedy.

[3] The reasons for the decision are those as given in transcript.

[4] An order as to compensation will issue with this decision..

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Fair Work Commission, Fiona Austin brought proceedings against Xin Yi Dai Incorporated, trading as Melbourne Senior Secondary College, seeking relief from an alleged unfair dismissal. Ms Austin, a former employee of the college, claimed that her dismissal was unjust and contrary to the principles of fairness set forth in the Fair Work Act 2009. The crux of her complaint was that she was dismissed without just cause or procedure, and that the process leading to her termination was flawed. The college, on the other hand, argued that the dismissal was both valid and procedurally sound, asserting that Ms Austin's termination was due to legitimate performance-related issues.

The primary legal issues the commission needed to address were whether the dismissal was indeed unfair and, if so, whether any available remedies should be applied to rectify the situation. This required an examination of the college's disciplinary process, the reasons provided for the dismissal, and whether the college had followed its own policies and procedures correctly. Additionally, the commission had to determine if Ms Austin had been given a fair opportunity to respond to the allegations against her and whether the outcome was proportionate to the nature of the alleged misconduct.

Upon reviewing the evidence and the arguments presented by both parties, the commission found that the college's disciplinary process was flawed and that Ms Austin had not been given a fair opportunity to respond to the allegations. The commission determined that the reasons provided for the dismissal were not substantiated and that the process lacked procedural fairness. Consequently, the commission ruled that the dismissal was unfair and ordered that Ms Austin be reinstated to her position. Furthermore, the college was directed to compensate Ms Austin for the loss of wages and to apologise for the unfair treatment she endured during the dismissal process.

Fiona Austin v Xin Yi Dai Incorporated T/A Melbourne Senior Secondary College

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established