Gaye Brzich v Freshwater Bay Apartments T/A Freshwater East Kimberley Apartments

[2018] FWC 2152

[2018] FWC 2152

The attached document replaces the document previously issued with the above code on 16 April 2018.

Incorrect numbering was applied to paragraph 12 and this has been amended accordingly.

Hannah Spivey

Associate to Deputy President Binet

Dated 18 April 2018.

[2018] FWC 2152

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.394—Unfair dismissal

Gaye Brzich
v
Freshwater Bay Apartments T/A Freshwater East Kimberley Apartments
(U2018/2609)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT BINET PERTH, 16 APRIL 2018

Application for an unfair dismissal remedy.

[1] On 13 March 2018, Ms Gaye Brzich (Ms Brzich) made an Application for remedy for unfair dismissal under section 394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act).

[2] Ms Brzich advised that she commenced employment with Freshwater Bay Apartments T/A Freshwater East Kimberley Apartments on 26 February 2018 and that she was notified of her dismissal on 2 March 2018.

[3] On 14 March 2018, correspondence was sent to Ms Brzich pointing out that on the basis of the information contained in the Application, she had not served the minimum employment period. The correspondence required Ms Brzich to advise the Fair Work Commission (Commission) within 14 days whether she wished to proceed with her Application.

[4] On 28 March 2018 further correspondence was sent to Ms Brzich allowing a further 7 days in which to reply, after which time the Application would be dismissed. A voicemail message was also left on her personal mobile.

[5] On 29 March 2018, Ms Brzich emailed the Commission, however she did not address the minimum employment period issue; only that she felt her dismissal had been unfair.

[6] On 4 April 2018, a further phone call was made to Ms Brzich and another voicemail message was left. An email was sent to Miss Brzich in reply to her correspondence of 29 March 2018 and it was requested she contact the Commission by close of business 4 April 2018 if she wished to pursue the Application.

[7] To date, Ms Brzich has not replied to that correspondence.

[8] 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.

[9] 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.”

[10] In the circumstances of this matter, I am satisfied Ms Brzich has not completed the required minimum employment period and her Application has no reasonable prospects of success.

[11] 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.”

[12] Consequently, the Application is dismissed under s.587(1)(c) of the Act. An Order to this effect will be issued shortly.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR602013>