Ivana Rogic Jodi-Ann Johnston Yasmine Vekis Shareena Hayes Rachelle Hausler Victoria Haggerston Tracy Loughry Chantel Goldspink Baenedict K Thiveanathan Christine Millard Constance Margaret Devine Alen Jokic Thi...

[2025] FWC 2997

[2025] FWC 2997      

The attached document replaces the document previously issued with the above code on 8 October 2025.

·  The documents referencing has been updated.

Mitchell Cail
Associate to Commissioner Platt

Dated 10 October 2025

[2025] FWC 2997      

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

STATEMENT & ORDER

s.333L - Application to deal with a dispute about a fixed term contract

Ivana Rogic
Jodi-Ann Johnston
Yasmine Vekis
Shareena Hayes
Rachelle Hausler
Victoria Haggerston
Tracy Loughry
Chantel Goldspink
Baenedict K Thiveanathan
Christine Millard
Constance Margaret Devine
Alen Jokic
Thi Kim Khanh (Kim) Nguyen
Stacey Cowling
Christine Dunlop
v

MS Society SA/NT

COMMISSIONER PLATT ADELAIDE, 8 OCTOBER 2025

Application to deal with a dispute about a fixed term contract

STATEMENT

1. An application to deal with a dispute about a fixed term contract pursuant to s.333L of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) was filed by the following employees (the Applicants) against Multiple Sclerosis Society SA & NT (the Respondent):

C2025/8069    Ivana Rogic
C2025/8345    Jodi-Ann Johnston
C2025/8431    Yasmine Vekis
C2025/8621    Shareena Hayes
C2025/8630    Rachelle Hausler
C2025/8646    Victoria Haggerston
C2025/8655    Tracy Loughry
C2025/8656    Chantel Goldspink
C2025/8657    Baenedict K Thiveanathan
C2025/8668    Christine Millard
C2025/8669    Constance Margaret Devine
C2025/8670    Alen Jokic
C2025/8689    Thi Kim Khanh (Kim) Nguyen
C2025/8730    Stacey Cowling
C2025/9067    Christine Dunlop

1. On 8 September 2025, 19 September 2025 and 30 September 2025 I conducted Conferences in relation to the disputes. As all of the applications involved the same factual matrix, and with the consent of the parties who appeared, the applications were dealt with together.

1. By way of background, the Respondent initially engaged each the Applicants on fixed term contracts. There is a factual dispute about extension/changes to these contracts. The Applicants employment ended as a result of the loss of certain contracts by the Respondent.  The Applicants contend that they became ongoing employees and are therefore entitled to redundancy pay. The Respondent says that the Applicants remained on fixed term contracts and are not entitled to redundancy pay under the NES. With the Respondent now in administration, this dispute may be relevant to determine the employees’ entitlements under the FEG Scheme.

1. On 8 September 2025, the key issues were discussed and the matter was adjourned for the Applicants to seek legal advice.

1. On 19 September 2025, the matter was adjourned to allow the Respondent to seek legal advice.

1. On 25 September 2025, the Respondent emailed my Chambers and advised it went into voluntary administration, that an administrator had been appointed and that the Respondent did not consent to the FWC arbitrating the dispute.

1. A final conciliation conference was conducted on 30 September 2025. The matter was unable to be resolved.

1. I note the Applicants have also filed a dispute in the South Australian Employment Tribunal (SAET).

1. In light of the Respondent’s position not to consent to arbitration, the Commission does not have the jurisdiction to determine the dispute.[1]

ORDER

1. Further to the reasons handed down on transcript at the Conference on 30 September 2025 (in particular, the Applicant's failure to prosecute her claim) and pursuant to s.587(3)(a) of the Fair Work Act 2009, the application by Ms Chantel Goldspink (C2025/8656) is dismissed.

COMMISSIONER

<PR792467>

[1] Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth), s.333L(4)(b).

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer