Jamie-Lee Cook v Cassie Jo
[2022] FWC 594
| [2022] FWC 594 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
| DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.394 - Application for unfair dismissal remedy
Jamie-Lee Cook
v
Cassie Jo
(U2022/2048)
| COMMISSIONER BISSETT | MELBOURNE, 17 MARCH 2022 |
Application for relief from unfair dismissal – minimum employment period – dismissal under s.587 at the Commission’s initiative.
On 16 February 2022 Ms Jamie-Lee Cook made an application to the Fair Work Commission for a remedy for unfair dismissal pursuant to s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (FW Act). Ms Cook alleged she was unfairly dismissed by Cassie Jo (the Respondent).
Ms Cook advised in the Form F2 Unfair Dismissal Application (Form F2) that she commenced employment with Cassie Jo on 24 February 2022 (sic) and that her dismissal took effect on 14 February 2022.
On 17 February 2022 the Commission attempted to contact Ms Cook on her nominated telephone number. A voicemail message was left requesting she contact the Commission as it appeared she may not have met the minimum employment period. Additionally, the date of commencement of employment fell after the dismissal date, and prior to the date of the application being made.
Later that day, the Commission emailed correspondence to Ms Cook’s nominated email advising Ms Cook that based on the information provided in the Form F2, she had not served the minimum employment period. The correspondence directed Ms Cook to file any documents/evidence to support her claim that she had served the required minimum employment period. That correspondence also warned that if Ms Cook did not contact the Commission within 14 days, the application may be dismissed without further notice.
Later that day, Ms Cook called the Commission and advised she wished to seek legal guidance. Contacts for Community Legal Centres were provided to Ms Cook.
As the required documentation was not received, on 2 March 2022 the Commission attempted to contact Ms Cook via telephone. However, Ms Cook could not be reached. A voicemail message was left requesting that she contact the Commission.
To date, Cook has not replied to the Commission’s correspondence.
Section 382 of the FW 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.
Section 383 of the FW Act sets out the minimum employment period as follows:
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.
Section 587(1) of the FW Act provides that:
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 prospect of success.
Having regard to the circumstances of this matter I am satisfied that as Ms Cook has not completed the required minimum employment period under the FW Act, her application has no reasonable prospect of success. As such, the application is dismissed under s.587(1)(c) of the FW Act. An order[1] to this effect will be issued with this decision.
COMMISSIONER
[1] PR739398.
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<PR739397>
0
0
0