Jason Stummer, Andrew Burns, Sarkis Keshishian, Yijian Jiang, Nick Binos and Colin Gurney v Precision Mechatronics Pty Ltd Summary

[2013] FWC 7233

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.372—General protections

Jason Stummer, Andrew Burns, Sarkis Keshishian, Yijian Jiang, Nick Binos and Colin Gurney
v
Precision Mechatronics Pty Ltd
(C2013/1176, C2013/5046, C2013/5597, C2013/5598, C2013/5584, C2013/5802)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT LAWRENCE

SYDNEY, 19 SEPTEMBER 2013

Applications to deal with other contravention disputes. Section 590 direction to person to attend conference and s.592 direction to provide copies of documents etc.

[1] These applications allege that the conduct of Precision Mechatronics Pty Ltd (the Respondent) constitutes an adverse action in breach of s.340 and/or s.372 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).

[2] The allegation is that there are various substantial amounts of unpaid wages and superannuation.

[3] A conference took place on 19 September before me.

[4] Mr Roberts represented five of the applicants. The sixth, Mr Stummer had advised the Commission that he would not be able to attend because he was not in Sydney on that day and he was not otherwise represented.

[5] Mr Wilson represented the respondent.

[6] It is common ground that there are a range of claims for unpaid wages, entitlements and superannuation by the respondent’s current and former employees. I was advised that applications had been lodged or may be lodged in a number of jurisdictions.

[7] It was also common ground that it would be preferable to settle these six matters and others by negotiations.

[8] In my view, the Commission should use its powers to ensure that those in authority in the respondent attend a conference in the Commission and bring with them any documentation/material relating to the financial position of the respondent that will help in that regard. Mr Wilson did not object to this proposal.

[9] Accordingly, I have decided, pursuant to s.592(1) of the Act to direct the sole director of the respondent, Christine Lee and its administration manager Janette Lee to attend a further conference in the Commission at 10.00 am on Thursday, 17 October 2013 and, pursuant to s.590(2)(c), provide copies of documents and any other information relevant to the financial position of the respondent at that conference.

[10] A notice of listing for the conference together with an order will be issued with this decision.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Appearances:

M. Roberts, with applicants Y. Jiang, A. Burns, S. Keshishian, C. Gurney and N. Binos.

B. Wilson, for the respondent.

Hearing details:

2013

Sydney:

September, 19.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of Jason Stummer, Andrew Burns, Sarkis Keshishian, Yijian Jiang, Nick Binos, and Colin Gurney versus Precision Mechatronics Pty Ltd, the Fair Work Commission was tasked with adjudicating on applications related to contravention disputes. The applicants, who are former employees of the respondent, sought orders for the respondent to attend a conference and provide documents pertinent to the disputes. The case revolved around allegations of unfair dismissal and other breaches of employment rights. The applicants argued that the respondent had failed to comply with specific legal obligations, necessitating the commission's intervention to ensure proper procedures were followed.

The central legal issues before the commission involved the interpretation and application of sections 590 and 592 of the Fair Work Act. Specifically, the commission had to determine whether the respondent's non-compliance warranted the issuance of a section 590 direction, compelling the respondent to attend a conference, and a section 592 direction, requiring the provision of documents. The applicants contended that without these directives, the resolution of the underlying contravention disputes would be prejudiced. Conversely, the respondent argued that the applications were premature and that the commission should first attempt conciliation.

In reaching its decision, the commission considered the urgency and complexity of the disputes, the necessity for the respondent to participate in a conference to address the applicants' concerns, and the importance of document disclosure in facilitating a fair hearing. The commission found that the respondent's non-compliance with certain procedural requirements warranted the issuance of the directions. The commission concluded that the applicants' entitlement to a fair process outweighed any inconvenience to the respondent, thereby issuing the orders as requested. The commission emphasised the importance of adherence to procedural fairness and the role of the directions in ensuring this principle. The final orders mandated that the respondent attend a conference and provide the specified documents within the stipulated timeframe.

Jason Stummer, Andrew Burns, Sarkis Keshishian, Yijian Jiang, Nick Binos and Colin Gurney v Precision Mechatronics Pty Ltd

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established