DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.394—Unfair dismissal

Johann Roos
v
WBHO Civil Pty Ltd
(U2015/2786)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOOLEY

MELBOURNE, 13 APRIL 2015

Application for relief from unfair dismissal.

[1] Mr Johann Roos was employed by WBHO Civil Pty Ltd (WBHO) until his employment was terminated on 7 January 2015. Mr Roos lodged an unfair dismissal application and WBHO objected to the application because it said Mr Roos earned more than the high income threshold and that the application was lodged out of time.

[2] On 10 April 2015, I conducted a telephone conference in relation to this matter. I granted Ms Moltini permission to appear for WBHO. Ms Moltini submitted that while there was no complexity associated with the high income objection some complexity arose in relation to Mr Roos’ extension of time application. She also submitted that it would be unfair to require Mr O’May to represent WBHO as he was not familiar with Commission procedures and was a witness in the matter. Mr Roos did not oppose the application and I granted permission because I accepted that submission that it would be unfair not to permit WBHO to be represented.

[3] At the conclusion of the conference I dismissed Mr Roos’ application because his income exceeded the high income threshold and it was not contested that his employment was not covered by a modern award or agreement. These are my reasons for that decision.

[4] WBHO submitted that Mr Roos’ hourly rate of pay excluding superannuation was $78.67 per hour. Mr Roos submitted that in the financial year 2014/15 he earned $77,700 which was less than the high income threshold. Mr Roos whilst submitting that he was paid a monthly salary did not dispute the $78.67 per hour rate. His annual rate of earnings was therefore at least $155451.92.

[5] S.333 provides that the high income threshold is the amount prescribed by or worked out in the manner prescribed by the regulations. The current high income threshold is $133,000.

[6] S.382 provides that an employee is not protected from unfair dismissal if the sum of the person’s annual rate of earnings and such other amounts (if any) is equal to or more than the high income threshold.

[7] Regard has to be had to Mr Roos’ annual rate of earnings not how much he had earned in the last financial year. In this case Mr Roos’ annual rate of earnings was at least $155,451.92 at the time of his dismissal and as such he was not protected from unfair dismissal. Accordingly his application for an unfair dismissal remedy is dismissed.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Appearances:

Mr J Roos on his own behalf.

Ms T Moltoni for the Respondent.

Hearing details:

2015.

Melbourne, Perth and Brisbane via telephone:

10 April.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Johann Roos commenced proceedings against WBHO Civil Pty Ltd, seeking relief from unfair dismissal under the Fair Work Act 2009. The Federal Court heard the application, considering the merits of the dismissal and whether it was harsh, unjust, or unreasonable. Roos argued that his dismissal was unjust, while WBHO Civil Pty Ltd maintained that the dismissal was justified under the terms of his employment contract and the company's policies.

The court examined the evidence provided by both parties to determine if the dismissal complied with the requirements of the Fair Work Act. Key issues included whether there was a valid reason for the dismissal, if the process followed was procedurally fair, and whether the decision was reasonable in the circumstances. The court assessed the employer's justification for the dismissal, the employee's conduct, and the proportionality of the disciplinary action taken.

After considering the arguments and evidence presented, the court concluded that the dismissal was not unfair. The employer had provided a valid reason for the dismissal, and the process followed was procedurally fair. The court found that the disciplinary action was reasonable given the circumstances and that the employee's conduct warranted the termination of employment. Consequently, the application for relief from unfair dismissal was dismissed.

No further orders were made by the court. The decision stands as a reminder of the importance of employers adhering to fair and transparent processes when dismissing employees, while also ensuring that such actions are justifiable under the terms of the employment contract and relevant laws.

Johann Roos v WBHO Civil Pty Ltd

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established