| [2023] FWC 2153 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
| DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.394—Unfair dismissal
Jonathon Blencowe
v
J.B. Cameron (Victoria) Pty. Ltd.
(U2023/6655)
| COMMISSIONER BISSETT | MELBOURNE, 1 SEPTEMBER 2023 |
Application for relief from unfair dismissal – minimum employment period – dismissal under s.587 at the Commission’s initiative
On 21 July 2023, Jonathon Blencowe (the Applicant) 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).
The Applicant advised in the Form F2 Unfair Dismissal Application (Form F2) that they commenced employment with J.B. Cameron (Victoria) Pty. Ltd. on 20 March 2023 and that their dismissal took effect on 27 June 2023.
On 24 July 2023, the Commission attempted to contact the Applicant on their nominated telephone number. The Applicant could not be reached. A voicemail message was left advising the Applicant that they had not met the minimum employment period and requested that they contact the Commission.
Later that day, the Commission emailed correspondence to the Applicant’s nominated email address advising the Applicant that, on the basis of the information provided in the Form F2, they had not served the minimum employment period. The correspondence directed the Applicant to file any documents or other evidence to support their claim that they had served the required minimum employment period. This correspondence also warned that if they did not contact the Commission within 14 days the application may be dismissed without further notice.
As no further correspondence was received by the Commission, on 7 August 2023, the Commission attempted to further contact the Applicant on their nominated telephone number. The Applicant could not be reached. A voicemail message was left requesting that the Applicant contact the Commission, as based on the information provided in the Form F2, they had not served the minimum employment period.
To date, the Commission has not received any correspondence from the Applicant.
Section 382 of the FW Act provides that a person is protected from unfair dismissal if they have completed a period of employment. I am satisfied the Applicant has not completed the required 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 as follows:
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.
As Jonathon Blencowe has not completed the required minimum employment period under the FW Act the application has no reasonable prospect of success. As such, the application is dismissed under s.587(1)(c) of the FW Act.
COMMISSIONER
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<PR765614>
- AGLC
- Jonathon Blencowe v J.B. Cameron (Victoria) Pty. Ltd [2023] FWC 2153
- Case
- [2023] FWC 2153
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue before the Commission was whether the applicant had served the minimum employment period required by section 383 of the Fair Work Act. This period is six months for employees of non-small business employers, and one year for employees of small business employers. If the applicant had not met the minimum employment period, the application would have no reasonable prospect of success and could be dismissed under section 587(1)(c) of the Act.
The Commission found that the applicant had not completed the requisite minimum employment period of six months. Despite multiple attempts to contact the applicant, including voicemails and emails, no response or further evidence was provided to substantiate the applicant's claim that they had served the required period. Consequently, the Commission concluded that the application had no reasonable prospect of success and dismissed the application under section 587(1)(c) of the Fair Work Act.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.