| [2023] FWC 3013 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
| DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.394—Unfair dismissal
Joshua Glackin
v
Blue Wren Holdings Pty Ltd T/A Civic Shower Screens & Wardrobes
(U2023/10211)
| DEPUTY PRESIDENT CLANCY | MELBOURNE, 17 NOVEMBER 2023 |
Application for relief from unfair dismissal – minimum employment period – dismissal under s.587 at the Commission’s initiative.
On 18 October 2023, Mr Joshua Glackin (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).
Mr Glackin advised in the Form F2 – Unfair Dismissal Application (Form F2) that he commenced employment with Blue Wren Holdings Pty Ltd T/A Civic Shower Screens & Wardrobes (Respondent) on 30 May and that his dismissal took effect on 18 October 2023.
On 23 October 2023, the Commission attempted to contact Mr Glackin, however his nominated telephone number was incomplete, and a call could not be connected. Later that day, the Commission emailed correspondence to Mr Glackin’s nominated email address advising him that, on the basis of the information provided in the Form F2, he had not served the minimum employment period. The correspondence directed Mr Glackin to file any documents or other evidence to support his claim that he had served the required minimum employment period. That correspondence also warned that if he did not contact the Commission within 14 days his application may be dismissed without further notice.
On 7 November 2023, as the required documentation was not received, the Commission attempted to contact Mr Glackin via his nominated email. This correspondence directed him to provide his correct employment start date by 8 November 2023. To date Mr Glackin 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. 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 the material before the Commission indicates Mr Glackin has not completed the required minimum employment period under the FW Act, I am satisfied the 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.
DEPUTY PRESIDENT
[1] PR768377.
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<PR768376>
- AGLC
- Joshua Glackin v Blue Wren Holdings Pty Ltd T/A Civic Shower Screens & Wardrobes [2023] FWC 3013
- Case
- [2023] FWC 3013
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues for the Commission to decide were whether Mr Glackin had satisfied the minimum employment period requirement under section 382 of the Fair Work Act and whether his application was frivolous or vexatious. Under section 383, the minimum employment period for employees of a non-small business employer is six months, which Mr Glackin had not met as his employment duration was less than five months. Section 587(1) of the Fair Work Act provides that the Commission may dismiss an application if it has no reasonable prospect of success. The Commission considered whether Mr Glackin's application had any reasonable prospect of success given that he had not met the minimum employment period requirement.
The Commission dismissed the application under section 587(1)(c) of the Fair Work Act, finding that Mr Glackin's application had no reasonable prospect of success as he had not completed the minimum employment period. Despite being contacted by the Commission, Mr Glackin did not provide evidence to support that he had completed the minimum employment period. The Commission noted that Mr Glackin did not respond to the Commission’s correspondence despite multiple attempts to contact him. Consequently, the application was dismissed without further notice.
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.