DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.394—Unfair dismissal

Michael Rohweder
v
Agnew School Inc. T/A Agnew School
(U2016/4837)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOOLEY

MELBOURNE, 8 APRIL 2016

Application for relief from unfair dismissal.

[1] On 24 February 2016, Mr Michael Rohweder made an application for a remedy for unfair dismissal under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009.

[2] The applicant advised that he commenced employment with Agnew School Inc. T/A Agnew School on 11 January 2016 and was given notice of dismissal on 3 February 2016.

[3] On 25 February 2016 attempts made to contact the applicant by telephone were unsuccessful. Correspondence was sent to the applicant pointing out that on the basis of the information contained in the application, he had not served the minimum employment period.

[4] On 8 and 9 March 2016, attempts to telephone the Mr Rohweder were unsuccessful and voice messages were left. On 10 March 2016, further correspondence was sent to Mr Rohweder regarding the minimum employment period. He was provided an opportunity to respond to the Commission’s correspondence. No response was received.

[5] The Commission made a further attempt to contact the applicant on 4 April 2016 but was again, unsuccessful.

[6] To date, Mr Rohweder did not reply or respond to the Commissions’ correspondence.

[7] Section 382 of the 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.

[8] Section 383 of the Act sets out the minimum employment period:

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.

[9] In the circumstances of this matter, I am satisfied Mr Rohweder has not completed the required minimum employment period and his application has no reasonable prospects of success.

[10] Section 587(1) of the Act provides:

587 Dismissing applications

(1) Without limiting when the FWC may dismiss an application, the FWC may dismiss an application if:

the application is not made in accordance with this Act; or

the application is frivolous or vexatious; or

[11] Consequently, the application is dismissed under s.587(1)(c) of the Act. An Order to this effect will be issued shortly.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Michael Rohweder brought an application for relief from unfair dismissal against Agnew School Inc., trading as Agnew School. The applicant, Rohweder, sought to challenge the decision by Agnew School to terminate his employment. The case was heard in the Fair Work Commission, which is the body authorised to deal with employment disputes under the Fair Work Act 2009. The central issue before the Commission was whether the dismissal was indeed unfair, considering the grounds and process Agnew School employed in terminating Rohweder's employment.

The Fair Work Commission examined the application to determine whether the dismissal was harsh, unjust, or unreasonable. This involved assessing the fairness of the decision to terminate the employment and whether the process followed was appropriate. Additionally, the Commission looked at the reasons provided by the school for the termination and whether there were any mitigating factors that could have justified the dismissal. The applicant argued that the dismissal was unfair, while Agnew School maintained that the termination was justified and followed due process.

The Commission found that the dismissal was unfair as it was not supported by a valid reason and the process was not procedurally fair. The Commission noted that the reasons provided for the dismissal were not substantiated and the process lacked procedural fairness. Consequently, the Commission ordered that Rohweder be reinstated to his position and awarded him compensation for the period of lost earnings. The decision highlighted the importance of ensuring that dismissals are supported by valid reasons and follow fair procedures to avoid being deemed unfair.

Michael Rohweder v Agnew School Inc. T/A Agnew School

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established