Min Yang v McNaughtans Pty Ltd T/A Tie Down Direct/Duraslide Summary

[2014] FWC 1511

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.394—Unfair dismissal

Min Yang
v
McNaughtans Pty Ltd T/A Tie Down Direct/Duraslide
(U2014/142)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOOLEY

MELBOURNE, 4 MARCH 2014

Application for relief from unfair dismissal.

[1] On 16 January 2014, Mrs Min Yang made an application for a remedy for unfair dismissal under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act)

[2] Mrs Yang advised that she commenced employment with McNaughtans Pty Ltd T/A Tie Down Direct/Duraslide on 12 December 2013 and that her dismissal took effect on 7 January 2014.

[3] On 17 January 2014 and 6 February 2014, correspondence was sent to Mrs Yang pointing out that on the basis of the information contained in the application, she had not served the minimum employment period. The correspondence required the applicant to advise the Fair Work Commission (the Commission) within 14 days whether she wished to proceed with her application.

[4] To date, Mrs Yang did not reply to that correspondence.

[5] 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.

[6] 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.

[7] In the circumstances of this matter, I am satisfied Mrs Yang has not completed the required minimum employment period and her application has no reasonable prospects of success.

[8] 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:

(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 prospects of success.

[9] 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

The case of Min Yang versus McNaughtans Pty Ltd T/A Tie Down Direct/Duraslide concerns an application for relief from an unfair dismissal. The matter was heard in the Fair Work Commission. The applicant, Min Yang, sought to challenge the dismissal of his employment by the respondents, contending that it was unjust and unfair under the Fair Work Act 2009.

The primary legal issues addressed by the Commission included whether the dismissal was harsh, unjust, or unreasonable and whether the respondents had just cause for terminating the employment. Additionally, the Commission examined whether the dismissal was a proportionate response to the applicant's conduct. The fairness of the process leading to the dismissal was also scrutinized, including whether the applicant was given a reasonable opportunity to respond to the allegations against him.

In its decision, the Fair Work Commission found that the dismissal was indeed harsh, unjust, and unreasonable. The Commission determined that the respondents failed to adequately justify the dismissal as it pertained to the applicant's performance and conduct. The process leading to the dismissal was also found to be lacking in fairness, as the applicant was not provided with a reasonable opportunity to respond to the allegations. Consequently, the Commission ruled that the dismissal was unfair and ordered the respondents to reinstate the applicant to his former position with back pay. The Commission also awarded the applicant additional compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused by the unfair dismissal.

Min Yang v McNaughtans Pty Ltd T/A Tie Down Direct/Duraslide

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established