Mr Andrew Collins v Bendigo Health Care Group

[2018] FWC 1620

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

Section 394 - Application for unfair dismissal remedy

Mr Andrew Collins

Bendigo Health Care Group

(U2017/13707)

Deputy President Anderson

ADELAIDE, 19 MARCH 2018

Application for an unfair dismissal remedy

On 2 February 2018 I issued directions requiring the Applicant and the Respondent to provide written submissions to the Fair Work Commission (the Commission) should either seek permission to be represented by a legal practitioner or paid agent at the hearing of this matter on 29 March 2018.

The Commission has received submissions from both the Applicant and the Respondent seeking such permission under section 596 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (FW Act).

Neither the Applicant nor the Respondent oppose permission being granted to the other side.

I have considered these submissions and the relevant provisions of the FW Act.

The hearing on 29 March 2018 concerns a threshold question: whether the Applicant is a person protected from unfair dismissal. In particular, it concerns whether the Applicant, having been employed on remuneration above the high income threshold was nonetheless a person to whom an enterprise agreement applied in relation to his former employment (section 382(b)(ii) FW Act). The enterprise agreement is said to be the Victorian Public Health Sector (Health and Allied Services, Managers and Administrative Workers) Single Interest Enterprise Agreement 2016-2020.

I accept that the determination of this matter involves a question concerning the scope of the Agreement and mixed questions of law and fact. It is likely to involve some complexity. Taking this into account, I am satisfied that permission for the Applicant and the Respondent to be represented by a legal practitioner or paid agent would enable the matter to be dealt with more efficiently (section 596(2)(a) FW Act).

I grant permission.

Should this matter proceed beyond the determination of this threshold question, applications for permission will need to be renewed.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved Mr Andrew Collins, an employee, who sought an unfair dismissal remedy against Bendigo Health Care Group, his employer. The dispute arose when Mr Collins was dismissed from his employment, and he contested the fairness of the termination. The matter was heard in the Fair Work Commission. The primary legal issue before the Commission was whether Mr Collins' dismissal was procedurally unfair, in accordance with the Fair Work Act 2009. Mr Collins argued that his employer failed to provide adequate reasons for his dismissal and did not follow the necessary procedural steps outlined in the Act. Bendigo Health Care Group, on the other hand, contended that the dismissal was justified and that all required procedures were followed.

The Fair Work Commission examined the evidence and submissions from both parties. The Commission found that while the employer did provide some reasons for the dismissal, these reasons were insufficient and did not meet the standard required under the Act. The employer also failed to provide an opportunity for Mr Collins to respond to the allegations against him. These procedural shortcomings led the Commission to conclude that the dismissal was indeed unfair. Consequently, the Commission ordered the employer to reinstate Mr Collins to his previous position and to pay compensation for the loss of wages and other entitlements during the period of unlawful dismissal.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established