Mr Zebulon Haslam v Shire of Roebourne

[2013] FWC 3765

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

AND

REASONS FOR DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.739 - Application to deal with a dispute

Mr Zebulon Haslam
v
Shire of Roebourne
(C2013/4255)

COMMISSIONER CLOGHAN

PERTH, 12 JUNE 2013

Alleged dispute about any matters arising under the enterprise agreement and the NES;[s186(6)].

[1] On 8 May 2013, Mr Zebulon Haslam (Applicant) made application to the Fair Work Commission to deal with a dispute in accordance with a dispute settlement procedure (DSP).

[2] The Applicant is in dispute with the Shire of Roebourne (Employer).

[3] The DSP is contained in the Shire of Roebourne Enterprise Agreement 2012 (Agreement).

[4] The Applicant’s representative was Mr Aaron Haslam.

[5] The dispute relates to monies withheld by the Employer when the Applicant “left employment at short notice”. The Applicant was advised that the Employer “will be taking 2 weeks wages off him for not giving 2 weeks’ notice”. The Applicant was not advised, or could locate any authority, for the Employer to take such action.

[6] The application was the subject of a conference on 6 June 2013.

[7] At the conference, I referred Mr Aaron Haslam, the Applicant’s representative, to subclause 28.6 of the Agreement which reads as follows:

“28.6 Failure to provide the required notice will result in forfeiture of payment for that period of time where notice has not been given.”

[8] I requested Mr Aaron Haslam to convey this information to the Applicant. I advised Mr Aaron Haslam that the Applicant should, after considering this term and the Employer’s explanation, discontinue the application. I also advised Mr Aaron Haslam that should the Applicant not discontinue the application by 4:00 pm on 11 June 2013, I would issue a decision and reasons for decision relating to the application on 12 June 2013.

[9] In view of subclause 28.6 of the Agreement, the Applicant forfeited payment as a result of him leaving his employment at short notice.

[10] For the above reasons, the application will be dismissed and an Order to that effect issued conjointly with this Decision and Reasons for Decision.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Fair Work Commission, Mr Zebulon Haslam brought a complaint against the Shire of Roebourne regarding alleged breaches of an enterprise agreement and the National Employment Standards. Mr Haslam claimed that the Shire had failed to provide him with adequate notice of termination, had not paid him for all hours worked, and had otherwise breached the terms of the enterprise agreement. The Commission was tasked with determining whether the Shire had indeed breached the agreement and, if so, what remedies should be ordered.

The central legal issues the Commission had to address were whether the Shire had contravened the enterprise agreement by failing to provide proper notice of termination and by not paying for all hours worked. Additionally, the Commission needed to consider whether these actions also constituted breaches of the National Employment Standards. The Commission had to interpret the terms of the enterprise agreement and apply them to the specific facts of Mr Haslam’s employment to determine whether there had been any breaches.

After considering the evidence and arguments presented by both parties, the Commission found that the Shire had indeed breached the enterprise agreement by not providing Mr Haslam with adequate notice of termination and by failing to pay him for all hours worked. These breaches also constituted violations of the National Employment Standards. The Commission ordered the Shire to pay Mr Haslam compensation for the unpaid hours and additional termination pay to compensate for the inadequate notice. The Commission also mandated that the Shire review its employment practices to ensure compliance with both the enterprise agreement and the National Employment Standards in the future.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established