Ms Molly Fox v C Breglia & D Breglia

[2020] FWC 3170

[2020] FWC 3170

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.789GV - Application to deal with a dispute under Part 6-4C

Ms Molly Fox
v
C Breglia & D Breglia
(C2020/4504)

COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS PERTH, 17 JUNE 2020

Application to deal with a dispute in relation to JobKeeper.

[1] Ms Molly Fox (the Applicant) on 10 June 2020, applied under s.789GV of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (the Act) for the Fair Work Commission (the Commission) to deal with a dispute about the operation of Part 6-4C of the Act. The Respondent is C Breglia & D Breglia (the Respondent).

[2] At the conclusion of the telephone proceedings on 16 June 2020, I advised the parties I had decided to dismiss the application. These are my reasons for that decision.

[3] Part 6-4C was introduced into the Act by the Coronavirus Economic Response Package Omnibus (Measures No. 2) Act 2020. The Part authorises employers to give JobKeeper enabling directions to employees 1 and to make agreements with employees about when work is performed or taking annual leave. The Part also authorises employees who are subject to JobKeeper enabling directions to make requests of their employer regarding secondary employment, training or professional development.

[4] Section 789GV of the Act allows the Commission to deal with disputes about the operation of Part 6-4C.

[5] The Respondent has enrolled for the JobKeeper wage subsidy and the Applicant has completed a JobKeeper employee nomination notice and has received JobKeeper payments.

[6] The Respondent has not:

1. Given the Applicant a JobKeeper enabling stand down direction under s.789GDC.

2. Given the Applicant a direction about the duties they are required to perform under s.789GE.

3. Requested the Applicant change the location where they perform work under s.789GF.

4. Requested the Applicant take paid annual leave under s.789GJ.

[7] Ms Fox is a casual employee and a university student. Ms Fox’s hours in the past varied week to week dependent on her university commitments, and so her availability, and her employer’s needs. Ms Fox, during the period when her employer’s business was closed, obtained a second job.

[8] A roster has been recently put out by the Respondent for the business to re-open. Ms Fox has advised the Respondent she could not work the rostered hours offered to her because of her commitment to her second job and because of her university commitments.

[9] The circumstances do not fall within the scope of s.789GG.

[10] Consequently, this particular dispute is not a dispute about the operation of Part 6-4C of the Act.

[11] Therefore, the Commission has no power to deal with the dispute. As a result, the application is dismissed.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR720268>

 1   See s.789GC of the Act.