Ms Paula Tracy v Ironbark Software Pty Ltd

[2020] FWC 6731

[2020] FWC 6731

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.394 - Application for unfair dismissal remedy

Ms Paula Tracy
v
Ironbark Software Pty Ltd
(U2020/4596)

COMMISSIONER HUNT BRISBANE, 14 DECEMBER 2020

Application for an unfair dismissal remedy – compensation ordered.

[1] On 9 December 2020, I issued a decision ([[2020] FWC 6601]), finding that Ms Tracy’s dismissal by Ironbark Software Pty Ltd (the Respondent) was harsh, unjust and unreasonable, and therefore Ms Tracy was unfairly dismissed.

[2] I determined that the Respondent is to pay to Ms Tracy the amount of six months’ pay being an amount of $30,000 gross, subject to taxation, less any remuneration received by her in the period 31 March 2020 to 30 September 2020 being the period of six months from her dismissal. Further, I decided that superannuation would be paid.

[3] On the decision being published I directed Ms Tracy to provide evidence of her bank statement for the relevant period. The bank statement demonstrated that Ms Tracy had received a modest sum of money on account of work performed by her for two weeks’ work.

[4] Ms Tracy provided the pay slips evidencing she was paid a total of $1,064.25 gross for work performed mid-late July 2020.

[5] Ms Tracy has been in receipt of JobSeeker payments during her period of unemployment, but only from around July 2020. The JobSeeker payments are not at the highest range that have been available to job seekers, and I understand this is on account of Ms Tracy’s partner’s earnings. Ms Tracy was in receipt of approximately $634 per fortnight.

[6] There is Full Bench authority that welfare payments generally do not count as remuneration 1 to be deducted from an amount of compensation to be awarded. Welfare payments have typically been very modest amounts, often close to or below the poverty line. While I would concur that welfare payments generally do not count as remuneration, I would, in some circumstances, consider the amount paid in a consideration under s.392(2)(g), that being “any other matter that the FWC considers relevant”. For example, throughout 2020 some JobSeeker recipients have been in receipt of amounts of up to $1,150 per fortnight which is considerable uplift from the usual fortnightly payment, taking into account a Coronavirus supplement.

[7] If Ms Tracy had been in receipt of an amount of $1,150 per fortnight for some of the period that she was unemployed, I might have had regard for that in reducing the amount of compensation ordered. However, she was in receipt of approximately $634 per fortnight and for only a part of the period of her unemployment. I consider this to be a very modest amount and it is not necessary to make any reductions on account of the payment received by her.

Order of compensation

[8] Having regard to the remuneration earned by Ms Tracy, being an amount of $1,064.25 gross, I have determined that the Respondent is to pay to Ms Tracy the amount of $28,935.75 gross less tax as required by law within 14 days of the date of this decision.

[9] In addition, the Respondent is to pay superannuation at the rate of 9.5% on the amount of $28,935.75, being an amount of $2,748.90 into Ms Tracy’s superannuation fund. This amount is to be paid within 14 days of the date of this decision.

[10] An Order [PR725419] to that effect will be issued with this decision.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR725415>

 1   Sprigg v Paul's Licensed Festival Supermarket, Print R0235 (AIRCFB, Munro J, Duncan DP, Jones C, 24 December 1998) [(1998) 88 IR 21], 29.