Next Athleisure Pty Limited T/A Next Athleisure Pty Limited (Glue Store) v Ms Courtney Pahlke
[2018] FWC 6380
•17 OCTOBER 2018
| [2018] FWC 6380 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.120 - Application to vary redundancy pay for other employment or incapacity to pay
Next Athleisure Pty Limited T/A Next Athleisure Pty Limited (Glue Store)
v
Ms Courtney Pahlke
(C2018/4974)
COMMISSIONER SPENCER | BRISBANE, 17 OCTOBER 2018 |
Variation of redundancy pay – redundancy pay reduced.
[1] An application pursuant to s.120 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) was made by Next Athleisure Pty Limited T/A Next Athleisure Pty Limited (Glue Store) (the Applicant) seeking to vary the amount of redundancy pay to be made to Ms Courtney Pahlke (the Respondent).
[2] The Respondent commenced employment with the Applicant on 21 May 2017 as a Store Manager at Glue Store Carindale on a full-time basis. The Respondent’s job was to be made redundant on 2 October 2018. The Respondent was advised of this on 22 August 2018 in a meeting with Ms Jennifer Yap, Human Resources Advisor, and Mrs Deborah Jollie, Head of Retail. It was not in dispute that the Respondent’s position was being made redundant.
[3] The Applicant submitted that they had obtained other acceptable employment in accordance with s.120(1)(b)(i) of the Act for the Respondent. The Applicant argued it offered the Respondent two full-time redeployment opportunities within the Applicant’s organisation at other stores in the Brisbane area.
[4] Directions were set for the expedited filing of material, and the matter was listing for hearing, conducted by telephone at the request of the Applicant. The Applicant submitted in this regard that the last day of trading for Glue Store Carindale was 2 October 2018. The parties agreed to have the matter listed for telephone hearing on 21 September 2018 and to file their material prior to this date.
[5] At the hearing, the Applicant was represented by Ms Jennifer Yap, Human Resources Advisor. The Respondent represented herself.
[6] Whilst not all evidence and submissions are referred to in this decision, all of such have been considered.
RELEVANT PROVISIONS
[7] Pursuant to s.119 of the Act:
“119 Redundancy pay
Entitlement to redundancy pay
(1) An employee is entitled to be paid redundancy pay by the employer if the employee’s employment is terminated:
(a) at the employer’s initiative because the employer no longer requires the job done by the employee to be done by anyone, except where this is due to the ordinary and customary turnover of labour; or
(b) because of the insolvency or bankruptcy of the employer.
Note: Sections 121, 122 and 123 describe situations in which the employee does not have this entitlement.
Amount of redundancy pay
(2) The amount of the redundancy pay equals the total amount payable to the employee for the redundancy pay period worked out using the following table at the employee’s base rate of pay for his or her ordinary hours of work:
Redundancy pay period | ||
Employee’s period of continuous service with the employer on termination | Redundancy pay period | |
1 | At least 1 year but less than 2 years | 4 weeks |
2 | At least 2 years but less than 3 years | 6 weeks |
3 | At least 3 years but less than 4 years | 7 weeks |
4 | At least 4 years but less than 5 years | 8 weeks |
5 | At least 5 years but less than 6 years | 10 weeks |
6 | At least 6 years but less than 7 years | 11 weeks |
7 | At least 7 years but less than 8 years | 13 weeks |
8 | At least 8 years but less than 9 years | 14 weeks |
9 | At least 9 years but less than 10 years | 16 weeks |
10 | At least 10 years | 12 weeks |
[8] The application has been made pursuant to s.120 of the Act, which states:
“120 Variation of redundancy pay for other employment or incapacity to pay
(1) This section applies if:
(a) an employee is entitled to be paid an amount of redundancy pay by the employer because of section 119; and
(b) the employer:
(i) obtains other acceptable employment for the employee…
(2) On application by the employer, the FWC may determine that the amount of redundancy pay is reduced to a specified amount (which may be nil) that the FWC considers appropriate.
(3) The amount of redundancy pay to which the employee is entitled under section 119 is the reduced amount specified in the determination.”
[9] Clause 15 of the General Retail Industry Award 2010 deals with redundancy:
“15. Redundancy
[Varied by PR994449, PR503607; PR561478]
15.1 Redundancy pay is provided for in the NES…”
[10] The Commission is required to take into account whether the Respondent was entitled to be paid redundancy pay, in accordance with s.119 of the Act; and whether the alternative employment is acceptable taking into account the remuneration and conditions of the alternative employment; that is:
● Status;
● Rate of pay;
● Location;
● Hours of employment;
● Duties;
● Whether the alternative employment was obtained by the Applicant; and
● Whether the alternative employment was or was not acceptable and why.
SUMMARY OF THE APPLICANT’S SUBMISSIONS AND EVIDENCE
[11] The Applicant submitted that the Carindale Glue Store had experienced a downturn in sales over the preceding months and that the store had experienced performance issues since the start of 2018. The Applicant submitted that the lease for the Carindale Glue Store had reached its renewal date and the decision was made to close the store from 2 October 2018.
[12] The Applicant provided a timeline of consultation events leading up to the Respondent’s redundancy. The Applicant’s timeline provided that an email was sent to the Respondent on 21 August 2018 inviting her to attend a meeting with Ms Yap and Mrs Jollie on 22 August 2018. 1
[13] The Applicant submitted that the meeting was held on 22 August 2018 in the Manager’s office with the door closed. The Applicant provided a file note of the minutes of the 22 August 2018 meeting which recorded that the Applicant’s position, as stated by Mrs Jollie, was “to re-deploy everyone back into the business” but that “if they aren’t redeployed, there is a package we have pulled together”. 2
[14] The Applicant submitted that on 24 August 2018, an email was sent to the Respondent containing a consultation letter outlining what was discussed at the prior meeting. The email records that “there is no equivalent Store manager vacancy in QLD, however do [sic] have an ASM [Assistant Store Manager] vacancy at Brisbane City, which we also encourage you to consider applying for”. The email also invites the Respondent to “…get in touch with any questions at all and advise whether you would be interested in reviewing the draft calculation should there be no suitable redeployment opportunities”. 3
[15] The Applicant submitted that it received a response from the Respondent by email on 27 August 2018. The Respondent stated “I have made my decision and unfortunately due to not having a position in my job title or pay grade in Queensland I have decided to take the redundancy package”. 4
[16] Later on that day, the Applicant submitted it received internal correspondence to the effect that one of its Store Managers at SuperGlue Indooroopilly was stepping down. 5 The Applicant submitted that a decision was made to delay responding to the Respondent’s email of 27 August 2018 until the situation at SuperGlue Indooroopilly could be clarified. The Applicant submitted further that this was done with the intention that it might “create an equivalent and suitable redeployment opportunity for [the Respondent] to be successfully deployed in”.6
[17] The Applicant submitted that the Respondent was informed of the vacancy at SuperGlue Indooroopilly on 28 August 2018, but that the Respondent had declined the role “due to the distance between Indooroopilly and her home”. 7 The Applicant records that the Respondent had stated the travel time was “around 2 hours one way”.8 The Applicant submitted witness statements of Ms Hannah McCotter, Area Manager, and Ms Jamie Carr, National Retail Manager who depose to the details of the phone call to the Respondent informing her of the Indooroopilly Store Manager vacancy.
[18] The Applicant submitted that on 30 August 2018, an email was sent to the Respondent advising that “the business has an equivalent role of Store Manager with QLD which enables successful redeployment for yourself…now that there is a vacant and equivalent position as Store Manager, you are no longer eligible for a redundancy”. 9 This information was also conveyed to the Respondent via phone call from Ms McCotter who advised as follows:
“I confirmed with her that as the business had been able to offer her an equivalent role at another store within a fair distance, that she would not be eligible to receive a redundancy. I told her that the Store Manager position at Indooroopilly, as well as the 2IC position at Brisbane City were being held open for her should she choose to accept either role”. 10
[19] On 2 September 2018, the Applicant submitted it received the following email from the Respondent: 11
“Dear Jen
Thank you for your email and the offer of the position of Store manager at the glue indooroorpilly store. I wish to inform you that I must regretfully and whole heartedly decline your offer for the following reasons.
• I have already accepted the redundancy package you offered on Wednesday 22nd of August. I refer to my email addressed and sent to yourself, Hannah McCotter and Deborah Jollie dated Monday the 27th of August. At this stage there were no available appointments for my position within Glue Qld.
• The position you are offering of the Indooroorpilly Glue store as Store Manager is not within my desired locations of future employment. My place of residence is south of Brisbane, within the Logan City area, it is not convenient nor would it make any sense financially or personally to accept this position. I do understand that in my initial contract of employment, dated 15th May 2017, clause 2.3 states I may have to work at other locations from time to time but this would be a permanent ongoing position and it would not suit my work/ life balance that I currently enjoy within my current position at the Carindale Store.
• The costs alone in accepting the Indooroopilly Store Manager position would be detrimental to my financial position and would not ever be within a financial position and would not ever be within a location that I accept as desirable. Public transport is not an option due to personal reasons.
• I was of the understanding that at the time you offered me a redundancy package during our meeting on 22nd of August that there were no positions available that suited my role or position within the company within the Qld region. I accepted the offer of redundancy in good faith. At no stage during our conversations was I made aware that if in the future, before my position at Carindale was terminated that if an equivalent and comparable role emerged that I would be ineligible for a redundancy.
• Since my acceptance of the redundancy offer and the introduction of the Indooroopilly Store Manager position I have felt intimidated and coerced into filling a position that I would never have considered if I was actually seeking employment outside of this setting. Furthermore, the stress and toxic environment I have recently found myself to be in within my work environment has caused me to seek medical advice and attention due to the high anxiety and pressure of the situation.
• I feel it is my own personal choice to decline the role you have offered after I had already accepted the redundancy offer 3 days before your reply email to inform me that it was no longer standing due to the resignation of position from Georgie.
I urge you to reconsider reinstating the original offer produced to me during our initial appointment on 22nd of August. The offer being a redundancy package of $6600 and my full commitment to Glue Qld at the Carindale store until 1st october 2018. I have been in contact with Fair Work Commission and have had a consultation with a legal representative in regards to my employment rights and conditions.”
[20] The Applicant responded by email dated 6 September 2018: 12
“Good morning Courtney,
Thank you for your email- my apologies for the delayed response.
…
At the time of consultation, you were advised that unfortunately there were no current Store Manager vacancies within QLD, in which you would be eligible for redundancy if you were not successfully redeployed into your current and/or salary equivalent role.
At the time of discussion, you were made aware of the current Full-Time Assistant Store Manager vacancy at Brisbane City in which we encouraged you to apply for.
Brisbane City is in a centralised location {20 minute drive from Carindale Westfield).
Based on Google Maps,
• Logan City > Carindale is a 36 minute drive (44.5km via National Route 13)
• Logan City > Brisbane City is a 44 minute drive (47.5km via M3)
This is an additional 3 km which is a reasonable distance for travel.
Whilst we understand that Assistant Store Manager Is not the title you are seeking, a redeployment opportunity guarantees you on going employment and the equivalent salary moving across.
Unfortunately due to poor timing, it was later brought to our attention a few days after that an equivalent Full-Time Store Manager opportunity at SuperGlue lndooroopilly became available in light of Georgie's resignation.
Based on Google maps,
• Logan City > lndooroopilly is a 48.6km drive via National Route 13 and M5
You are currently travelling 44.5km from Logan City to Carindale, therefore there is only a variance of 4.1km in distance, which is reasonable distance for travel.”
[21] The Applicant referred the Respondent to s.15 of the General Retail Industry Award 2010 which deals with Redundancy, before concluding that the Respondent was not entitled to receive a redundancy payment. Further, it stated to the Respondent, “the business is not in a position to offer a redundancy, as your role is still required to be performed and available within QLD. To action this would be an ingenuine [sic] redundancy”. 13
[22] The Applicant continued that it had provided two reasonable redeployment opportunities, and that “as there are current vacancies within your state, within reasonable travelling distance and like for like salary, by declining both roles, you are effectively expressing you no longer wish to remain in the business”. 14 Additionally, the Applicant stated it offered the Respondent the same salary for both positions, in recognition that the Assistant Store Manager position was a “step down in title due to current vacancy”.15
[23] The Applicant also noted that it had “not pursued further recruitment at this stage, as we have ensured that either of these roles are open for you to be redeployed in”, 16 and that they were “happy to review flexible working arrangements to alleviate travel if this is where your concern lies, in order to reach a mutual agreement”.17
[24] The Applicant stated it sent a further email to the Respondent on 7 September 2018 advising that this application would be filed, but that no further correspondence from the Respondent was received. 18
SUMMARY OF THE RESPONDENT’S SUBMISSIONS AND EVIDENCE
[25] The Respondent confirmed that she was invited to, and attended, the meeting of 22 August 2018 with Ms Yap and Mrs Jollie. The Respondent submitted that “the closure was not much of a surprise as we had not received stock in nearly two months and [the] store was very empty”. The Respondent confirmed she “was shown options of other employment rolls [sic] within the business” but that “no roll [sic] in Queensland was available in my job title or pay grade” at the time of the meeting. 19
[26] The Respondent submitted further that she was “shown a redundancy package” at the meeting. She says that Mrs Jollie stated to her in the meeting that she had until 31 August 2018 to inform the Applicant of her decision “to drop to a lower position in Brisbane city store or accept redundancy”. The Respondent says she was “told that if I accepted redundancy that I had to work till the very end date of the closure of the store to get the redundancy which I was completely okay with”. 20 The Respondent stated she was encouraged to apply for the Assistant Store Manager role at Glue Store Brisbane City by email from Ms Yap on 24 August 2018.
[27] The Respondent confirmed she sent an email to the Applicant on 27 August 2018 accepting the redundancy package. The Respondent stated she began to look for new employment that afternoon. 21
[28] The Respondent also confirmed she was notified of the vacancy for a Store Manager at SuperGlue Indooroopilly on 28 August 2018 by phone call from Ms McCotter, Area Manager, and Ms Jamie Carr, National Retail Manager. The Respondent stated she told the Applicant, “unfortunately due to the travel distance and time, the roll [sic] would not be suitable for me as it would take me upwards of one to two hours to get there. I did my training for Glue at the Indooroopilly store and the travel was not worth its [sic] as I would have to leave home before 7 am to be at work on time”. 22
[29] The Respondent submitted she received a phone call from Ms McCotter on 30 August 2018, who informed her “that because I was offered the roll [sic] of manager within another store that I was no longer eligible for redundancy and that I either had to take manager roll [sic] of Indooroopilly or ASM of Brisbane city or I was told that I had to resign when the store closure happened”. The Respondent stated she advised Ms McCotter that she “would have to think about it as I was shocked and didn't know what to say”. 23 The Respondent set out that this information was also conveyed to her via email from Ms Yap on 30 August 2018.
[30] The Respondent submitted that, after discussions with a representative from the Fair Work Commission Helpline, she sent an email to Ms Yap on 2 September 2018. The Respondent confirmed she received a response from Ms Yap on 6 September 2018 and a further email advising that this application had been filed in the Commission on 7 September 2018. The Respondent said that, in that email of 7 September 2018, Ms Yap requested a response to the two previously offered redeployment opportunities, by 14 September 2018.
[31] The Respondent concluded her submissions by stating that she “declined Brisbane city as I have worked hard for years to become a manager so why would I want to step down into a lower roll at a further location”. She submitted she “also declined Indooroopilly due to travel,” explaining that it was “not the distance that is the issue it is the time it would take me to get there, the higher etoll and the parking cost”. The Respondent further submitted that “the manager just resigned due to the roll [sic] there being to stressfull [sic] and the assistant manager there being unmanageable”.
[32] Notably, at the hearing in this matter, the Respondent stated she was not advised by the Applicant that both positions would be offered at the same salary.
CONSIDERATION
[33] In determining an application made pursuant to s.120 of the Act, the Commission must first be satisfied that there is an entitlement to redundancy pay. 24 Where there is no entitlement to redundancy pay under s.119 of the Act, there can be no order to reduce the entitlement.25
[34] It was agreed between the parties that the position of Store Manager at Glue Store Carindale would become redundant on 2 October 2018, to coincide with the closure of Glue Store Carindale.
[35] Based on the circumstances as set out, and in accordance with s.119 of the Act, the Applicant had been employed for more than one year but less than two years (and had worked out the applicable period of notice) and therefore was entitled to four (4) weeks redundancy payment. Whether any reduction should be made to this redundancy payment amount turns on whether the Applicant had obtained “other acceptable employment” pursuant to s.120(1)(b)(i) of the Act, for the Respondent.
[36] The Applicant submitted that it obtained alternative jobs for the Respondent as the Assistant Store Manager at the Brisbane City store (on a salary equivalent to the Store Manager) and subsequently, the Store Manager position at the Indooroopilly store.
[37] The Full Bench in Australian Chamber of Manufacturers v Derole Nominees Pty Ltd, 26 held that:
“What constitutes “acceptable alternative employment” is a matter to be determined, as we have said, on an objective basis. Alternative employment accepted by the employee (and its corollary, alternative employment acceptable to the employee) cannot be an appropriate application of the words because that meaning would give an employee an unreasonable and uncontrollable opportunity to reject the new employment in order to receive redundancy pay; the exemption provision would be without practical effect.
Yet, the use of the qualification “acceptable” is a clear indication that it is not any employment which complies but that which meets the relevant standard. In our opinion there are obvious elements of such a standard including the work being of a like nature, the location being not unreasonably distant; the pay arrangements complying with award requirements. There will probably be others.” 27
[38] The differences in the employment conditions between the redundant position and the redeployment offered to the Respondent must be considered in relation to whether the other employment was “acceptable”. The concept of “other acceptable employment” was considered in the decision of NUW v Tontine Fibres 28 where it was found:
“[24] The onus of establishing that the alternative employment in question is acceptable rests with the applicant employer. In order to establish whether the alternative employment obtained by the employer is acceptable it is necessary to have regard to such matters as pay levels, hours of work, seniority, fringe benefits, workload and speed, job security and other matters (including the location of the employment and travelling time)…”
[39] The decision was cited with approval in Datacom Systems Vic Pty Ltd v Rasiq Khan; Siddharth Desai, 29 which explained further:
“[9] Other employment does not cease to be “acceptable” merely because it is on terms that are less advantageous to that of the terminating position. Tontine makes it clear that there are matters of degree involved.” 30
[40] The Applicant made an initial offer to the Respondent of the position of Assistant Store Manager at Glue Store Brisbane City at a meeting on 22 August 2018. At the hearing, the Applicant conceded that it was not made clear that this role would be offered to the Respondent at the same Manager’s salary as her current position. The evidence also discloses that a redundancy package was discussed at this meeting, which the Respondent says she accepted by email on 27 August 2018. The Respondent’s evidence was that it was not made clear that that package may not be available.
[41] The Applicant later offered the Respondent the Store Manager position at SuperGlue Indooroopilly on 28 August 2018. The Applicant submitted that it considered the offer of this role to also be “other acceptable employment” for the Respondent. However, the Applicant conceded at the hearing that it was only made clear on 30 August 2018, that the Respondent would not be eligible to receive the redundancy pay if this offer of an equivalent role at another store (within what they considered to be a reasonable driving distances) was made to the Respondent.
[42] Despite the later offer being made to the Respondent and the subsequent advice from the Applicant regarding the Respondent’s ineligibility for the redundancy payment, the assessment in s.120(1)(b)(i) of the Act is made at the time the Respondent’s position was made redundant. 31 The redundancy took effect on 2 October 2018, when Glue Store Carindale closed, and both offers of redeployment were made prior to that date.
[43] The Respondent submitted that the two offers of redeployment were unacceptable on the basis that either location would substantially increase her travel time. She submitted at the hearing that when she had performed training at the SuperGlue Indooroopilly store previously, it had taken her “upwards of an hour” to get to work before her start time of 8:20am, if she “left before 7:00am”.
[44] The Respondent agreed that her employment contract stated she might have to work at other locations from time to time as directed, but disputed that this would apply to a permanent ongoing redeployment position.
[45] At the hearing, the Applicant submitted that the role at the Brisbane City store was an additional 3km of travel, when compared to the Respondent’s current place of work, and the role at the Indooroopilly store was an additional 4.1km of travel. The Applicant considered either redeployment offer was acceptable, given that the driving time for both roles was reasonable for a commute in a large metropolitan city.
[46] The Commission must assess the alternative employment on an objective basis. Deputy President Sams in Spotless Services Australia Limited 32 addressed the issue of additional travel time in an offer of alternative employment:
“[20] That said, I return to consider whether the additional travelling time made the offer of reemployment objectively unacceptable alternative employment. While I sympathise with the extra inconvenience and cost the employees would have been required to accept, particularly in the context of their relatively low wages and part time hours, I am unable to conclude that a daily travel time of around 1 hour and 40 minutes return trip, or an additional travel time of 50 minutes return, constitutes a sufficient basis for refusing the offer of reemployment at Eraring.
[21] Accordingly I find the offer of reemployment to Eraring was ‘acceptable employment’ within the meaning of s 120 of the Act. Given this finding, the onus on the applicant to demonstrate that its offer of re-employment was ‘acceptable employment’ has been discharged. I consider that no amount of redundancy pay is applicable in these circumstances. The application is granted and a determination to that effect will be issued contemporaneously with this decision.” 33
[47] The Applicant had previously submitted that the Respondent’s commute to her current place of work at Carindale Shopping Centre was 36 minutes. This was not disputed by the Respondent.
[48] Google Maps provides a route to SuperGlue Indooroopilly from the Respondent’s place of residence in Logan, with an estimated travel time of between 35 and 65 mins, depending on traffic, in order to arrive by the Respondent’s work start time of 8:20am. Google Maps estimates the same travel time to SuperGlue Indooroopilly from Logan if the Respondent were to depart before 7:00am, as was submitted. Google Maps also provides a route to Brisbane City from Logan with travel time of between 30 and 55 mins.
[49] The additional travelling time faced by the Respondent for the two redeployment opportunities offered is less than an additional 5km and equates to 20 to 30 mins (dependant on traffic) according to the submissions and Google Maps data. Further, the Applicant submitted that it was able to work with the Respondent to reach a flexible working arrangement, to minimise the impact of the travel. However, that offer was not made until after the Respondent first raised concerns about the additional travel time on 27 August 2018.
CONCLUSION
[50] Taking into account all of the circumstances, the redeployment opportunities that the Applicant had offered are deemed to be “other acceptable employment” and therefore the discretion pursuant to s.120(2) of the Act is exercised to reduce the amount of redundancy pay, payable to the Respondent. The alternative position of Indooroopilly Store Manager was the equivalent role, in terms of duties, status and remuneration, and the associated increased travel time for the Respondent is not excessive in terms of what would be considered a reasonable period of travel time for employment in a metropolitan location.
[51] While the position offered to the Respondent of Assistant Store Manager at the Brisbane City store was of a lower status, the Applicant at a later stage informed the Respondent that she would be paid the same salary if she chose to be redeployed in that position. However, this was not made clear to the Respondent when the position was first offered.
[52] It has been taken into consideration that whilst the position of Store Manager was offered to the Respondent, which is at an equivalent status and remuneration, there was other information regarding the availability of flexible arrangements to reduce the impact of travel time which was not made available to the Respondent at the time the decision was required to be made. In accordance with the Respondent’s submissions, it is accepted that information regarding the pay rate for the Assistant Manager role, and the availability for flexible work arrangements to accommodate for additional travel time was not presented by the Applicant to the Respondent at the time the offers were made. Additionally, the possibility that an offer of a redundancy package would not be available was not initially made clear to the Respondent. Accordingly, the Applicant did not present, as per s.119(2) of the Act, all of the associated details of the offer of redeployment initially, and this has been taken into consideration regarding any reduction to the redundancy amount payable.
[53] When taking all of the criteria and circumstances into account, in accordance with s.120(1)(b)(i) and (3), and for the reasons set out above, the redundancy payment of four (4) weeks is reduced to two (2) weeks.
[54] An Order [PR701334] to that effect will issue together with this decision.
COMMISSIONER
Appearances:
Ms J Yap for the Applicant.
Ms C Pahlke on her own behalf.
Hearing details:
21 September 2018 in Brisbane, by Telephone.
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<PR701332>
1 Statement of Jennifer Yap dated 14 September 2018, Attachment 1.
2 Statement of Jennifer Yap dated 14 September 2018, Attachment 2.
3 Statement of Jennifer Yap dated 14 September 2018, Attachment 3.
4 Statement of Jennifer Yap dated 14 September 2018, Attachment 4.
5 Statement of Jennifer Yap dated 14 September 2018, Attachment 4.
6 Statement of Jennifer Yap dated 14 September 2018, page 2.
7 Statement of Jennifer Yap dated 14 September 2018, page 2 and Attachment 4.
8 Statement of Jennifer Yap dated 14 September 2018, page 3.
9 Statement of Jennifer Yap dated 14 September 2018, Attachment 6.
10 Witness Statement of Ms Hannah McCotter dated 14 September 2018.
11 Statement of Jennifer Yap dated 14 September 2018, Attachment 6.
12 Statement of Jennifer Yap dated 14 September 2018, Attachment 6, page 5.
13 Statement of Jennifer Yap dated 14 September 2018, Attachment 6, pages 6 and 7.
14 Statement of Jennifer Yap dated 14 September 2018, Attachment 6, page 8.
15 Applicant’s Form F45A Application at 2.3.
16 Statement of Jennifer Yap dated 14 September 2018, Attachment 6, page 7.
17 Statement of Jennifer Yap dated 14 September 2018, Attachment 6, page 8.
18 Statement of Jennifer Yap dated 14 September 2018, page 3.
19 Respondent’s Submissions dated 20 September 2018.
20 Respondent’s Submissions dated 20 September 2018.
21 Respondent’s Submissions dated 20 September 2018.
22 Respondent’s Submissions dated 20 September 2018.
23 Respondent’s Submissions dated 20 September 2018.
24 Application by CAE Australia Pty Ltd [2012] FWA 7992 at [13].
25 Ibid.
26 (1990) 140 IR 123.
27 Ibid at 128.
28 [2007] AIRCFB 101.
29 [2013] FWC 1327.
30 Ibid at [9].
31 Darren Lange Trust T/A Darren Lange Swimming Academy v Mr Jerome Zevenbergen[2018] FWC 1564 at [38].
32 [2013] FWC 4484.
33 Ibid at [20] – [21].
0
5
0