Scott Anderson v Skillhire

Case [2022] FWC 561


[2022] FWC 561

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.365—General protections

Scott Anderson
v

Skillhire

(C2021/7739)

COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS

PERTH, 15 MARCH 2022

Application to deal with contraventions involving dismissal - s.587.

  1. This matter involves an application made by Mr Scott Anderson (the Applicant) under section 365 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) to deal with alleged contraventions involving dismissal. The respondent is Skillhire (the Respondent).

  1. The Respondent objects to the application on the ground that the Applicant has not been dismissed by the Respondent and is still in the Respondent’s database as a Labour Hire Casual.

  1. The application was the subject of a conference with a Fair Work Commission staff conciliator however the matter was not resolved and so was referred to me for arbitration to determine whether the Applicant had been dismissed.

  1. Correspondence was sent to the parties on 12 January 2022 notifying them of a hearing and providing specific directions to each party. This was sent to the Applicant by email. The Respondent on 10 February 2022 did comply with the Fair Work Commission’s directions to file its hearing materials in support of their objection. The Applicant was directed to provide written materials in response to the Respondent’s objection by 9 March 2022. Nothing was received from the Applicant by this date.

  1. A follow up letter was emailed to the Applicant on 10 March 2022 regarding his failure to comply with the Fair Work Commission’s direction and directing that his materials be filed and served on the Respondent by 10:00am 14 March 2022. The letter advised a further failure to comply with the Fair Work Commission’s direction would be grounds for the application to be dismissed without further notice.

  1. As at the date of this decision the Applicant has not filed any materials as directed nor otherwise contacted the Commission.

The legislation

  1. Section 577 of the Act obliges the Fair Work Commission to perform its functions and exercise its powers in a manner that is fair, just and is quick, informal and avoids unnecessary technicalities and is open and transparent and promotes harmonious and cooperative workplace relations.

  1. Section 587(3) of the Act empowers the Fair Work Commission to dismiss an application on its own initiative.

Decision

  1. In this case the Applicant has repeatedly failed to comply with the Fair Work Commission’s directions and was on notice that non-compliance would be grounds for the application to be dismissed.

  1. Consequently, my decision is that this application to deal with contraventions involving dismissal should now dismissed on the initiative of the Fair Work Commission under section 587(3) of the Act.

  1. An Order [PR739282] to this effect will now be issued.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR739281>

Details
AGLC
Scott Anderson v Skillhire [2022] FWC 561
Case
[2022] FWC 561
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Scott Anderson filed an application with the Fair Work Commission under the Fair Work Act 2009, alleging that Skillhire had dismissed him. Skillhire, the respondent, objected to the application, claiming that Anderson was still listed in their database as a labour hire casual and therefore had not been dismissed. The matter was referred to Commissioner Williams for arbitration after a conciliation conference failed to resolve the issue. Anderson was directed to provide written materials in response to the respondent's objection by a certain date, but he failed to do so and did not comply with subsequent directions to file his materials. As a result, the application was dismissed on the initiative of the Fair Work Commission under section 587(3) of the Act.

The central legal issue before the court was whether Anderson had been dismissed by Skillhire. The respondent argued that Anderson was still listed in their database as a labour hire casual and therefore had not been dismissed. The court had to determine whether Anderson's failure to comply with the Fair Work Commission's directions was sufficient grounds for dismissing the application under section 587(3) of the Act.

The court found that Anderson had repeatedly failed to comply with the Fair Work Commission's directions and was on notice that non-compliance would be grounds for the application to be dismissed. The court emphasised the importance of following the Fair Work Commission's directions and noted that Anderson had not filed any materials as directed nor contacted the Commission. Consequently, the court dismissed the application on the initiative of the Fair Work Commission under section 587(3) of the Act. An order to this effect was issued.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.