Scott Gore-Johnson v Citi Stayz Pty Ltd

[2023] FWC 1618

[2023] FWC 1618

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.394—Unfair dismissal

Scott Gore-Johnson
v

Citi Stayz Pty Ltd

(U2023/4821)

COMMISSIONER BISSETT MELBOURNE, 5 JULY 2023

Application for an unfair dismissal remedy – minimum employment period – dismissal under s.587 at the Commission’s initiative.

1. On 1 June 2023 Scott Gore-Johnson (the Applicant) made an application to the Fair Work Commission for a remedy for unfair dismissal pursuant to s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (FW Act).

1. The Applicant advised in the Form F2 Unfair Dismissal Application (Form F2) that they commenced employment with Citi Stayz Pty Ltd on 19 February 2023 and that their dismissal took effect on 27 May 2023.

1. On 6 June 2023 the Commission attempted to contact the Applicant on their nominated telephone number. A voicemail message was left requesting the Applicant contact the Commission by phone in relation to a concern that the Applicant had not met the minimum employment period.

1. Later that day the Commission emailed correspondence to the Applicant’s nominated email address advising the Applicant that, on the basis of the information provided in the Form F2, they had not served the minimum employment period. The correspondence directed the Applicant to file any documents or other evidence to support their claim that they had served the required minimum employment period. That correspondence also warned that if they did not contact the Commission within 14 days the application may be dismissed without further notice. An SMS notification was also sent to the Applicant’s nominated telephone number requesting that they contact the Commission.

1. As the required documentation was not received, on 16 June 2023 the Commission attempted to contact the Applicant on their nominated telephone number. As the Applicant could not be reached, a voicemail message was left identifying concern that the minimum employment period had not been met so requested a response by phone or email.

1. To date the Applicant has not replied to the Commission’s correspondence.

1. Section 382 of the FW Act provides that a person is protected from unfair dismissal if they have completed a period of employment. I am satisfied the Applicant has not completed the required minimum employment period.

1. Section 383 of the FW Act sets out the minimum employment period as follows:

383 Meaning of minimum employment period

The minimum employment period is:

(a) if the employer is not a small business employer—6 months ending at the earlier of the following times:

(i) the time when the person is given notice of the dismissal;

(ii) immediately before the dismissal; or

(b) if the employer is a small business employer—one year ending at that time.

1. Section 587(1) of the FW Act provides as follows:

587 Dismissing applications

(1) Without limiting when the FWC may dismiss an application, the FWC may dismiss an application if:

(a) the application is not made in accordance with this Act; or

(b) the application is frivolous or vexatious; or

(c) the application has no reasonable prospect of success.

1. As the Applicant has not completed the required minimum employment period under the FW Act the application has no reasonable prospect of success. As such, the application is dismissed under s.587(1)(c) of the FW Act.

COMMISSIONER
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR763885>