| [2022] FWC 1300 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
| DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.394—Unfair dismissal
Shirley Alison George
v
Woolworths Group
(U2022/5174)
| COMMISSIONER O’NEILL | MELBOURNE, 26 MAY 2022 |
Application for relief from unfair dismissal – minimum employment period – dismissal under s.587 at the Commission’s initiative.
On 8 May 2022, Mrs Shirley Alison George 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).
Mrs George advised in the Form F2 Unfair Dismissal Application (Form F2) that she commenced employment with Woolworths Group on 25 October 2022 and that she was notified of her dismissal on 13 April 2022.
On 9 May 2022, the Commission attempted to contact Mrs George on her nominated telephone number. Two attempts were made and on each occasion the call was not answered and there was no facility to leave a voicemail.
Later that day, the Commission emailed correspondence to Mrs George’s nominated email address advising her that on the basis of the information provided in the Form F2, she had not served the minimum employment period. The correspondence directed Mrs George to file any documents/evidence to support her claim that she had served the required minimum employment period. That correspondence also warned that if she did not contact the Commission within 14 days, the application may be dismissed without further notice.
As the required documentation was not received, on 23 May 2022 the Commission attempted to contact Mrs George via her nominated telephone number. However, she could not be reached. A voicemail message was left requesting that Mrs George urgently contact the Commission in relation to the matter and advising that based on the dates provided the matter may be dismissed if contact was not received.
To date, Mrs George has not replied to the Commission’s correspondence.
Section 382 of the FW Act provides that a person is protected from unfair dismissal if they have completed a period of employment of at least the minimum employment period.
In the circumstances of this matter, I am satisfied Mrs George has not completed the required minimum employment period and her application has no reasonable prospects of success.
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.
Section 587(1) of the FW Act provides that:
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.
Having regard to the circumstances of this matter I am satisfied that as Mrs George has not completed the required minimum employment period under the FW Act, her application has no reasonable prospect of success. As such, the application is dismissed under s.587(1)(c) of the FW Act. An Order to this effect will be issued shortly.
COMMISSIONER
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<PR741987>
- AGLC
- Shirley Alison George v Woolworths Group [2022] FWC 1300
- Case
- [2022] FWC 1300
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The FWC noted that section 382 of the FW Act provides that a person is protected from unfair dismissal if they have completed a period of employment of at least the minimum employment period. The FWC examined the information provided by Mrs George and found that she had not completed the minimum employment period. The FWC attempted to contact Mrs George on two occasions by phone and once by email, but received no response. A voicemail was left on 23 May 2022 requesting urgent contact from Mrs George, but she did not respond. The FWC concluded that because Mrs George had not completed the minimum employment period, her application had no reasonable prospect of success.
In light of the FWC's findings, the application was dismissed under section 587(1)(c) of the FW Act, which allows the FWC to dismiss an application if it has no reasonable prospect of success. An order to this effect will be issued shortly. The FWC found that Mrs George's application was unlikely to succeed because she had not completed the minimum employment period, and there was no evidence to suggest otherwise. The FWC's decision was based on the information provided by Mrs George and the lack of response to attempts to contact her.
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.