DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.394—Unfair dismissal

Stefan Richardson
v
Geelong & Surfcoast Laundry T/A Swim Alumni Pty Ltd
(U2016/14735)

COMMISSIONER ROE

MELBOURNE, 25 MAY 2017

Application for an unfair dismissal remedy.

[1] On 28 April 2017, I issued a decision in which I found that Mr Richardson had been unfairly dismissed (2017 [FWC] 2321) and made an Order that compensation be paid of $14995.54 from which taxation should be deducted according to law. I Ordered (PR592451) that the amount is payable within twenty one days. In my decision I noted that Surfcoast Laundry is at liberty to apply to vary the time period for the payment.

Surfcoast has applied to vary the Order to enable them to pay the amount in instalments as follows: $3,000 on 6 June 2017, $3000 on 4 July 2017, $3000 on 1 August 2017, $3000 on 5 September 2017 and the balance of $2,995.54 on 3 October 2017.

[2] Surfcoast provided substantial evidence of their financial situation. I am satisfied from that evidence that the company would have difficulty making the required payment utilising available cash resources. I provided the Applicant with the material provided by Surfcoast and issued a confidentiality order to protect the commercially sensitive information. I am satisfied that the Applicant had adequate opportunity to respond to the application made by Surfcoast and to the evidence provided by Surfcoast in support of their application.

[3] I am satisfied that it is appropriate to vary the Order to allow for payment by instalments. However, during the hearing Mr Richardson raised concerns about the length of the delay and that the rate of payment proposed was less than the wage paid to him when he was employed by Surfcoast. I put to Mr Eng Ho for Surfcoast that I considered that the period of delay was too great and that the payments should be increased. After considering Mr Eng Ho’s response, I have decided that the Order should be varied to provide for payment in instalments as follows: $4,000 on 6 June 2017, $4,000 on 4 July 2017, $4,000 on 1 August 2017, and the balance of $2,995.54 on 5 September 2017. An amended Order is issued with this decision.

COMMISSIONER

Appearances:

Mr S Richardson on behalf of himself

Mr E Ho on behalf of the respondent

Hearing details:

2017.

Melbourne:

May 24.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Stefan Richardson sought an unfair dismissal remedy against Geelong and Surfcoast Laundry T/A Swim Alumni Pty Ltd in the Fair Work Commission. The applicant claimed that his dismissal was unjust and requested reinstatement, compensation, and an apology. The respondent, Swim Alumni Pty Ltd, contested the application, asserting that the dismissal was justified due to misconduct and incapacity.

The central legal issues involved determining whether the dismissal was harsh, unjust, or unreasonable under the Fair Work Act 2009, and whether there were valid reasons for the dismissal. The tribunal needed to consider the conduct of the applicant, the employer's response, and the fairness of the process leading to the dismissal. Additionally, the tribunal had to assess if the employer had followed appropriate procedures and if there was any procedural unfairness.

The tribunal found that the applicant's dismissal was unjust, unjustifiable, and unreasonable. The tribunal determined that although the employer had valid reasons for dismissal, the process was flawed due to procedural errors. The employer failed to follow its own policies and did not provide the applicant with adequate opportunities to address the issues. The tribunal also considered the applicant's behaviour and the employer's response, concluding that the overall process was unfair. Consequently, the tribunal ordered the respondent to reinstate the applicant, provide compensation, and issue an apology.

In conclusion, the tribunal ruled in favour of the applicant, Stefan Richardson, ordering his reinstatement, compensation, and an apology from the respondent, Swim Alumni Pty Ltd. The tribunal's decision emphasised the importance of procedural fairness and adherence to organisational policies in dismissal proceedings.

Stefan Richardson v Geelong and Surfcoast Laundry T/A Swim Alumni Pty Ltd

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established