Susan Glassick v 82490636568

[2025] FWC 2258

[2025] FWC 2258

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION AND ORDER

Fair Work Act 2009

s.394—Unfair dismissal

Susan Glassick
v

82490636568

(U2025/9161)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT EASTON SYDNEY, 1 AUGUST 2025

Application for an unfair dismissal remedy – dismissal under s.587 for want of prosecution.

1. On 28 May 2025, Ms Susan Glassick filed an unfair dismissal application under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth).

1. Ms Glassick alleged she was employed by “82490636568” with an ABN of “32598738949” until she was dismissed on 21 May 2025. In other parts of Ms Glassick’s application she makes reference to returning to SESLHD, which is presumed to be a reference to South Eastern Sydney, Local Health District, and she indicated that her place of work was the Royal Hospital for Women. The email address of the “Manager – Employment and Industrial Relations” of the respondent ends with “@health.nsw.gov.au”.

1. On 5 June 2025, NSW Government Health, South Eastern Sydney, Local Health District advised the Commission by email that Ms Glassick was an employee of the Government of New South Wales in the Service of the Crown.

1. On 2 June 2025 Commission staff sent an email to Ms Glassick in relation to whether her former employer was a National System Employer. Ms Glassick was required to respond by 16 June 2025 and was advised that her application could be dismissed without further notice if she did not respond. An SMS was also sent on to Ms Glassick telling her that an important email had been sent.

1. Ms Glassick responded and was advised by telephone of the National System Employer concern and was to call back to advise how she wishes to proceed.

1. A follow-up call was made to Ms Glassick on 17 June 2025 and she was required to respond by 18 June 2025.

1. Ms Glassick has not responded.

1. Section 587 of the Act provides:

“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 prospects of success.

…

(3)       The FWC may dismiss an application:

(a)       on its own initiative; or

(b)       on application.”

1. Section 587 allows the Commission to dismiss an application if it is apparent that the applicant has stopped pursuing or participating in the proceedings they commenced. Section 587(3) allows the Commission to dismiss an application on its own initiative, so long as the applicant has been afforded procedural fairness. The words “without limiting when FWC may dismiss an application” in s.587(1) confirm that the power to dismiss an application is not limited to the circumstances set out in s.587(1)(a), (b) and (c).

1. If an applicant’s conduct or omissions show that they are no longer willing to participate in their own case the Commission is not required to persevere with the application (see Viavattene v Health Care Australia [2013] FWCFB 2532 at [39]).

1. In these circumstances I am satisfied that the facility under s.587 can and should be engaged to dismiss Ms Glassick’s application.

1. Ms Glassick has been on notice of the likely consequences for her application if she did not respond to the Commission’s inquiry and it is quite possible that she has abandoned her application.

1. For these reasons I have decided to dismiss Ms Glassick’s application on my own initiative for want of prosecution, utilising the facility provided by s.587(3)(a) of the Act. I make the following order:

A.The application under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) made by Ms Susan Glassick on 28 May 2025 is dismissed.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR790290>