Tao Yang v SAL HR Services Pty Ltd
Case
•
[2023] FWC 1325
•4 JULY 2023
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Tao Yang v SAL HR Services Pty Ltd [2023] FWC 1325
[2023] FWC 1325
4 JULY 2023
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In the Fair Work Commission, Tao Yang applied for an unfair dismissal remedy under section 394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 against SAL HR Services Pty Ltd. Mr Yang, who had been employed by SAL as a full-time warehouse store person, alleged that he was unfairly dismissed on 6 February 2023. SAL contended that Mr Yang was not dismissed but had resigned and that any dismissal would have been justified due to his work performance, attendance issues, and conduct on the day in question.
The primary legal issues revolved around whether Mr Yang was indeed dismissed and, if so, whether the dismissal was unfair. SAL argued that Mr Yang's resignation was voluntary and not coerced, while Mr Yang maintained that he was dismissed by the General Manager. Additionally, SAL contended that any dismissal would have been justified based on Mr Yang's performance and conduct. The Commission had to determine the credibility of the witnesses' testimonies, including the Applicant, the General Manager, and other employees, and assess the relevance and reliability of the CCTV footage and screen shots provided by the Respondent.
The Commission found that the Applicant, Mr Yang, was a plausible witness but had a tendency to exaggerate and downplay his role in the events. The evidence of the General Manager, Mr Tang, was deemed consistent and credible where it conflicted with Mr Yang's account. The Commission also noted the exaggerations in Mr Wang's testimony due to his sense of injustice. The CCTV footage and screen shots provided by SAL were problematic due to their selective nature and lack of proper explanation. The Commission accepted that Mr Yang was sometimes late to work but found that the screen shots did not adequately support the Respondent's claims about Mr Yang's punctuality. Based on this assessment, the Commission found that Mr Yang was dismissed and that the dismissal was unfair.
The Commission ordered SAL HR Services Pty Ltd to pay Tao Yang compensation of 6 weeks’ wages and to provide a formal written apology.
The primary legal issues revolved around whether Mr Yang was indeed dismissed and, if so, whether the dismissal was unfair. SAL argued that Mr Yang's resignation was voluntary and not coerced, while Mr Yang maintained that he was dismissed by the General Manager. Additionally, SAL contended that any dismissal would have been justified based on Mr Yang's performance and conduct. The Commission had to determine the credibility of the witnesses' testimonies, including the Applicant, the General Manager, and other employees, and assess the relevance and reliability of the CCTV footage and screen shots provided by the Respondent.
The Commission found that the Applicant, Mr Yang, was a plausible witness but had a tendency to exaggerate and downplay his role in the events. The evidence of the General Manager, Mr Tang, was deemed consistent and credible where it conflicted with Mr Yang's account. The Commission also noted the exaggerations in Mr Wang's testimony due to his sense of injustice. The CCTV footage and screen shots provided by SAL were problematic due to their selective nature and lack of proper explanation. The Commission accepted that Mr Yang was sometimes late to work but found that the screen shots did not adequately support the Respondent's claims about Mr Yang's punctuality. Based on this assessment, the Commission found that Mr Yang was dismissed and that the dismissal was unfair.
The Commission ordered SAL HR Services Pty Ltd to pay Tao Yang compensation of 6 weeks’ wages and to provide a formal written apology.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Employment & Labour Law
Legal Concepts
-
Unfair Dismissal
-
Jurisdiction
-
Standing
-
Breach of Contract
-
Implied Terms
-
Unjust Enrichment
-
Compensatory Damages
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Ana Maria Gracioso Martins v Wallace Medical Systems Pty Ltd [2025] FWC 24
Cases Citing This Decision
24
Mr Babak Parchami v Top Centre Laundry Tasmania Pty Ltd
[2025] FWC 2206
Logan Nagy v O'Brien Joinery Tas Pty Ltd
[2025] FWC 2152
Steven Curr v Virgin Australia Airlines Pty Ltd
[2025] FWC 2144
Cases Cited
16
Statutory Material Cited
0
Sagona v R & C Piccoli Investments Pty Ltd & Ors
[2014] FCCA 875
Sagona v R & C Piccoli Investments Pty Ltd & Ors
[2014] FCCA 875