TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT – genuine redundancy – ss. 389, 394. Fair Work Act 2009 – applicant employed as physicist – employer entered into agreement with third party company which had direct impact on at least 50% of applicant’s workload – balance of applicant’s workload being performed by another employee or contractor – only available position for redeployment was in marketing and sales – applicant not qualified for this role – satisfied that redeployment not possible – applicant’s role covered by Manufacturing and Associated Industries and Occupations Award 2010 – consultation provisions considered – general information provided to employees about possible restructure – meeting held at which the applicant was given a termination letter – no meaningful opportunity to discuss the change – not satisfied that the consultation requirements of the award were met – not a genuine redundancy – satisfied that the dismissal was unfair – reinstatement not sought by applicant and opposed by employer – compensation appropriate – probability that employment would have been ongoing was low – three weeks’ compensation considered appropriate – compensation of $2,884.50 ordered. Li v Creative Water Technology
…
