TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT – termination at initiative of employer – ss.394, 400, 604 Fair Work Act 2009 – appeal – Full Bench – at first instance the Commission found that the employee had been unfairly dismissed – appellant sought permission to appeal against jurisdictional decision of March 2018 as well as the merits and compensation decision of June 2018 – jurisdictional appeal lodged 86 days outside of 21 day time limit – Full Bench rejected appellant’s submission that the jurisdictional decision was in the nature of a preliminary or interlocutory decision – application to extend time for filling appeal against jurisdictional decision rejected – Full Bench agreed that appeal of merits and compensation decision raises important matters in relation to employees engaged by labour hire companies – permission to appeal granted – appellant submitted that Commission failed to pay sufficient regard to the Temporary Employment Agreement (TEA) and that the employee’s assignment could be terminated at any time at the discretion of the host employer – submitted that the actions of the employer amounted to a valid reason for termination as employee was unable to perform the inherent functions of their role – appellant also submitted that they intended to find employee an alternative assignment but could not and that the employee had walked away from her employment – Full Bench found decision at first instance consistent with the approach adopted in Adecco, Pettifer and Tasports – found that the TEA contained no assignment or conclusion date and that employee’s assignment was extended twice without any indication when it may end – satisfied that Commission correctly described the employee’s work with the employer host as ‘an indefinite duration’ – rejected appellant’s submission that employee ended her employment – found no substance to appellant’s claim of an alleged failure to provide adequate reasons for decision at first instance – appellant submitted that the amount of $15,000 in compensation was too high in relation to the temporary nature of the appellant’s employment – Full Bench satisfied with Commission’s application of Sprigg given findings of there being no valid reason for dismissal and that the work performed was for an indefinite period – grounds of appeal not made out – appeal dismissed – corresponding stay order to be set aside. Appeal by Spinifex Australia P/L t/a Spinifex Recruiting against decisions of Hamberger SDP of 13 March 2018 [[2018] FWC 1363] and 21 June 2018 [[2018] FWC 3686] Re: Tait
…
