TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT – contract for specified term – termination at initiative of employer – ss.386, 394 Fair Work Act 2009 – application for relief from unfair dismissal – applicant’s employment ended on 1 April 2016 – jurisdictional objection raised by respondent – employment related to the running of a Family Reunification House in Cairns – respondent determined it would employ employees for a specified term of an initial 12 months – evidence from respondent that applicant informed during interview regarding the role being for this period – position description included in the documentation given to applicant stated employment status as ‘Full Time Fixed Term until 1 March 2016’ – due to employment not commencing until 30 March 2015, letter of engagement later amended the period nominated as 30 March 2015 to April 2016 – in early 2016 issues arose regarding the staffing structure that were discussed at a staff meeting in February 2016 – at further meeting in March 2016, applicant told her contract would not be renewed – applicant submitted she was shocked by this, as she had understood her employment beyond 1 April 2016 could be part-time or casual – necessary for Commission to determine whether terms provided a clear and unambiguous fixed period of time – advertisement for position made no mention of employment being for a fixed period ending on a certain date – position description held to be merely a reference document – letter of engagement also contained terms that were unsuitable for a fixed term contract, including termination and remuneration clauses – Commission held that clear words are necessary to satisfy the test that employment entered into by parties for a fixed term – due to ambiguity in such documents as the contract of employment, Commission adopted the decision in Carr v Blade Repairs Australia P/L (No 2) – held that the evidence demonstrated a reasonable person in the circumstances, having read the letter of engagement, would not have considered it to be a fixed term contract – jurisdictional objection dismissed. Fraser v Act for Kids
…
