TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT – genuine redundancy – remedy – ss.389, 394 Fair Work Act 2009 – application for relief from unfair dismissal – applicant commenced working for respondent in February 2015 as filleter/general hand – promoted to Production Supervisor in September 2015 – employed under terms of Seafood Processing Award 2010 (the Award) – respondent raised objection to application on basis that applicant’s dismissal was genuine redundancy – claimed serious downturn in business so reducing operating costs was only option – respondent decided to reduce labour costs by making three non-production roles redundant – Commission satisfied that there were genuine business reasons associated with downturn in profitability and performance and that role of Production Supervisor no longer existed – held that redundancy not a sham – parties gave evidence about consultation – meeting commenced with parties speaking at cross-purposes – Commission satisfied that most of the meeting concerned missing stock and the restructure was a short conversation – Commission found decision to make applicant redundant was impulsive, insensitive, extreme and unwarranted – applicant heard nothing more about restructure until meeting on 2 June where he was handed a letter advising he was redundant, effective immediately – Commission held that respondent did not consult in any meaningful way and there was no consultation within meaning of clause 8 the Award – failed to meet statutory requirement of consultation and cannot be ‘genuine redundancy’ – Commission further held respondent did not take all reasonable steps to redeploy applicant – jurisdictional objection dismissed – whether dismissal harsh, unjust or unreasonable – Commission found there were genuine operational reasons for business restructure so there was valid reason for dismissal – held dismissal was harsh, unjust or unreasonable notwithstanding valid reason – nature of failure to consult and failure to give reasonable consideration to redeployment were sufficiently serious to deny applicant ‘fair go all round’ – application granted – Commission recommended Member Assisted Conciliation on question of remedy – if process not undertaken or not successful, Commission to make decision on remedy. Buttar v PFD Food Services P/L t/a PFD Food Services
…
