TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT – misconduct – s.394 Fair Work Act 2009 – applicant dismissed for misconduct – various protocol issues and performance based issues – applicant submitted that his behaviour did not amount to misconduct – submitted that there was not a valid reason for his dismissal and that he was denied proper process – Commission found conduct could not be properly construed as inadequate performance or misconduct which could provide sound and defensible reason for dismissal – applicant’s behaviour should have been addressed with some specified identification of particular incidents of concern together with requirement to have the applicant rectify the concerns – instead concerns were generalised and without clear requirements for rectification – Commission considered that the substantive reason for applicant’s dismissal was invalid – respondent’s process for dealing with the applicant’s alleged unsatisfactory performance was severely flawed such that the applicant was denied natural justice – dismissal unjust and unreasonable – compensation an appropriate remedy in the circumstances – applicant made efforts to mitigate the loss suffered – element of established misconduct in the form of retaliatory insubordination – twelve weeks compensation ordered – order issued. Kumar v Consulate General of India, Sydney
…
