TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT – misconduct – ss.387, 394, Fair Work Act 2009 – Regulation 1.07 of the Fair Work Regulations 2009 – applicant employed as Assistance Store Manager at various Prouds and Angus & Coote stores – applicant summarily dismissed following investigation in October 2015 into allegations of misconduct – following investigation into number of allegations including creation of laybys without customer being in store, staff discounts to friend and bullying team member applicant dismissed – respondent submitted applicant breached policies and procedures and terms of contract which required compliance with policies and procedures – applicant submitted actions were administrative errors and not serious enough to warrant termination – applicant also submitted that had good work history – Commission considered whether dismissal harsh, unjust or unreasonable taking into account criteria in s.387 FW Act – phrase ‘termination of employment may be unjust because employee was not guilty of misconduct on which employer acted, may be unreasonable because it was decided upon inferences which could not have reasonably been drawn from material… and may be harsh in its consequences for the personal and economic situation of the employee’ [Byrne v Australian Airlines] – Commission considered each allegation separately and found applicant had engaged in misconduct – found applicant notified of reason and provided with opportunity to respond – found respondent did not unreasonably refuse support person – Commission found not necessary to make finding as to whether misconduct of employee fits definition of serious misconduct under reg. 1.07 FW regulations [O’Connell v Wesfarmers Kleenheat Gas] – Commission found dismissal not harsh, unjust or unreasonable – application dismissed. King v Prouds Jewellers P/L
…
