TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT – performance – s.394 Fair Work Act 2009 – applicant summarily dismissed – received three written reprimands regarding work performance – respondent submitted applicant’s employment terminated for dereliction of duty and gross misconduct – further verbal warnings issued to applicant in relation to work performance – Commission considered if dismissal was harsh, unjust or unreasonable – respondent bears onus of establishing serious misconduct that justifies summary termination – test of whether employer can demonstrate reasonable grounds for holding belief employee guilty of misconduct that justifies summary termination – test of whether employer can demonstrate reasonable grounds for holding belief employee guilty of misconduct [Harley] – valid reason is one which is sound, defensible or well-founded but not capricious, fanciful, spiteful or prejudiced [Selvachandran] – issue separate from determination if termination was harsh, just or unreasonable [Toby] – provisions must ‘be applied in a practical, common sense way to ensure that the employer and employee are each treated fairly'[Selvachandran] – valid reason required consideration in establishing fairness of termination [Wililo] – Commission found valid reason existed for applicant’s termination – procedural fairness requires employee opportunity to respond before decision to terminate [Crozier] – applicant put on notice with respect to work standard before termination – applicant unaware of two issues that led to dismissal – failure of procedural fairness not found – Commission not satisfied termination of employment was not unfair – determination of dismissal was harsh, unjust or unreasonable notwithstanding the existence of a valid reason involves a weighing process [Australian Postal Corporation] – Commission concluded termination was not harsh, unjust or unreasonable – application dismissed. Cockroft v InterPark Australia P/L t/a InterPark Australia.
…
