Fair Work Commission Upheld Dismissal of Injured Employee
Wednesday 2 July 2014 @ 10.36 a.m. | Industrial Law
The Fair Work Commission has dismissed an unfair dismissal claim effectively holding that the dismissal of an injured employee was fair. The case was Ronald MacDonald v Jetstar Airways Pty Limited T/A Jetstar [2014] FWC 488.
Facts
The applicant in the case, Ronald MacDonald, suffered a series of work related injuries to his arms and shoulders during his employment with Jetstar. By late July 2012, the applicant was declared unfit for work and did not appear for work until the time of his dismissal. Adequate compensation was paid to him for his injuries.
On 14 January 2013, his manager advised him through a letter that they were considering the termination of his employment. The letter further explained that the decision to terminate was based on a medical report by Dr. Bloom. The letter requested that the applicant respond by the 21 January with any other information he would like Jetstar to consider.
On the 23 January 2013, the applicant’s solicitor wrote to the manager asking for a copy of the medical report. This was given and the response time was extended to the 4 February 2013 by the manager. Having not received any response by the 14 February 2013, the manager wrote to the applicant advising of his immediate termination.
Arguments in Court
The applicant relied on a subsequent medical report made in excess of four months after the relevant date to argue that the dismissal was unfair. Commissioner Bull of the Fair Work Commission ultimately found that there was a legitimate reason to terminate the employee based on Dr. Bloom’s report. The Commissioner found that the report from Dr. Bloom was valid at the time of dismissal. The applicant had been given sufficient opportunity to respond prior to the termination.
However, Commissioner Bull stated that the medical report should have been attached to the original letter to the applicant. Further to this, he found that Dr. Bloom had not been given all the relevant documentations when he assessed the applicant. Commissioner Bull stated that Jetstar ‘should have done better’ in its handling of the applicant’s dismissal but concluded that the threshold of unfairness had not been met by the procedural deficiencies. The unfair dismissal application was dismissed.
TimeBase is an independent, privately owned Australian legal publisher specialising in the online delivery of accurate, comprehensive and innovative legislation research tools including LawOne and unique Point-in-Time Products.
