Commission also finds employer misled worker
A worker recently requested an extension of his dismissal application after revealing that he was “confused” with the instructions of the Fair Work Commission’s (FWC) staff, as well as being misled by his employer.
Joshua Tremaine submitted a request to the FWC, seeking a remedy for what he alleged to be an unjust dismissal from his position at Olssons Administration Pty Ltd (Olssons).
Tremaine started casual employment with Olssons on May 31, 2022. He outlined in his application that his dismissal occurred on August 4, 2023. The Commission received his form on November 8, 2023.
In his form, Tremaine cited being informed by a FWC staff member on August 4, 2023, that he had 21 days from receiving a separation certificate to file the unfair dismissal application.
The form also mentioned a conversation with a Commission staff member on September 28, 2023, clarifying that a separation certificate was not necessary to commence an application.
For the application to be within the 21-day timeframe after the dismissal, it should have been filed by midnight on August 25, 2023. The delay encompasses the period immediately following that time until November 8, 2023.
Tremaine, according to the Commission, does not need to provide a reason for the entire delay. An extension of time may be granted depending on all circumstances, even if Mr. Tremaine has not provided a reason for any part of the delay.
Apart from his confusion with the instructions of the FWC staff, the Commission found that he was also misled by his employer.
“It appears Tremaine was given false information about there being no work available when the reality was there was work available, just not for [him].”
“Tremaine was never told why he would not be offered any further work. Olssons should have been upfront with Tremaine about its decisions concerning his employment rather than giving him false information and making it difficult for him to speak with anyone,” it said.
The FWC said that “he was genuinely confused and that he [faced] technical limitations most other applicants would not face.”
It said that “he took steps to dispute the dismissal via his two phone calls to the Commission, the first on the day of his dismissal.” Thus, it ruled that there were exceptional circumstances for the worker’s situation. The FWC then decided to extend his application.
