Department of Justice

Tasmanian Industrial Commission

www.tas.gov.au
Contact  |  Accessibility  |  Disclaimer

T10403 and T10435

 

TASMANIAN INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION

Industrial Relations Act 1984
s.29 application for hearing of an industrial dispute

Susan Natalie Houghton
(T10403 of 2002)
Steven Samuel Aitkin
(T10435 of 2002)

and

ACN 090721190 in liquidation formerly known as Q's Couriers Pty Limited

 

COMMISSIONER P C SHELLEY

HOBART, 9 December 2002

Industrial dispute - severance pay in respect of termination of employment as a result of redundancy - order issued

REASONS FOR DECISION

[1] On 16 September 2002 Susan Natalie Houghton and Steven Samuel Aitken (the applicants), applied to the President, pursuant to s.29(1A) of the Industrial Relations Act 1984, for a hearing before a Commissioner in respect of an industrial dispute with ACN 090721190 in liquidation formerly known as Q's Couriers Pty Limited (the respondent) arising out of severance pay in respect of termination of employment as a result of redundancy.

[2] The matters were heard together at the Commonwealth Law Courts, 39-41 Davey Street, Hobart, Tasmania on Thursday 17 October 2002. The applicants sought, and were, granted, leave to amend their applications to accurately reflect the name of the respondent.

[3] The applicants represented themselves and Mr Forbes Ireland, together with Mr Damon Hobbs, appeared for the entity ACN No 090 721 190 under liquidation formerly known as Q's Couriers Pty Limited.

[4] The background to these disputes is that the company, Q's Couriers Pty Ltd, was put in the hands of the administrator, Paul Cook and Associates and shortly thereafter the creditors resolved to liquidate the company, which ceased trading on 31 May 2002. The applicants' employment was terminated on that date.

[5] Section 29(1A) of the Act enables applications to be made to the Commission by former employees for a hearing in respect of an industrial dispute relating to severance pay in respect of former employees terminated as a result of redundancy. The applicants were bound by the terms and conditions of an award of the Tasmanian Industrial Commission.

[6] Section 29(1B) of the Act says:

"An application for a dispute before a Commissioner in respect of an industrial dispute relating to termination of employment or severance pay relating to redundancy is to be made within 21 days after the date of the termination or, if the Commissioner considers there to be exceptional circumstances, such further period as the Commissioner considers appropriate".

[7] The applicants lodged their applications with the Commission after the expiration of 21 days from the date of their termination, and sought an extension of time.

[8] The applicants received letters from the administrators, Paul Cook and Associates, stating that they would continue to receive applications in respect of severance payments until 18 September 2002. The applications were received by the Commission before that date. Mr Ireland stated that he had no objection to the granting of an extension of time. I noted for the record that the reason the Commission had granted extensions of time in similar circumstances in relation to the same employer was because there had been considerable confusion surrounding what it was the employees were required to do in order to make a claim for redundancy and some people may have been led to believe that they had up to a year in which to make application to the Commission, rather than just 21 days. I hereby formally record in writing that the extension of time to the date of the hearing is granted in respect of these applications..

[9] The applicants said that they were seeking redundancy payments of two weeks' pay for each year of service. I now confirm what I said on the day of the hearing in respect of the period of service of Mr Aitken. On the basis of the evidence I find that, at the time of the termination of employment, Mr Aitken had been a permanent employee for only two and a half months. Prior to that the pattern of his attendance for work had been very irregular, including lengthy periods when he did not work at all. Accordingly, for the purposes of severance payment as a result of redundancy, the only time to be counted is that during which he worked regular hours and had a reasonable expectation of ongoing employment on a regular basis.

[10] I find that the applicants were terminated as the result of redundancy and I confirm in writing my decision, delivered on the day, that employees should receive severance pay based upon two weeks' average pay for each completed year of service or part thereof.

ORDER

I hereby order, pursuant to s.31 of the Industrial Relations Act 1984, that the respondent, A.C.N. 090 721 190 (in liquidation) formerly Q's Couriers Pty Ltd, pay to each of the former employees whose names appear below the amount specified below, in full and final settlement of applications T10403 and T10435, such payments to be made no later than 5.00 pm on 30 December 2002.

    Susan Natalie Houghton $1,639.32
    Steven Samuel Aitken $185.90

     

P C Shelley
COMMISSIONER

Appearances:
Mr F Ireland on behalf of ACN 090721190 under liquidation formerly known as Q's Couriers Pty Limited
Ms S Houghton and Mr S Aitken representing themselves

Date and place of hearing:
2002
October 17
Hobart