NEWS-HR
The Port Stephens Veterans and Citizens Aged Care Ltd T/A Harbourside Haven has a s.739 (Application to deal with a dispute) with which it must contend in front of Deputy President Saunders (Level 3, 237 Wharf Road, Newcastle) at 10am (Carr)
An application by Health Services Union (Sch.3, Item 20A(4) – Application to extend default period for agreement-based transitional instruments) will be determined by Justice Hatcher (Video using Microsoft Teams) in Sydney today.
St John Ambulance Western Australia T/A St John Ambulance Western Australia has a s.739 (Application to deal with a dispute) with which it must deal before Fair Work Deputy President O’Keeffe in the Fair Work Commission 111 St Georges Terrace Perth at 10am (Sibley)
Mansfield Autism Statewide Services T/A Mansfield Autism Statewide Services is facing a s.739 (Application to deal with a dispute) before Fair Work Commissioner Bissett (Video using Microsoft Teams) in Melbourne (Boyes)
Lonnie v WA Council on Addictions Incorporated
TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT – high income threshold – fringe benefit tax – ss.382, 394 Fair Work Act 2009 – applicant employed as General Manager of Residential Services and alleged unfair dismissal – respondent raised jurisdictional objection on basis that applicant’s annual rate of earnings exceeded the high income threshold of $162,000 and that he was not covered by an award or an enterprise agreement – applicant contended he was covered by the respondent’s enterprise agreement and that his earnings were less than threshold – applicant claimed the enterprise agreement had broad coverage for all employees located in Perth Metropolitan Area (excluding child care and creche) and that he performed duties within a classification of the agreement – Commission held applicant’s role as General Manager not within the classification structure of the enterprise agreement – Commission held applicant’s employment not covered by an industrial instrument – Commission assessed applicant’s annual rate of earnings at time of dismissal – Commission held applicant’s salary was $141,797 – applicant also used company vehicle with an agreed monetary value of $10,783 – applicant provided with laptop and phone with agreed combined value of $947.19 – respondent contended that payments or adjustments to the applicant's salary to cover accrual of fringe benefit tax on use of company vehicle ought be considered – Commission considered Rofin's Case and Chang – held where an amount paid other than to an employee and other than on their behalf or direction does not meet definition of ‘remuneration’ (Rofin's Case) – Chang approach not required as vehicle assigned agreed value by parties – applicant’s wage adjusted to account for agreed value of car – Commission concluded fringe benefit payments or adjustments not to be counted as remuneration – applicant’s total remuneration was $153,527.19; below high income threshold – jurisdictional objection dismissed.
U2023/565 [2023] FWC 673
Beaumont DP Perth 20 April 2023
