Dismissed or just not rostered? Employer argues future reemployment possible
The Fair Work Commission (FWC) recently dealt with a general protections application involving dismissal from a casual gym receptionist who alleged his employment ended after a phone call from his manager.
The worker said his employment ended when he received a telephone call from his manager, who said: "I'm sorry to inform you that I have to let you go effective immediately. You're no longer working here anymore because you've been talking shit about the business."
The employer said they did not dismiss the worker. In their response, they said they had to discontinue the worker's employment solely because of his limited availability and the redundancy of staff.
The case required the FWC to examine whether the worker had been dismissed, whether the employer terminated the employment on the employer's initiative, and whether the Commission had jurisdiction to deal with the application.
At the determinative conference conducted on 8 October 2025, the employer said they had reduced hours at the worker's workplace, and they had to reduce staff numbers.
They chose the worker because he had less availability than other staff members and was also a more recent hire than the other staff.
They said they had no work at that time but would hire him in the future if work became available. They agreed that they had asked the worker's manager to call him.
Section 365...
word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word w...