Powered by MOMENTUM MEDIA
moneymanagement logo
 
 

FWC finds para-planner’s dismissal not ‘unfair’

regulations/

15 February 2016
| By Nicholas |
image
image image
expand image

Brisbane-based financial planning business, Howe Ford and Boxer (HFB) Pty Ltd, failed to adhere to the rules of Banking, Finance and Insurance Award 2010, when dismissing para-planner, David Priest.

The Fair Work Commission (FWC) heard that HFB partner, Terry Ford, had sought advice from a human resources (HR) consultant regarding a restructuring of the practice, after the planning business's sale performance dropped 49 per cent.

The Commission heard that Ford contacted HR consultant, Claire Harrison, about the possibility of making a staff member redundant on 8 September 2015, six days later she provided a draft letter to the employee for his consideration.

On 16 September 2015, HFB Accounting operations manager, Shona Sherman, requested a meeting with Priest (who had worked for the practice for more than three years), where he was introduced to Harrison, who proceeded to tell him that due to a restructure of the business, his position was no longer required and there was no possibility of him being moved to another role.

The FWC found the accounting and planning practice had failed to consult with Priest prior to the meeting where he was made redundant, as required by the Award.

The Commission said HFB's "treatment of the applicant on 16 September 20015 was indecent".

"However… the commission, as presently constituted is not satisfied that, overall, the dismissal of the applicant was harsh, unjust or unreasonable," the commission said in its ruling.

"In this case, deficiencies in the consultation about the redundancy would not have altered the outcome arrived at by the respondent and provides little support for a finding that the termination was harsh, unjust or unreasonable."

The FWC noted that "by reason of the respondent being a small business (as defined by the FW Act) the applicant was not entitled to a severance or redundancy payment on the termination of his employment".

"His only entitlement was to notice and the respondent made a payment to him in lieu of notice," the commission said.

"Understandably the applicant is aggrieved that he did not receive a redundancy payment. Had the respondent not been a small business employer the applicant would have been entitled to seven weeks' pay."

Read more about:

AUTHOR

Recommended for you

sub-bgsidebar subscription

Never miss the latest news and developments in wealth management industry

MARKET INSIGHTS

Significant ethical issues there. If a relationship is in the process of breaking down then both parties are likely to b...

2 weeks ago

It's not licensees not putting them on, it's small businesses (that are licensed) that cannot afford to put them on. The...

3 weeks ago

So we are now underwriting criminal scams?...

6 months 3 weeks ago

After last month’s surprise hold, the Reserve Bank of Australia has announced its latest interest rate decision....

2 weeks 1 day ago

A professional year supervisor has been banned for five years after advice provided by his provisional relevant provider was deemed to be inappropriate, the first time th...

4 weeks ago

WT Financial’s Keith Cullen is eager for its Hubco initiative to see advice firms under its licence trade at multiples which are catching up to those UK and US financial ...

2 weeks 5 days ago

TOP PERFORMING FUNDS

ACS FIXED INT - AUSTRALIA/GLOBAL BOND
Fund name
3y(%)pa
1
DomaCom DFS Mortgage
74.26 3 y p.a(%)
3