Log in or become a subscriber

It wasn't unreasonable or unjust to find a long-serving employee's "sheer number of absences" weighed in favour of his dismissal being valid, a Fair Work Commission full bench has ruled.

In doing so, the bench acknowledged that many features of the employee's case were "powerful" and might have resulted in a different outcome depending on the Commission member.

The case involved a Woolworths warehouse storeman, who was sacked in April last year for failing to meet the inherent requirements of his role. During unfair dismissal proceedings, the employer contended another dismissal reason was his "persistent" non-compliance with its directions to provide notice of and evidence for his absences.

The Commission heard the employee had been absent 92 times in the 12 months leading to his termination. He claimed this was due to difficult personal circumstances, involving his own health and the health of his son...