• [105] Mr Pinto gave evidence that he found alternative employment a week prior to the hearing which means that he was out of work for a period of about 15 weeks. Consequently, in these circumstances where Mr Pinto had only suffered a loss of 15 weeks, I do not consider it appropriate that the compensation be more than 15 weeks.

Amount of remuneration earned by the Applicant from employment or other work during the period between the dismissal and the making of the order for compensation

• [106] Mr Pinto presented no evidence of earnings for the 15 weeks of unemployment.

Amount of income reasonably likely to be so earned by the Applicant during the period between the making of the order for compensation and the actual compensation

• [107] As Mr Pinto provided no evidence of earnings, I am unable to ascertain the amount of income likely to be earned. Nevertheless, I am not inclined to discount the compensation on this point. However, he was paid 3 weeks' notice and 6 weeks of severance pay and I consider it appropriate to reduce the amount of compensation by 9 weeks. This leaves a balance of compensation of 6 weeks.

• [108] There are no additional relevant factors to take into consideration.

• [109] It is appropriate in these circumstances to make an order of 6 weeks' pay. This is a figure of $8654.88 gross. Tax is to be deducted according to law and forwarded to the ATO.

1. I am satisfied that the amount of compensation is appropriate to the circumstances of this case and the criteria for deciding compensation under s.392(2). Misconduct is irrelevant[83] the figure does not include an amount for shock, distress etc,[84] and the compensation does not exceed the cap.[85]

• [111] An order[86] will be issued with this decision for the payment of the net sum ($8654.88 less tax) within 7 days of this decision into Mr Pinto's bank account. Superannuation on this compensation is also payable directly into Mr Pinto's nominated superannuation fund in accordance with the Superannuation Guarantee requirements.

K Stewart, lawyer, and C Nair and R Narayanan for the Respondent.

[1] Contract of Employment, Digital Hearing Book ('DHB') pp 18-36.

[2] Transcript of proceedings dated 14 November 2024 (Transcript) PN62, PN64 and PN81.

[3] Transcript PN88. The CFO was the head of finance and oversaw the Melbourne and Geelong office together with the offshore department.

[8] Advert from Naukri, DHB p 47; Email to Jacob Mohan on 15 May 2024, DHB p 53; and DHB p 177.

[9] Referenced in the letter of 15 July 2024 signed by the "authorised delegate", DHB p 131.

[10] Alleged "aggressive" shutting of doors, references to "ridiculous" excuses for not attending meetings, accusations that the manager wasted his staff's time, accusations of shouting and yelling.

[11] Email from Satya Indukuri Chief of Staff, DHB p 68.

[14] Further emails for 2023 were received from Ecommsys Pty Ltd regarding student intake data, DHB p 71.

[16] Email from Satya Indukuri Chief of Staff dated 2 July 2024, DHB p 129.

[19] DHB pp 135-136; Excerpts from website of student enrolments, DHB p 262.

[21] DHB pp 194, 204 and Transcript PN215 - PN216 and PN717.

[22] The Respondent admitted to a recording of the meeting and would submit the recording if it was necessary. Transcript PN458 - PN460 and PN961.

[32] The Education Services for Overseas Students Amendment (Quality and Integrity) Bill 2024.

[33] DHB p 151 and Transcript PN142-144.

[39] Exhibit R1, Witness Statement of Chenicheri Sid Nair at [3]-[5], DHB p 406.

[41] He was the Dean of the Sydney and Melbourne campus in respect to the higher education programs.

[43] Transcript PN542 - PN550 and PN596.

[44] This includes its obligation to consult and consider redeployment opportunities, see also Transcript PN332, PN345 and PN351.

[45] Attachments SN-1 - SN-4, DHB p 408 and pp 411-415.

[47] Exhibit R1 at [33] - [46], DHB p 409.

[49] Transcript PN342 - PN345 and PN422 - PN429.

[51] Which lacked any reliable detail. He refers to student numbers that he "thinks" were around 1000, but no corroborating evidence was submitted.

[52] Exhibit R2, Witness Statement of Raj Narayanan, DHB pp 439-441.

[55] Attachment RN-1 email dated 16 July 2024.

[60] Transcript PN718, PN782, PN786 - PN806 and PN818 - PN822.

[63] See Ulan Coal Mines Limited v Honeysett and Others [2010] FWAFB 7578.

[64] Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) s.389(1)(a).

[65] Yitzhak Shachar v Electrical Home Aids Pty Ltd t/a Godfreys [2018] FWC 4892 at [29].

[66] S.389(1)(b).

[67] [2011] FWA 4239 at [19].

[69] Ibid at [20] quoting Sinfield v London Transport Executive [1970] 1 CH 550 [at 558].

[70] Sayer v Melsteel Pty Ltd (2011) FWAFB 7498, [14]; Smith v Moore Paragon Australia Ltd [2002] AIRC 317, [69].

[71] Selvachandran v Peteron Plastics Pty Ltd [1995] IRCA 333; (1995) 62 IR 371, 373.

[72] Walton v Mermaid Dry Cleaners Pty Ltd [1996] IRCA 267; (1996) 142 ALR 681, 685.

[73] Crozier v Palazzo Corporation Pty Ltd (2000) 98 IR 137, 75.

[74] Gibson v Bosmac Pty Ltd [1995] IRCA 222; (1995) 60 IR 1, 7.

[75] [2012] FWAFB 5241.

1. [80] He v Lewin [2004] FCAFC 161, [58].
2. [81] Biviano v Suji Kim Collection PR915963 (AIRCFB, Ross VP, O'Callaghan SDP, Foggo C, 28 March 2002), [34] ('Biviano') citing Lockwood Security Products Pty Ltd v Sulocki and Ors PR908053 (AIRCFB, Giudice J, Lacy SDP, Blair C, 23 August 2001), [45].

[82] Biviano, [34] citing Payzu Ltd v Saunders [1919] 2 KB 581.

1. [83] S.392(3).
2. [84] S.392(4).
3. [85] S.392(5).

[86] PR787481.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer