Vi-Dan Thach v SA Toyo Paper Products Pty Ltd [1995] IRCA 256

mination of employment of the Applicant as asserted by the Respondent. There is no dispute that the afternoon shift was in fact abolished and in the absence of any significant evidence to the contrary that establishes that production must have decreased. That some employees have performed overtime since the abolition of the afternoon shift does not alter that. The employer maintained it had the right to select employees that best fitted the tasks at hand. In view of the fact that of the two other employees who performed some packing duties one was mainly employed as a Storeman Forklift Driver and the other was employed as a Packer and Cleaner, it appears to be that the employer had a valid reason for choosing Mr Thach rather than either of those two employees. The Applicant's counsel argued that the employment of a casual and employment of a "Section B" employee in early 1995 to replace a worker who had been involved in a motor vehicle accident established that the employer was not bona fide in making the Applicant's position redundant however those two events were not anticipated by the company at the time of the termination of this Applicant's employment. I am satisfied for these reasons that the Respondent had a valid reason for the termination of the Applicant's employment. No evidence was tendered that satisfies me that the employment of the Applicant was terminated harshly unjustly or unreasonably in view of the fact that he was given the opportunity to work out his notice, all award obligations were met and that he was offered work if there was an increase in production at a later date. For these reasons the Application is dismissed. I certify that this and the preceding two pages are a true copy of the reasons for my judgment. DATE OF HEARING : 24 and 25 May 1995 FOR THE APPLICANT : Ms I Condon FOR THE RESPONDENT : Mr A Chismeysa