Saeid Khayam (right) with barrister Mark Gibian
Brave teacher sets new legal precedent Teachers and other employees on fixed term contracts, now have the right to apply for an unfair dismissal determination from the industrial umpire, thanks to the actions of one brave English college teacher, supported by his Union.
Saied Khayam was employed as an English language teacher by Navitas English on a contract basis. In 2015–16, during a dispute between the IEUA NSW/ACT Branch and Navitas, Khayam actively promoted the union cause with colleagues. When his contract expired in June 2016 it was not renewed, despite Khayam having worked at Navitas for 12 years. In previous years his contract had been renewed annually without question. Khayam was convinced he was not offered further employment due to his union activities and asked the IEUA NSW/ACT to support him in an unfair dismissal case at the Fair Work Commission (FWC). On behalf of Khayam, the Union made an unfair dismissal application with the FWC. An essential requirement for running an unfair dismissal is that the termination has to be at the initiative of the employer. No right In May 2017 the matter was heard before a FWC Commissioner, who found that there was no right to argue
18|independent education|issue 2|Vol 48|2018
for unfair dismissal. The Commissioner’s decision was based on a decision of the commission’s predecessor from 2006 in a case referred to as Department of Justice v Lunn (Lunn). In Lunn, it was decided that if an outer limits contract employee is terminated on the last day of the period specified in the contract, then the termination is not at the initiative of the employer and the employee cannot seek a remedy for unfair dismissal. Appeal Khayam, again with the assistance of the Union, appealed the decision to a Full Bench of FWC. The Union argued in lengthy submissions that Lunn no longer should be applied for a number of reasons involving complex arguments including that the law had changed with the introduction of the Fair Work Act in 2009. On behalf of Khayam, the Union argued that Navitas made a deliberate and considered decision to end the employment, while the employer continued to maintain that