- Published
A recent unfair dismissal case in Victoria has brought attention to how employers manage cultural conversations and employee behaviour in the workplace.
In this matter, the employee was working as a street cleaner for a local council. During a routine toolbox meeting, the council introduced an Acknowledgement of Country. According to the council, the employee interrupted the meeting and made comments such as “The Acknowledgement of Country is not necessary” and that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples “do not deserve an acknowledgment at the start of meetings.” The comments were described as being delivered in a disrespectful, sarcastic, and aggressive tone.
The council also alleged that the employee made a derogatory remark about a colleague, saying “I don’t like the guy, I hate him,” and had spoken with others about the colleague’s licences and pay.
Following these events, the employee was stood down while the council conducted an internal investigation into the alleged conduct.
What the Fair Work Commission Decided
After reviewing the circumstances, the Fair Work Commission found that the dismissal was harsh, unjust, and unreasonable.
While the comments made during the meeting were acknowledged, the Commission noted that:
- There was no evidence that other employees were offended or distressed by the comments
- The employee’s tone was not aggressive or threatening
- The employer relied on unsubstantiated claims and included inaccurate statements in the termination documentation
- The process followed did not give the employee a fair opportunity to respond to the allegations
The Commission also criticised the employer for relying on compliance training (Equal Employment Opportunity Program, EEOP) ‘Record of Learning Report’ that had online/e-course training marked as completed using the employee’s login, despite the employee being on leave at the time and not having access to a computer. It appeared that a supervisor had completed the training on their behalf, which undermined some of the concerns raised about conduct and compliance.
A decision on remedy is still to come, with the Commission considering whether reinstatement or compensation is appropriate in the circumstances.
What Employers Can Learn
This case serves as a timely reminder for employers to approach disciplinary matters with care. Especially when it involves personal views, cultural protocols, or interpersonal tensions.
Here are a few key takeaways:
- Not all disagreement is misconduct: Employees may express views that are unpopular or uncomfortable, but that alone doesn’t always justify termination.
- Process matters: Before making a decision to terminate, it’s essential to investigate thoroughly, ensure the employee has a fair chance to respond, and rely only on substantiated facts.
- Cultural protocols need context: If your business introduces new practices like Acknowledgement of Country, it’s helpful to explain the purpose behind them and create space for respectful discussions.
- Training records should be accurate: Whether it’s compliance modules or policy briefings, ensure training is genuinely completed and appropriately documented.
If you’re unsure whether your current policies, investigation procedures or disciplinary processes are up to scratch, it may be time for a review. Getting it wrong can be costly – not just financially, but for morale and reputation too.
Get in touch with our team today to discuss how we can help.
Stay up to date with all the upcoming changes via our Linkedin or sign up to our ‘Employer Update’ newsletter.
