Skip to main content

False Allegations Valid Reason for Dismissal

Mohammed Ayub made an application for an unfair dismissal remedy (in the case of Ayub v NSW Trains [2017] FWC 1106) in respect of the termination of his employment by NSW Trains. Mr Ayub was employed as a Customer Service Team Leader from May 1982 until his dismissal in January 2016. Mr Ayub’s employment history was quite colourful – he had received a number of sanctions for breaches of the NSW Trains Code of Conduct including fines, suspensions and final warnings.
Between December 2014 and May 2015, Mr Ayub was involved in two incidents. The first incident occurred in December 2014 when Mr Ayub elected to absent himself from work without approval or authorization. Following this incident, Mr Ayub was issued with a final warning. The second incident occurred in 19 May 2015, when Mr Ayub allegedly abused Mr Singh, a Platform Manager, over the phone. It is alleged that Mr Ayub made a number of comments to the Platform Manager including “you should cut your hair and throw your turban away” and “Punjabis are very good people but you are disgusting.” 
Mr Ayub was suspended from work while an investigation was conducted into this incident. The Disciplinary Review Panel determined that Mr Ayub’s conduct had breached a number of his obligations under the Code of Conduct, Transport Prevention and Management of Bullying and Harassment Policy, and Transport Discrimination Free Workplace Policy. The DRP recommended that Mr Ayub be suspended for two weeks without pay and required to attend counseling in Diversity and Inclusion Awareness. These incidents were not considered in detail by the FWC, as the FWC considered that these incidents were not ultimately the reasons NSW Trains relied upon to terminate Mr Ayub’s employment.
Between May 2015 and July 2015, Mr Ayub also made a number of allegations against his co-workers. These allegations ranged from co-workers have underworld associations, to corruption and allegations of bullying and harassment. Despite numerous requests, Mr Ayub did not provide information to substantiate these allegations. Following an investigation into false allegations, Mr Ayub was dismissed.
The FWC held that the false allegations made by Mr Ayub provided NSW Trains with a valid reason to terminate his employment. The FWC noted that “at no time either before the Commission proceedings, or during them, did Mr Ayub proffer the least shred of evidence” to support these allegations. Instead, Mr Ayub’s “attitude seemed to be that if someone made an allegation against him he was entitled to respond with his own allegations – however baseless.” The FWC stated, “no employer should be expected to tolerate this behaviour.” The FWC found that Mr Ayub’s dismissal was not harsh, unjust or unreasonable. Mr Ayub’s application was dismissed.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Unfair dismissal – harsh to dismiss, however reinstatement not appropriate

In the recent decision of  Paul Johnson v BHP Billiton Olympic Dam Corporation Pty Ltd  [2017] FWC 4097, Commissioner Hampton found that, although the employee had engaged in misconduct constituting a valid reason for dismissal, the dismissal was nevertheless harsh due to a number of mitigating factors. However, the Commissioner did not consider reinstatement appropriate because the employer had a rational basis for its loss of trust and confidence in the employee given the importance of the need for compliance with safety policy and the maintenance of appropriate discipline in connection with workplace health and safety matters. The employee was instead awarded compensation. The facts The employee was employed by BHPB from 24 May 2001 until his dismissal on 31 March 2017. At the time of his dismissal, the employee was a process specialist, responsible for a team of technicians looking after a flash furnace and other equipment in areas of a smelting facility at an und...
Post a Comment
Read more

Lorna Jane vindicated after two-year, $570,000 bullying case

Legal experts are urging businesses to train their staff in up-to-date social media policies this year, after activewear brand Lorna Jane won a two-year legal battle in November against a former employee who claimed the company was responsible for the psychiatric impacts of bullying at work. Former Brisbane store manager Amy Robinson filed a legal claim against Lorna Jane in 2015, seeking $570,000 in damages. The former manager claimed Lorna Jane was negligent and should be held responsible for her being bullied by a learning and development manager at the company, which led to psychiatric illness and a loss of employment and future employability. The company came out swinging against the claims early on,   posting a later-deleted Facebook post in 2015 defending itself against the claims  and saying it had been “very disappointed” by what had been reported in the media about the case. The claims included that Robinson was bullied and called a variety of names while...
Post a Comment
Read more

Stop-bullying application rejected

An employee who claimed his new team leader micromanaged and bullied him has had his stop-bullying application rejected, after the Fair Work Commission found her behaviour "abrupt" but not repeated or unreasonable. The Bunnings Warehouse employee claimed that in May 2016 the new team leader asked him about his face – the left side of his face "droops" and he is unable to move his left arm – which he found "deeply disrespectful and hurtful". A few weeks later, the team leader on two occasions confronted him and questioned why he was in different sections of the store, he told the Commission, noting he believed he was being singled out and treated differently from colleagues. He contacted the store manager to discuss the issue but was told she was too busy to speak with him, and he subsequently took two days off because of work-related stress. The employee claimed that when he returned to work, the employer suspended him but didn't tell him wh...
Post a Comment
Read more