When AWPTI conducts an investigation we provide all the documentation including letters of allegation to our clients however I am often asked “Should we provide some sort of letter or email with the allegations?”
The answer is always YES.
Why: Recently I published an article about allegation letters, procedural fairness and why it is essential…Read more
In the case at the FWC of K v K&S Freighters Pty Ltd  FWC 1555 (24 March 2016) an employee of 30 years was dismissed over misuse of a fuel card. Commissioner Bissett found there was a valid reason for dismissal but there had been was a lack of procedural fairness.
The commission was satisfied the applicant sent freight without consignment notes, sent freight without charge and used a fuel card while he was on annual leave. Mr Kirkbright’s argument that this was how it had always been was not satisfactory.
Lack of procedural fairness
The Commissioner found that Mr Kirkbright was not advised that his conduct was an issue or were being investigated. In addition he was not provided with an opportunity to consider what was being alleged or the opportunity to respond.
The commission also considered that the HR department should have been better prepared for the meeting where Mr Kirkbright was dismissed:
“Whilst Mr K’s language in the meeting of 17 August 2015 leaves much to be desired; he displayed an appalling lack of respect for his manager and co-worker and this was the first time he had been confronted with the allegations. His reaction was not outside the realm of possibilities and should have been foreseen. The human resource manager, if she had not, should have walked the HR officer through what to do in such a circumstance.”
“The meeting should have been halted, Mr K given the allegations in writing and he should have been given an opportunity to respond either in writing or in a meeting at a future date (which could have been in a couple of days).”
The Commission found that the lack of procedural fairness and long service of the employee were both relevant.
On providing an opportunity to respond the commission said:
“In Crozier v Palazzo Corporation Pty Ltd… the full bench said: As a matter of logic procedural fairness would require that an employee be notified of a valid reason for their termination before any decision is taken to terminate their employment in order to provide them with an opportunity to respond to the reason identified…”
Mr Kirkbright sought reinstatement but it was considered inappropriate. The matter was set down for compensation to be considered.
Later in Kirkbright v K&S Freighters Pty Ltd  FWC 2743 (4 May 2016) the Commission ordered compensation in the amount of $11,624.25 plus superannuation.
As I mentioned when we conduct investigations we ensure that all the documentation is legally complaint and that procedural fairness is afforded. If you wish to conduct investigations into misconduct internally I recommend;
AWPTI – workplace investigation Sydney and through-out NSW, QLD and Victoria. Workplace training national wide
Misconduct investigations, bullying investigations, harassment investigations & sexual harassment investigations, complaint investigations, grievance investigations, discrimination investigations
Add a Comment