Bali v Able Placements Pty Ltd [1998] QIRC 97 (1998) 157 QGIG 183

182 QUEENSLAND GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL GAZETTE 13 March, I 998 J 3 March, 1998 QUEENSLAND GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL GAZETTE 183 ###################1/###############lt###############ffl#### QUEENSLAND I 'DUSTRIAI. RELATIONS COMMISSION W11rkp/11t·e Rl'/011011.1 Ao /997 s. 21� - appfo.:ation for reinstatement Pauli ne• Ball Al\[) Able Pla�cmcnis Ply Lit! /No. li/429 of /9Y7J COMl'v1ISSIO'.'JER l'ISHcK Application for rcins1a1cmcnt - Di,mi,sal - Alleged mi,condu,L and hreach or du1y of {!OOd faith - f\�c..."Clin� • -Fat:!'\imilc lo lndonG"ia - Fa<.:similc no1 on Cnmpany kut::rhcad - Person31 do,omcms nn company comput�r sy"tcm - Warning lcucr - Evidence .. No adequate cxplana1io11 - Personal rcsu,m: -· Pa:-.sworJ protC(.;tCU do{:11men1 - Per,nnal invoice - Ca....e law - lnvt::,tigation -· O[l!)<>rLunil) 10 ddcnd provided - Tru,1 broken - Co1111nc:m.:cd ,,wn bu,ine..;, in t.liret:t competition In re�pondcnt -- Emph)yee not a..:1iu:ly �ec'King rdns1atcmc111 - Rcin,1a1cmcn1 no1 appropriate •· C"mpc.:n,atinn rcfu,ed -· Ar1)lication refu,;cd - Co,ts refused. DECISION An applica11on has been likd scc:king the rcin,1mcmcnl of Pauline Ball to the po,i1i,m of Senior A."odatc of Ahk Pl:KcrncnLs Pty Ltd. M, Ball rnmmcnccJ employ111c111 t>ll I July 19% and wa, <li,mi»cd on I4 July 19'17. Two weeks pay in lieu or notice a, 1-.:r the c,>ntrucl of cmployrncni ":i, paid on tcnnina1inn. On the day of her tcnni1i:nion M, Ball 1\i1, a,1-.cJ Lo ancnd a mc<:1ing "ith 1,,0 Directors nf the Cornp,rny. Larry and Amhnny Grima. LO di,cu,., four is�UC\ of conct:rn. d..:: (i) pcr'-r»nal n;:,;umc:-. on the.� Ahl� '-..-nmpu1cr sy!--ll':111 (ii) password pm1c.:c·tc<l personal files on rhc Ahle computc•r system (iiiJ invoit:e prepared fnr her hu:-itnu1<.l's husinc.s� (iv) marketing materia l LO lndone,ia through Ahle's computer system an<l fa,,imile Al first glance 1he,e ma11e.r, when taken separately or collectively would nm :,,ccm 10 provide grounds for di<missal ror the rca,on, cited above. However. <m closer cxamin:.,1ion. ,rnd a, will he explained. the employer was nhlc to �uhstamiate it� concern..,. The background to this meeting is that nn or ;1hout I!\ June 1997 Valmai Klcasc. an employee of 1hc Company. gave Larry G1ima a copy of a fox dated 12 June I 997 ,em by Ms Flail w a Dr Ong in lnd,mcsia. fn her cvidcn"" !\.\s Klca.,c said 1ha1 ,he dcrid,,d to give the fox 10 LatTy Grima b<:G1usc i1 wa, abnormal in the ,ensc that i1 neither included rekre11<:c 10 1hc Company nor was:, Company fox header �heel u,ed. Larry Grima "as cmic.:crned after r �ading the leuer a, it appeared M, Ball was marketing. herself personally rnthcr than the Company Lo Dr Ong and seeking to personally develop business opponunitics with him. AC"cording to Larry Grima. al around the same time th< fax wa:-. giv�n tt, him. his brnthcr Amhony. was in the process or indcpcndemly iove,1igating some irrcgulari1ic.s in the Company', invoicing �y,1cm in Queensland. As pan of the investigation Anthony Grima downloaded all record, oil the Quccn,lnnd data b:isc 10 lh<! Sydney <lfficc. While s<1111c· invoking prohlcm, were tfo,covered. Anthony Grima abo found other pi:rs,ma l records <>f M, Ball including the resume. a p;tssworcl pm1cc1.e.d document :,nd the invoice. Larry Cinina alerted Anthony 10 1hc lcller Lt> Dr Ong hul ii was dcddcd not to raise tha1 mat1cr wilh M� B:111 until all inn:stigalions into <lo..-umc·otatinn on the Company's computer system had 1-k:cn rnmplctcd. Thi, would 1heo enable Lhc Company to pul i1, \Oollec.:1ivc concern, In M, Ball. On 14 July 1997 Ms Ball wa, called IO a 111ccti1ig with Larry and AnLhony Grima whcr� ,hl' was handed a lcucr detailing the lilur is,ues of concern. Allacht'd was lhc d(x:umcnw1ion rcfcm,d 1<>. The letter :tbt> advised that the Company viewed the 11,aLLCr as scriou, rni;,,;undu<:L and wcr� consickring tcrminaling her cmpl\)ymenl. The letter 10 Dr Ong wu� highligh1cd as being in dircu rompc1itinn with her employment al Ahle: while the.: oth�r rnmtcr:-. wc111 to ct,ncc.i-r,, ahoul the u� of 1hc Company 1imc and cquipm.:n1. The lc11er '"" pa1cmly t:lcar about rhc scriou,nc" with which 1hr C1>n111;my vicw.:<l 1he 111a11..:r,. '"pccially the lc11cr to Dr Ong. This is a c.isc which will larg<'iy turn rnl the ,rcdit of the \\illles�., in relation lo the explanation for 1hc ilcrn., a11d the: pn,:c,s followctl h) the ,,mploycr in thi, matter. I found An1hony Grima in panicular 1n be an imrrc,,ivc witne,, ;111d found hi, c,•i(kncc to Ix c-redihk. In ,ontrast I did 1101 find M, Ball It> h.., rdiahlc: on tx:ca,inn I found her Lo he cva,i,-c•. II follow, then lhal where a conllict of c,·iucncc arise:, hc1wccn Anthony Grima and M, lfall. the c1·idenrc of the form�r " pref�rred. I should also add lhal Larry Grima·, c,·ilk:m:c regarding 1hc mc\.!ting� wilh �1 ls Ball an<l other maucr:-. relating. lo 1x<x:1._•�-' i.:orn)h<>nuc<I 1hc..; c,·idcnc.:t! of Anthony (Jrinm. Larry Grtm�1 wa"i ;,1n ehullielll \\itne.�s hut ..:,·en alh,..,ving l\,r thi�. I g�ncralJ} tf.mnd his c,·kkm:c lo he heli<!vahle. I arn salislictl on the c,·i,lcrn:c or Larry and Amhnny Grima 1hal they in\'itcd Ms Ball 1n provide an explanation for each of the items. I am furlh'-'r sa1i,iied on their cvitkm:c that no deci,ion to terminate M, Ball had tx.-cn nHH.k' al t.hat t.irnc and exp lanations ,verc genuinely sought. /\� Larry Grim�, explained ,ubs1anlial money had been ou1laid 10 establish the i\blc Tcchninil Divi,i,)11 in which Ms Ball and hcT wllcaguc fan Day were employed. The Com1)any realised 1ha1 if :VI, Ball wa, 10 h<:. <li�mi,.,cd. M� Da)' \\\>Uld follow. f( w,L, not in their interests then to have Ms Ball depart. 1Vb Ball <.:ould not have failed to grasp th� gravity of tllc :,;ituation gh�n the rnnten1, of the kt1cr yet she provided only minimal explanation believing that lh\! d�ci,ion lo <lismi:,.:-,; her hi1d already hecn taken. Larry and Anlhtmy Grima were dissali,lictl wuh th� rc,pon.,c, provillctl hut ga,·c Ms Ball a fo 11hcr opp011uni1y 11, consider her ,i1t1ation. They adjourned the meeting 1,,r approximately one h11ur. During this time the brothers con,ulted with another h,wh�r and Dirc-clnr. Michael Grima. who was ba;cd in Sydney while M, Bnll ,poke Lo Ms Day. A<:,on1ing Lo !Ills Day's cvicknce M, Ball ha<l ac.:t:cp1cd �he ,,;,L, goin� to� Ubmi�'\t'<l an<l wa� prepared to leave with goo<l grnc.:e. 26I15_1.DOC -- 1 of 2 -- 184 QUEENSLAND GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL GAZETTE 1 3 March, 1 998 When 1h� meeting r�sum<XI I am ag,1i11 salisli<:<l 1ha1 Ms Ball "as invited 10 provide fu nh..:r explanations. When this was not done to L arrv anJ Amhony Grima·, satisfactinn. Ms Ball ""' di,rnissc.d. She rciurn;d the Compmty's pro,�ny and left the premises ,hrn1ly after. "In Coof,,v r We.,1pa,· Banking C,11poru1i"11 ( 1995) 59 IR 262 at 269 Wikox CJ. ci1cd 1he dcxi,ion of Sniilhc1, J. ,\nu Evau J. In N"rlh � 7i•le11i.rio11 c,,,7>nro1io11 l.td ( 1976J I I ALR 599. wherein a1 60� their Honours ,aid:- . A1 1h<.: first meeting Ms Ball t>rovided (>Illy th<! hare.,t explanation, or 1hc is,ucs and al 1hc S<:L'ond ,aid ,he ha<l nolhini! fu rihcr 1,, add. More: dc1ail wa, giq;n <luring the course ()f t he hearing by \\-av of witnes., slatemem and evidence from lhc wirncss 1-,._"· lnli1nna1ion wa� abo provido;:d from 1hc har tahk. Thl· Comntb'\ion vf t:our.-.c i.:an only rdy on thar given in evid,:nce. Al the 111cc1ing M., Ball ;it:k11owlcdgcd that a JJCrsonal rc,ume had bo.:cn on the .,y�tcm �inrc shl' commcnel:!:J employment. In her written �videnc:e M� Ball', furthe r explanaliun was lhat there was nothing wrong 1'1lh having he;· resume on ihe ne1work computer sys1,•1n. In her oral tcs1irnoJI\' ,he datio ratccl hy s.1y ing it \\.IS 1herc so 1hat ii could he casil v :icccs��<l for <-�ladling _to 1..:1!der...., :1nd a'.'- an e.xwnpl� providt•d 10 1.;omra...:t c�1ginccr:-.. Tht" ((lrnpany·, <.:vukncc was th:11 no 01hcr emp!,>yce hatl their rc,urnc on thL' ,y,1em cind u<li ng Ms Oay>. 1ha1 1hey were nm mtad1t:u 10 1c11dcr.-. t,111 pc-r:,onal ovcn·icv...� provided and lhat a t'-'rnplaLc n:,um\.! ,.vas im 1h� sysicm L O he f)l'l)\'idcd In l' llllll�ll.'I staff ir n:quin.:d. Wi1h regard lo lhc l'""w ord pn,1ec1cd document Ms Ball L'rnisis1en1lv l-laid al the m1..'\:ti11� and durin� her cvic.kncc that lhc doc:um�nl wa� a rc�lHll� hul 1ha1 she had forgoucn lhc pa,.,wor<.l. Her cxplanatirn1 or pulling 1hc do<:�rncnt 011 10 1hc ne1work systc111 wa, rcjcc1ed hy An1hony Grima. who prolcs,cd 10 he wmputcr fr iendly. Co1Kcrn was also cxpre,S<.:d hv the Company a, t o why M, Ball would rcqwrc a pa,swonJ pro1cc1ed 1nu,{1e 011 the sy,1,:111. The 1naucr of lhe inn>ic-c W:\s ,aid lCl he LkX'umcntalion 10 jus1ify 1ra,·d c.,pcnse, paid hy her hu,ba11d . h wa, prepared for tax purposes. She acknowledged .,�nding a fax rcg:1rding thi� matter. Jn her oral l!\'i<.lncc M:') flall expl ained she had little pcr,un;i l 1irnc IO complete the ia,k in vie" of 1hc h•:ur, she worked for Ahle Pla,cmc111,. Although 1hc Company look i"ue w11h M, 13alr., o,c or co1npany 1 ime and fo<:ili1ic� 10 prep.ire th� invoice. al lhc lx�aring 1hb n1atfL•r did nrn reccin.· mw.:h prominence. A:-. a rt.:,uh in mv co11,i,kra1io11 of lhi, appli.:rnion IiIlle a11cn1io11 ha, been paid 10 1his nwucr. -· At the meeting ,,f 1-l .luly 1997 M, Rall ac·knowlc<l�cd ,endino 1he fox lo Dr Ong. �<1 tc.111her i:xplanation was prodd�d as 10 thc""rca.,rni:-. d;�pi1c the cnn,·<'rn., being de.irly idcn1ili<:d in 1hr Co111pm1y·., letter. In her wriucn e,·i ticnce M, flail·, explanation ,,,,. Lhc klkr 10 f)r-Ong wa, thal a friend had ,uggc,tcu ,he ta�<' a p,·rs<�tal appr,�1ch Ill intrndun' hcrsclf. The reason filr the approach taken v.:" th:11 ,he bdievcd .,he ""' a,1ing wi1hin 1hc srniic or her crnplovmmt. 1he Company·, conL-cr11s 1\crc 1101 onlv 1h:H At,k Placement, or Ahle- T<!dltlit: al lwd 1101 lx:en iden1itil'd in tl;,, fcucr. t,\· k11crhcad or fa\ cov,r ,heel hut thal M, t3al! had not in fr,nned Micha�! Grin1a of h1.•r inlL'lllion,. :v1idwd Grirna \"-�•:-; lhc tk:�i�1 ,a1ed o tlicl.!r within I� Com1x'.ny dc,1li1_1g with 111arkclin� in lndo nc,ia . I at::epl hi, evidence 1ha1 h1, a,·t"·n,c, 10 lh!S rc,p�'<:I w.:,·c• � nnwn to l\h lhli and as a maucr of counc,y. if 1101 et hic,. ,It,· �hould ha,c L' o111ae1cd him 10 ,cl'k :1dvin:. "!here 1, a c,m,idtrat,fc n,·cd an<l llppol1lllli1; 10 develop 3 Tc,:hni,ally ha.,cd Re<.Tui1n1�11f Con�ul lmll·y·· "lhcr� is Ill} rcul fodlit) l(>r . rcl..' r uitiJJt;! localry hascd prnf��sional and Lt'<: h111i.:al per,onnd and there " an excelkm opponunity 1n develop .,uch .a hu!'-ini:�,·· and "I would wo.:lt-ome 1ho.: "Jlp,mu ni1y It> e,1ahli,h diahlguc ro.:gard111g what ruuld he all CXL·,lltnl vc nwrc hoth in the slh>n and long term.". \Vht.:n lhc�� fX:l"iS-i.tgc.;-.. arc read in the L'ont..:x1 of �1hser11.: c of refon.mce to Ahk Pl:1<·,,111en1 , or Able Tcdrnic·:11. it i, 0as; 1n ,ei.: why 1hc C,>mpanv were l'llllt:Crncd ahou l !he possibility of :,.1, Hall ('ngal,cin� in ·ac1i, i11cs i11in;ical lo il� i111en::-.t..... lht:ir 1..'01l1,: 1..'r n wa, L'\..1c..:-.;rhatt·tl hy ,h; di,L·ovt•rv of a rc�umc·and pa,�wonl prntL,clc<l !'ik 011 1h.; nc1 wnrk crn11pu1er. 11 111:1) have h.:cn 1hc ,:tsc 1h111 the Comp:u1 :· pu1 1,vo and t" ,> 1occthL'f and \\'ere lnoJ..ing at an an:-.\\'l.;I' of li\c. how c,·�r. in thi'.\ circun1.,L arn.:c� 1hc, decided lo ;,!i\ c �'ls l:l.111 all opportuni1y 10 cxpbin her ac·1io11 ,. Wh.:n li11i� cxplarn.11iun and nn ,-.ni�fo\_'hJry cxplamniun, \l,•..:-n.: abk to he provided the Company decided 10 dismi,,. • l !�hi ;\tl� Ht1ll_·, :1�1i1 in_" l'OJhlillH� ,,;cr�nu, mi,�nn(!Ll<.:r.1 In Col!u�lwu r I<.\/ (Ac I �Ii Q(,!( • ; </) Bougourt' C . rc1errrtl to the lollo\1 in� d"rns,i<•1 or lh!..'.: flk•:.111ing of mi:-.cl'll•l uct: ... 'It i, of a.,sistancc 10 consider 1he cxpre�,ion ·•iniscondu,t" bv rcf�ren_"c 10 .,ub_1ec1 mailer In whidt it i, rda1c-cl and 1he t:Olllcxt j� wh1�·h II appears. :he subject 1rn111cr is 1hc lennination i>y one party agan1..;1 lhc \'vJI! oi .anolhcr of a ,ominuin•-1 conlft.tct nf cmplovmc�t on ihc ground nf hrcad1 of nnc of 1he icri�s of the co111rau a;;d the concrac1 is such lo i ndicate 1ha1 l'Crtain hr�achc, of a non-serious nature. some or which would he wi1hin 1hc eonnow 1ion of n�1.1..r.:<�n<lu_c1: arl.'.' no1 n.::gar<led HS �rrnu1t..1." for lCrmin,Hinn. In such a s11uawm I( ;, n?.a,onahle lo imc,rprel lhc expression "miS<.:ondud' as referring l<> conduc:1 :-.o :-.criou:--ty in bread1 oft he contrm:t that hv th� standard� ol' fairness and ju,1irc 1hc employer should 1101 he i,;lun� lo conLinuc the cmpl <)ymen1. This ,iruation \\\1uld ari:-c if thcrL' were conduct inconsistcn1 wi1h the fulfilment llf the cxrn: s, rn· i111rlicd co11di1i11n, or ,en ice.'. I n Dal1tJ11 r IJ111w11 ·., (;old M<'dul lii.<rnils l.ul c 1974) IKLR 4:'i. a head IIOIC of lhc ,kc i,ion �talc�:- 'There i� no fegal di.!linilion of �rcJ,� mi�: onduct whkh will fil the t:in.·umst1.11ic..:c:-. of t·vcry t:a:,.('. \.Vhat b gros:-. m1,"lconduc.:t is a malh.�r of l ".1ct to he tl<!tcrmincd by 1hc indtt,11'i,1 I 1rit>unal. · .... I n this maucr rcfercnt,;:c wa� 1natlc lo :-.�riou:-. rather lhan gross mis.:ondu,·1. Tht: M;it:4uaric Dinionarr f or relc,·anl purpo"'s dt'lincs "serious" a:-. ··or grav� a:--rx.•t.·t'·. "weighty or importiml'·. The altac.:hment of the adJ _ ectivc ..:-.cri<>u:--.·· 10 ·•mi'-l� ondlH: t·· ctmnotcs a grave ,«>rm uf ini,eon<lul'I rcncfonng the t_.ontrau irrl.!parahly hrc<JChc.xl. Gn).'1:-, or x-ri ou.... mi:--condu<..·t u,uall! r<.:,uh, in ':1 mmary di,miss,tl. once appn�1ria1e procedural s1cps have hccn inllo\vc<l. fvf1x:(mc.Ju<.· t lll(1 y alM> have 1h1..· :-iamc rc�uh c�pccially gi,cn the provision; of,. 2::?6 of t he Acl and ,. )7 of the Wodp/11c,· R;/"�;011., R,,g,d111ion., 1997. I arn not s.ati:,;fied 1h1Jl nn t'on:--i(k:.rath)n or 1hc ih;ni:,. or ...:olll'.l'f'll either scp:mucly or rnllcc1i,cly !hill M, Bs1il', au i,111, wns1i1u1ed 111isrnndu,·1 or ><:ri_""'. mis..:omlu_c1 a, ddincd. In vicw of 1h, Company paying Ms Hall her 11011cc II " douhtlul whc1hcr it ultim:uc ly �on,1rucd her a<:tiotb :is ,ui.:h. I nm,, l llrn In a <:o'.isidcra1ion nf whclhcr 1h,· ,li,mb,al wa, har.,h. unjusi or Ullll':Jsonahl'-'. Sc'<: l1on 220 of lhc Ai.:1 prov ide, a rnn�e or focltu, which the Comnussion mu�( t·1,nsh.icr in <lcc:iding wl�th...·r a <li"mi��al \'-U'.'\ harsh. unju:1 or _u nrcasonabk. In ilL\: urJancc wi1h parci graph (a). M, Hall wa, n,lt1l1c<l ol the reason lor 1h� d1smi,s:,I. Clcarlv. 1hc ,li,mi,sal rdaicd 10 !vis Hall', c,md ul'I. /\n·ordingl� . tJ1c Co111mi"h,;1 111us1 ..-ons1ck:r whc1hcr M, Ha ll had hccn ,1- arncd al'>om the nind ucl ,1r whc1hcr she '"" t:ivcn ihc opp,muni1y to re,pnnd t,, lhc alkga1inn, al><•ul Jhe conduct. Mud1 "as made tlurin1'! the heari n� by M, Ball and her rqm,sentatiw L hat no v,:arnrng:-,. had hccn ,s:-i11ed in rel:.Hiun to any vf'the condu ...:t whid , wa'."> alkgcd '" have l,cc1 l of i.:onccrn. h was ,aid thal had ,udi warnino, hccn iss�1ed 1hen M, ttall would ha,·e complied. None or iho.: m.illcrs ��"' ,o ,enous as 1,, "arr: u1t di,111is,-:1I nor collcc·thdy did they do so. This wa, a ""'" in whit:h 1he Company lwd ground, to believe 1ha1 M, Ball Wl.h "t.:ting in a IJ)annL:r \.-v hich was inimical to it..., intl.!n.: .,l!-1. Tht.: mauer:-. or concern '":re 'lJUarcly pu1 10 her in wri ting wi1h 1hc cnn.,equencc, heing dearly 1de1111l1 cd. M, 13,1 11 i, an in1dli�cn1 \\0111an. In ,m ,·ic," she wuld no1 h;i\·c failc<l to hav._.. t!ra:-.petl the gravity ol 1hc siu.wli on. lndc1..'d he r evidence . dearly show, 1h:u ,h<.: did. She- wa, prm·idcd wi1h IW<> opporm11111e., 10 respond. ,p:,cc,1 "' that she coultl furt'hcr wn.,idcr her 1><>si1ion . and respond in dl'ta il. A, ,he liiiku 10 provi,k .,11 adequaic ,· xplana t ,on the C't>mpany wa, lcfl in 1he po,i1i,1n or helievine 1ha1 Ms Ball '< iH.: lions �hould he llllcrrrete,J as they had p1,.•n.:civcd. It was 1;nt a t•a..;e when:' warnin�s W\'n.: appr npria11.� ,1 :-- they were k·fl in �1 po"i1ion of hd it'\ inc their 1-'iu�i_nC\:-- wc..1, l"k.!ing tfamag,.xJ . h)r olhcr fl·ason!-- it tlid no1 :--uil lht.· Co�)f)all\ 1t, d1�111iss :\1:--. Ri1fl but in lhc drrum�lam:c" i1 \\'a., kft with 110 ,l lh..·ri'Hi tin.:. It '"'' <aid on M, Ball·, behalf lh�l the (\1111pan)' ,hould lww undcn:1ken a mor<.' thorough invcsligation ��pct.:ially in n:huion lo Lhe Jcucr 1,, Dr Ong �nd her claim, that a per,onal aprroat:11 ha, bc'Cn recommended to her. While it i, 1ruc 1ha1 1hc pc,:son who i1 is ,aid made the nxommcnda lion i� named in 1hc lcnt'r. Ms Ball did not tdl Larry and Anthnnv Grima al the mce1 in� of thi� rct\}Jllmcndation. �cir did ,.,he cxph,in tll·r hd i�f' thal ._.he was r J 3 March, 1998 QUEENSLAND GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL GAZETTE 1 85 ac1ing wi1hin her <1u1hori1y. She only acknowleJg"d .<ending lhe fax dnd no 0)1.)n..' , I am .sa1i.sfied on 1h e evidence of Larry and i\nlhony (irima 1ha1 had furtha cxplanalion hccn provided ii would have been inve.<1iga1ed. The e mployer csnnot he eXp<!cled 10 inv.,stiga1e further if lhe empl oyee dect.< nllt 10 Ji�do.se r<.'l�vanl informa1ion when a proper ,,pponunity L< given and 1hc wn.<equ.,ncc.< arc fully expl ained. l"fkcti,·ely lhe applicant i.< seeking 1he Comm1.<.<ion·.s in1uvc:111io11 t,,c:iu<t' 1he opportuni1y 10 defend wa.< nol rc,t<onahly 1akcn at lhe rd s:vanl iimc. Becau.<e \<I.< Ball did not apparemly hdieve lh.; Company wa.s 2,ncri,lly 1111ere.<1�d in her cxplanalion� she did 1101 cooperate fully. h was a ;.i.<k)' and ul1imakly fo1al call. ·rn� d1.�ci.�ion was open to the employer. An inve�1igation had ()(.'C.:UrTttl and the npponunily 10 r<!.<pond had hten provided. I I i.< lhc ca<c that I.he Ctlmpany acted on suspicion: ii did nc� prove 1ha1 ;\{-: Ball':i actitm� we.re cc.,ntt,lry or damaging to it� inkre.<.t<-. �onethele...:. ..:i1 i.< ck:ir that 1hc 1rust had been hroke n hc1we en lhe employtr and a .sen ior en1pl<>ycc. 'The con1ra,1 of cmploymem wa.s incapal>k of continua1ion. In .some c·itcunwtance$ .<uch a.s Ibis, an employer may have handled lhe .separa1i,,n ,hffcrtnily. for example. hy offoring !he opponuni1y to re.sign nr hy nego11a11ng a .<cparati,,n package. ' The employer did nol do .so here hu l decided 10 pay the no1icc in accordanc� with th<> <-'t>n lrac1. Thi.s approach h,c, 11,� aff,·c1.,d ,ny decision. All 1ha1 remain.< 10 he said on lhi.s a.s!)<!<:I 1s tha1 in.<ufficjonl has hccn pu1 10 me 10 lead me 10 condudo 1ha1 lh� dismi•.sal wa.< so har:-;h. unju"-1 or unrl!a.,onahle a..-.; t() warrant the Commission·� intc:rvi..:ntinn. I .shc>uld add 1ha1 in lhe evenl my decision 1ha1 !he dimu.,sal was urn harsh, unJUSt or unrc,s<onahk wa.< found to he wrong I would no! award any r�m..:�ty. Scoion 222(4) provides that the Comn1is!\ion mwn not m(tk� an on:h.:r io rt:instalc or t.:orn�n;,;at� unle.,<;, <..:on.((idaing all lhc cin.: un\�tanct!.'i of 1hc mallt'-r. 1t is sa1istied d1e rc,m.,dy t-irdcrcd i.s appropriaie. As 1hc cvidencs: unfolded in lhis mana certain of the Company·, fears nMl.,nali.scd. �-1.s Ball informed lhc Conun i.ssion 1ha1 within two wu:ks ,>f h.!.r disnU�...:al �h� h'1d received cwo joh offr.r.� - one in Bri�hanc and one in Penh. She advi.<ed 1hat one olfercd a package margin>tlly abow Iha! she rcccivcd while al Ahk Pldcemc.llls and lhc olhcr margina ll y hdow . ,\llh,•ueh it wa.s later claimed from !he har tahk the.so w«r" 1101 finn offer.s. 1his 1s ;1,>1 direc1 c-vid1.:nce <1nd cannot he relied on. It wa.� M.� Ball'� cvidenc hmw,w 1hat :.fler receiving lhG jot, offer.<, she co11.s1dered her .<ituation and decided .<he did 1101 wish 10 conlinuc as an employee. Shco d,;;c id<>d 10 ,�1mmcn-:c her own ht1sincs,. By 25 July 1997 M.< Ball had held di.stu.,<ion wi1h Jdn l);,1f'.\ spouse ahl,ul <...:tahli�hing a rc:-c.:ruitm�lll hu...in�s....:. /\ Yel low P.:ic1!...: adv(.!r1i...:-.!nl\."nl for th<.� hu.�incS.'- was placed on 3() July 1997 whith <1,�ld111ed rdcrc.ncc 1n \11.s Ball's name and m,ihilc phllnc coruact. On 4 J\u�u.-1 (coincide111ally 1hc ,!ale nf liling the applica1io11) Ms Ball hccamc a dir:ctor nf 1hc Company and four Jays la1cr 1h� hu.,111,:.<s wa• incorporated. It ,� apparcnl from lhis hh1ory thal hy the lime the disn\J.<.,al appliL.alion w,L� litvd \ls Ball was n(� long...:r s1..:e king ri.:instaumcnt. Shi:- had .:..::1ahlishi.:d her own Im.sine<.<. dfc�1ivdy in eompdilll>II wi1h her prcvim1s employer. Ahhouch 1hc hu.si,wss did no! he,;nme fully functional until OciC'l>er and dc svit.:.. \1.< [l,,11 1101 t1rAwing a $:tlary cv�n unl!I lh" pnx-cedings. h�r a-,1i,>11.< in ��t,1.hli�hing a com{:k::ting husirh.•.-:� den,on�trnte thrtt rein.-:tah!mem w:.t.'-' rwf a genuine pursui1 cHher al the 1im,; of fihng or .,uhscqucn1ly. It i.s 1ruc: 1h;,t 1hc 1es1 for rdnsta1.:menl ha1 changed from "impraclical>k" under th, /,,du slrial Rda1io11s Arr 19911 lcl "inappropria1.;" under 1hc Workplare Rr.lario,,.,. At'! /997. The �1a.:quarie D1c1iondl'y ddinc.s "in,if)propria1,.. 1,1 111.;an "1101 appropria1c" and "apprnpriak" ••• ..,uitahlc or tilling for a particular purpo.<G. person. occasion �1c". It i.< dear fnJm the drcu1n.,;:tan<.X::s of thi� C:d.'>�. thrtt rdn.�taten1cnt w<L'- not only inappropri,1tt! hut ii was nrs�r apprnpriatt:. Sh,luld then « remedy or comJ'<.'11.Sal ion ilc enlcrtarncd? In lhi.s ca.sc: lht' answer i.< no. :-.1.< Ball w,t, paid 1wo wc�k., no1icc. Effectively .<he w,s, p.,id I(> the ,·nd of July. By 1ha1 1imc :vt.< Ball had ma,k a wn.scious de-:i.<wn to a.sl.thlish her own husin�:�s in comp<.:1i1ion with her former employer,. Althc..,ugh h�r ,u:tions may not havt.' contra\·cncd lh.: �petific ft!quircment.,;: of thi; rc�trtiint of tradl? cl;1u�t! of her Cllntr,1ct, �ht! nor11.:thdc:-;:,,; took the consdous dt!<.:1..:.:i0n to h<,th <•.-�tahhS"h the husinc�!i and <liscon11nuc a-. an <'ntplnyec,. This W<L< hor choice cvtm 1hough al lca<I one rea.<on;J,I,;; job offer (the Brisbane ha�ed pcsi1ion) had t>een made wi1hin the two week period for which notice had heen paid. In lhe.se <:ircum<tances where a co11.Sciou., 182 155--16 decision ha-t hc�n madt: - not hy nece,��ily hut hy choic�, th�n I do nol consider compen.•allon .should he awanfod. :vis Ball a<1ivdy ctcci,kd I<> pu.r,u" a path which wa.< n<>I income producing for a period. The form�, employer .should nrn IX! .:;q.J<•c:lod 10 compcnsalC for lo.ss in thi.< in,1ance. The apphca1ion is di.smi,.•cd. Bolh panie.s re.served their fXlsi1ions on co.<L< pending 1h1s decision. Vly 1..kci:,ion in th1..;: matta wa'i that a di�mis!-al for s�riou.<: m1sconduc1 was unwarrnn1cd. In my view Ms Ball wa.< al liberty 10 ch,tlknge lhe.se. grounds. A.s I found however, dismi.,sal of \ls Ball w,s< open lo lhc cmplo}·er. For !hie rca.s(,n I am not disposed 10 eniertain a claim for co,L,. I n so doing I downplay 1hc fact lhal " remedy wa.s nol readily achicvahle. Order accordingly. G.K. HSHER, Conurn,.sioner. Appearmwe.,:- M.s L. Archie (llf L ee Archie & Associa1e.s Ply Lid) in.stnlClt'd by �-1r C. D<:am (of Hopgood & (ianim) and wilh them \1.s P. Ball. Ms I.C. A.,t>ury of lhe \<le1al Trades Industry A:-.<ocialion of Au stralia. Queen.stand Branch, Cnion nf Empk,ycrs and wi1h her :vtr L. (irima for 1he rc.<p<>ndent Operalive Dale: -:::tA Decision - Reinsta1emen1 ########################################################## -- 2 of 2 --