Brett Steed v Active Crane Hire Pty Ltd

In the matter of Brett Steed against Active Crane Hire Pty Ltd, the Fair Work Commission was asked to consider whether the dismissal of Mr Steed was unfair. Mr Steed, an employee of Active Crane Hire, was dismissed for sleeping on duty, which the company considered to be gross misconduct. The crux of the dispute was whether the dismissal was justified and whether procedural fairness was observed during the dismissal process. The case was heard by the Fair Work Commission, which was tasked with determining the fairness of the dismissal and whether appropriate remedies were available.

The primary legal issues the Commission needed to address were whether Active Crane Hire had a valid reason to dismiss Mr Steed and whether the dismissal process adhered to principles of procedural fairness. Additionally, the Commission had to determine if the dismissal was harsh, unjust, or unreasonable, and if so, whether the appropriate remedy was reinstatement or compensation. The defence by Active Crane Hire centred on the severity of the misconduct, while Mr Steed argued that procedural fairness was lacking and that the dismissal was unjust.

In its decision, the Fair Work Commission concluded that while Mr Steed's conduct warranted dismissal, the absence of procedural fairness rendered the dismissal harsh, unjust, and unreasonable. The Commission found that although Active Crane Hire had a valid reason to terminate Mr Steed's employment, the manner in which the dismissal was handled was flawed. Consequently, the Commission determined that reinstatement was not a suitable remedy given the circumstances, but compensation was appropriate to address the unfairness of the dismissal. The matter was subsequently programmed to determine the quantum of compensation to be ordered.