Can you dismiss a worker for taking unapproved leave?

Worker argues he had to take care of mother

Can you dismiss a worker for taking unapproved leave?

The Fair Work Commission (FWC) recently dealt with a worker’s claim that he was unfairly dismissed after his employer failed to notify him of his dismissal.

However, the employer argued that it had several reasons to dismiss the worker, including extended unapproved leave and underperformance, among others.

The worker, Craig Perkins, filed an application before the FWC alleging unfair dismissal by iFab Steel Pty, his former employer.

Perkins began his employment on February 17, 2023, and was dismissed by iFab Steel Pty Ltd on November 6, 2023.

iFab Steel Pty Ltd cited several reasons for Perkins' dismissal, including missed deadlines, unsatisfactory work, negative client feedback, and a disregard for management's directions. Instances of tardiness and non-attendance were also highlighted, contributing to the decision to terminate his employment.

Background of the case

From late May to Early June 2023, the employer said that Perkins did not report to work during this period without providing an explanation. He later attributed his absence to his mother's health issues.

Around June 2023, while working for a project in Sydney, there were allegations of defective work, prolonged absences, and additional costs incurred by iFab Steel Pty Ltd.

From Late August to mid-September 2023, Perkins was absent from work for four weeks without prior notice, causing significant disruptions and costs to the company.

There was also an alleged project that ran over its deadline due to Perkins' actions, resulting in damage to property and client dissatisfaction.

Several disagreements between the parties arose regarding Perkins' conduct and performance.

Such issues included poor workmanship and overspray during a project, though Perkins claimed he followed instructions. Perkins further alleged that he worked long hours without breaks and was unfairly treated by management.

Termination of work

On November 6, 2023, Perkins returned to work only to be informed by the project manager that there would be no further work offered to him.

iFab Steel Pty Ltd cited ongoing issues and recent work failures as reasons for termination, denying Perkins' request for a separation certificate.

The worker submitted that there was no valid reason for his dismissal and that his refusal to work additional hours on 2 November 2023 was due to fatigue.

He also said that there was no notification of any valid reason for his dismissal before the decision to terminate was made, and he was not provided with an appropriate opportunity to respond to any reason for the dismissal.

Meanwhile, the employer submitted the reason for Perkins’ dismissal was the “numerous occasions of missed deadlines, unsatisfactory work, negative feedback from clients and disregard of direction from management.”

Valid reason to dismiss

In its decision, the FWC found that Perkins “had been warned about his extended periods of unapproved absences,” adding that the employer “had given [him] opportunities to address his performance.”

“It is also apparent from the evidence supplied that Perkins was regularly late to work,” it added. “[He] took extended periods of unapproved leave in his relatively short period of employment, and whilst [his] explanation for at least one period of extended leave concerning his taking on a caring role, the fact is he did not follow appropriate steps to apply for and have these periods of leave approved.”

“This issue of itself would have provided [the employer] a valid reason for dismissal at the relevant times of these periods of unexplained leave. In any event, it is to the [employer’s] credit that it agreed to allow the employment relationship to continue despite this conduct on the part of the worker,” the FWC said.

“In addition to this, there is clear evidence that Perkins was taking a considerably longer period of time to complete work [than] it would appear others would take to perform the same work, and this was causing the [employer] to incur significant additional cost,” it said.

Thus, the FWC said the employer had valid grounds to terminate the worker’s employment.

Recent articles & video

From full-time to casual: 'Struggling' employer converts worker's role without consent

Woolworths fined $1.2-million for underpaying long service leave of employees

Queensland resolves dispute on long service leave entitlements

Ai Group renews call for 'cautions, moderate' approach to wage hike

Most Read Articles

Queensland resolves dispute on long service leave entitlements

'Confused' worker tries to clarify ‘unclear’ dismissal date

CFMEU, official get higher penalties after unlawful conduct appeal