Compensation for sacked worker despite valid dismissal for racist comments

Procedural shortcomings have cost a medium-sized employer thousands of dollars, with the Fair Work Commission (FWC) awarding a sacked employee compensation despite commending the “strong stance” the employer took on racist comments made by the worker during a toolbox meeting.

The employee had approximately two years’ service as a Ceiling Fixer with the commercial wall & ceiling subcontracting business when he was summarily dismissed in July 2025 for making “inappropriate and racially offensive remarks about Chinese labour within the industry” during a toolbox meeting in which over 20 other staff were present.

Adelaide-based Commissioner, Jessica Rogers, noted that the employee “fluctuated throughout the [FWC] proceeding between accepting that his comments could have been perceived as racist and showing remorse, to defending his comments and denying the comments were racist”. The Commissioner ultimately preferred the “consistent evidence of his colleagues”, finding the Fixer did make comments that Chinese workers were “taking our jobs”, “taking over the industry” and “taking opportunities away from apprentices”. Commissioner Rogers identified that the comments were made publicly in front of more than 20 other staff (approximately half of the employer’s South Australian workforce), including several co-workers who are Chinese, and acknowledged several of the Fixer’s colleagues considered the comments to be “unacceptable” and “severely racially motivated”, saying the conduct made them “feel quite uncomfortable”.

The Commissioner was satisfied the Fixer had made the comments as alleged, that the remarks were “racist” and, “irrespective of whether the comments were intended to offend”, determined that making such statements during a site-wide meeting in a multicultural workplace provided a valid reason for dismissal.

Unfortunately for the employer, despite endorsing the reason for dismissal, Commissioner Rogers was not willing to overlook the procedural deficiencies that preceded the Fixer’s termination, noting the decision had been made to dismiss before the Fixer was notified of the employer’s reasons. She was also critical of the fact the employee was not provided with a chance to respond to the employer’s concerns before his employment ceased.

Whilst it is available to the Commission to determine that a valid reason for dismissal can overcome procedural shortcomings (and therefore not award remedy even when an individual is found to have been unfairly dismissed), Commissioner Rogers expressed that the Fixer had been entitled to “basic procedural fairness”. The Commissioner surmised the employee would have remained employed “for no more than three weeks if procedural fairness was afforded”, to which she applied a deduction of one week given the employee’s conduct directly contributed to his dismissal, resulting in a compensation amount of $4,059.44 (gross).

Jones v Exclusive Contracting (WA) Pty Ltd [2026] FWC 253 (30 January 2026)