In an important ruling on the weight HR practitioners should accord to medical certificates, a court has today reinstated a weather observer who was dismissed for planning to appear on a reality television program while absent on sick leave for anxiety and traumatic stress.
The Bureau of Meteorology dismissed its relief weather observer for providing unacceptable medical evidence for taking sick leave in July last year, when he planned to appear as a contestant on the Seven Network's reality television program Beauty and the Geek.
The BoM relied on a medical assessment conducted by an Australian Government medical officer a month prior to his dismissal, which found that he was medically fit to work.
But the employee claimed he suffered from recurring stress-related symptoms, exacerbated by the BoM relocating him from his home in Victoria to an office in Brisbane, away from his family and medical support; and by assigning him administrative rather than field-work tasks.
The employee admitted that he lied in the show's participation declaration when he denied having a history of mental health issues.
The employee's Ballarat-based doctor certified that while the employee was unfit for work, he was healthy enough to participate in the show, because he believed the employee's adjustment disorder was triggered by the changes BoM had made to his work location and duties.
The doctor, who had been treating the observer since he was a child, denied knowledge of the mandatory eight-week lockdown when he said he thought the show might be "beneficial" for his patient's mental wellbeing.
Federal Magistrate Dominica Whelan distinguished the case from the unique facts in Anderson v Crown Melbourne, warning that the 2008 case did not "represent judicial carte blanche for employers to ignore medical certificates issued by registered medical practitioners".
Federal Magistrate Philip Burchardt in Anderson upheld the dismissal of a Crown Casino employee and "football fanatic" who obtained a medical certificate to take time off work to attend an Essendon v West Coast match in Perth (see Related Article).
Federal Magistrate Whelan said there was no evidence that the BoM employee's doctor was dishonest; he had treated the employee for nineteen years and had provided sufficient evidence to explain why he thought participation on Beauty and the Geek might benefit his patient.
The magistrate was also impressed with the level of detail the doctor invested into his medical assessments, including steps to address his recurring condition, and criticised the BoM for rejecting the doctor's findings.
She also found the employee lacked the necessary "sophistication" to manipulate his doctor, commenting that he was "somewhat young for his age", and she said she could see why (without providing further details) the employee was a suitable candidate for Beauty and the Geek.
Federal Magistrate Whelan accepted that the BoM had taken adverse action against the employee and ordered it to reinstate him and compensate him for his loss, with the amount to be determined at a later hearing.
Decision underlines dangers of HR practitioners judging medical fitness
The lawyer who represented the weather observer says the case demonstrates the importance of HR practitioners deferring to medical expertise in judging an employee's capacity to carry out their duties.Kelly Workplace Lawyers principal Joseph Kelly told Workplace Express that the BoM had accepted the interpretation of medical evidence by HR practitioners to assess the employee's medical fitness.
Significantly, the government department failed to lead any medical witnesses in support of its position, including that of the Australian Government medical officer who had written the report BoM relied on a month before the dismissal.
"At its simplest this is a decision about who is best to assess the medical condition of an employee – their doctor or their HR manager. It also makes clear that employees may be unfit for their normal employment duties, but perfectly fine for other activities - such is the nature of mental illness.
"If HR managers are unsure whether an employee is fit for work or not, the only avenue available to them is to seek further contemporaneous medical advice," Kelly said.
Workplace Express understands the employee was a contestant on the show and while he was eliminated early, he was a popular choice in the "makeover" segment.