Mine fitter's second safety lapse sinks unfair dismissal claim

A maintenance fitter at Roy Hill was sacked after a second workplace safety incident, just months after being let off with a warning for a similar breach. The Fair Work Commission found his dismissal was not unfair.

Mr Jeffray Fox worked as a Maintainer Fitter for Roy Hill Holdings. In January 2025 he caused an oil spill after failing to properly isolate a valve or complete a risk assessment before starting a job. Rather than sack him, the company issued a first and final written warning and put him on a performance improvement plan. He completed retraining and, for a time, his supervisors were satisfied with his work.

Three months later, while still on that improvement plan, Mr Fox was assigned to replace a pump on a sprinkler system. He correctly isolated the electrical power but did not isolate two mechanical valves controlling water flow, and had not signed onto the job's risk assessment document. When his supervisor questioned him, Mr Fox was evasive. He was stood down and, after a lengthy written back and forth in which he disputed the need for the isolation and accused his supervisor of harassment, Roy Hill terminated his employment.

What the Commission decided

Commissioner Lim found there was a valid reason for the dismissal, but the reasoning was not straightforward. The Commissioner accepted that failing to sign onto the risk assessment document was not, on its own, enough to justify sacking Mr Fox.

What tipped the balance was the pattern: Mr Fox had been through a serious incident, retrained, and was actively being monitored under a performance plan when the second breach happened only a few months later. He had even acknowledged in his own correspondence that his team had been focused on completing risk assessments

What this means

This case is a reminder that a single incident may not justify dismissal, but a repeated safety breach while already on a performance improvement plan can tip the scales in the employer's favour. Workers who successfully challenge such terminations typically do so through an unfair dismissal claim, which examines whether the employer had a valid reason and followed a fair process before sacking the employee.