What a Recent Fair Work Case Just Taught Us
A recent Fair Work Commission case shows just how tricky drug and alcohol policies can be, especially when mental health and prescription meds are involved.
Unicomb, a coal mine worker, was fired after testing positive for Temazepam, a prescribed medication banned on-site. Despite a signed Medical Management Plan, the Commission ruled the dismissal harsh and awarded him compensation.
💡 Key Lessons
- A valid reason doesn’t always justify dismissal
Even with a banned substance involved, the Commission considered Unicomb’s mental health, prescription use, and long service. - Policy clarity isn’t enough—understanding matters
It’s not just about having employees sign off on policies. They need to fully understand what they’re agreeing to. - Not all breaches are equal
A brief camera cover-up wasn’t the core issue. The response should match the severity of the action. - Fair process is essential
Unicomb wasn’t given a proper chance to explain himself. That lack of procedural fairness weighed heavily in the decision. - Reinstatement isn’t always the outcome
Even though the dismissal was harsh, the breakdown in trust meant compensation—not reinstatement—was the right call.
🛠️ Need Support Navigating These Issues?
We can help you stay compliant and confident with:
- Nationwide onsite drug & alcohol testing
- Expert toxicology advice
- Policy reviews and updates
- Staff training and education
📩 We provide a Policy Review service redeemable with products – book a free consultation with our team today.
Source
Fair Work Commission Case – Benjamin Unicomb v SESLS Pty Ltd [2025] FWC 186