A worker who defied his employer's safety principles in moving a locomotive without authorisation has had his unfair dismissal claim rejected, after the Fair Work Commission found he knowingly put the safety of his co-workers at risk.
FW Commissioner Bruce Williams found the employer, Hamersley Iron Pty Ltd, responded appropriately to the safety breach, and the worker's dismissal wasn't harsh, unjust or unreasonable.
In October 2012, the mainline locomotive driver was required to undertake a "propelling movement", but wasn't allowed to start until he received permission from a shunter.
The Commission heard that propelling involved "a movement with one or more locomotives pushing rather than pulling the wagons or cars". During the task, the driver couldn't see immediately in front of the lead wagon or whether there were obstacles, vehicles or people on the track.
The shunter was an employee on the ground who maintained radio contact with the driver and acted as the driver's eyes and ears.
When the shunter in the case at hand gave permission for the worker to start propelling, he noticed the wagons had already moved about 200m.
The employer conducted an investigation and found the worker had disregarded its operating rules by undertaking an unprotected propelling movement. It terminated his employment.
The worker made an unfair dismissal claim, arguing the reason for his dismissal wasn't sound, well founded or valid.
The employer told the Commission that the worker knowingly breached its shunting principles and put the safety of other people in the rail yard at "grave risk".
Commissioner Williams said the employer "has statutory obligations regarding safety within the workplace and in order to comply with those, and no doubt also for good business reasons, imposes obligations upon its employees to follow prescribed procedures in its rail operations".
"Indeed the evidence is that the majority of injuries and fatalities involving railways happen in marshalling yards in the course of shunting including propelling movements," he said.
Commissioner Williams found the worker started the propelling movement before he was instructed to, and the dismissal wasn't harsh.
"This was a dangerous act," he said.
Wardle v Hamersley Iron Pty Ltd [2013] FWC 1812 (4 April 2013)
