Office Christmas parties are the hallmark of holiday cheer in workplaces. A time to unwind, share a laugh, and toast to the successes of the year gone by. And while it’s delightful to have a few drinks on the company’s tab, the aftermath can often be a cocktail of awkwardness and, sometimes, serious repercussions.
Over recent years, the Fair Work Commission has seen its fair share of cases where inebriated employees faced dismissal following inappropriate conduct at Christmas parties. The outcomes of these cases have been mixed – some dismissals were deemed unfair, while others were upheld. What differentiates these outcomes? Let’s delve into two pivotal cases to understand better.
Two Christmas Parties: Two Different Verdicts
In the case of Keenan v Leighton Boral Amey NSW Pty Ltd, an intoxicated employee who verbally abused his superior and sexually harassed a colleague was dismissed. Despite a warning that the standard workplace conduct code applied at the party, the Commission ruled the dismissal as unfair.
The Commission contended that the employee’s behavior was “isolated” and not reflective of his usual character. They argued that it was paradoxical for the employer to expect usual conduct standards while serving unlimited free alcohol.
Contrastingly, in Vai v Aldi Stores, another employee was dismissed for misconduct at a Christmas party where the employer supplied free alcohol. This employee had thrown a glass full of beer at his colleagues. However, the dismissal was deemed fair in this case.
The Tale of Two Verdicts
The distinct verdicts for seemingly similar misconduct scenarios can appear perplexing. Some might argue that the actions of the employee in the Keenan case were more severe than those in the Vai case.
However, a deeper look uncovers that the venue of the Christmas party in the Vai case was a hotel where alcohol serving was managed, and senior staff was present for supervision. In contrast, the Keenan party lacked such control measures, with employees serving themselves alcohol and no one specifically overseeing the event.
The Precedent Conundrum
The differing outcomes of these cases leave employers in a quandary. There’s uncertainty around the fairness of dismissing an employee for misconduct during a work function. The Commission appears inclined to hold employees accountable for their actions when the employer has responsibly managed alcohol provision. Yet, if free-flowing alcohol is supplied without proper supervision, it seems employers may struggle to enforce accountability for misbehavior at work parties.
A Word to the Wise for Employers
To mitigate the risk of inappropriate behavior at your next office party, you might consider either limiting the alcohol served or not serving it at all. It’s also crucial to communicate to employees beforehand that the same behavioral expectations apply at the party as they do at work.
However, if you decide to serve alcohol, prepare for the possibility that some employees might overindulge and behave inappropriately. The key takeaway from the mentioned cases is that the higher the alcohol consumption and the more out-of-character the subsequent misconduct is, the more likely any related dismissal could be considered unfair. Be mindful of these considerations when planning your next festive office gathering.
Call Frontline Employment Defenders Now so we can help you 1300 089 353 or visit https://www.fled.com.au