Haslam v SAE Institute Pty Limited [2025] FWC 3827
KEY TAKEAWAYS
A recent unfair dismissal decision of the Fair Work Commission highlights:
- the importance for investigators to maintain independence and to resist pressure to change findings without reasonable justification based on the evidence (which may include new evidence)
- that taking a person-centred approach to an investigation does not mean favouring the complainant’s preferences – procedural fairness for all participants remains paramount
- the importance of maintaining clear separation between the role of investigator and decision-maker to ensure fairness and impartiality.
The case
In August 2025, an associate lecturer employed at a NSW private tertiary education institution was dismissed after an investigation substantiated allegations of inappropriate conduct towards a student. The conduct took the form of inappropriately touching a student’s hair without consent and telling the student they looked ‘cute’ combined with physical contact.
The associate lecturer, who had an ‘exemplary’ six-year employment record with no prior warnings, filed an unfair dismissal application in the FWC. His claim included that the institution’s investigation and decision were ‘not impartial or unbiased’ contravening the relevant enterprise agreement.
Investigation allegedly ‘not impartial’
The associate lecturer alleged that the investigator changed their initial findings and recommendations due to pressure from the student’s mother and the decision-maker, who directed a ‘victim-centric approach’ be taken to the investigation.
After the initial investigation report was delivered, the decision-maker directed the matter be reopened and this led to the investigator changing a finding from unsubstantiated to substantiated in circumstances where the Commission found there was ‘no proper or fair basis’ to do so and that the change was made ‘on the basis of strong encouragement’ from the decision-maker.
FWC findings
While the Commission found there was evidence before it of a valid reason for dismissal, it held that the dismissal was unfair because:
- the institution did not comply with its obligation to act fairly and impartially in relation to its disciplinary procedures, changing a finding without a fair or proper basis and placing ‘excessive reliance on [the student’s] wish to continue studying … and paid very little attention to [the associate lecturer’s] interest in remaining employed’
- the financial and personal impact on the lecturer was disproportionate to the gravity of his misconduct.
The Commission ordered the lecturer be reinstated to his former position (with lost remuneration paid) noting that the institution had the capacity to implement ‘sensible and appropriate measures’ to ensure the student felt safe on campus.
Key learnings for investigators and employers
This case highlights critical issues regarding the integrity of workplace investigations.
Investigator independence: Investigators must not be influenced by decision-makers in relation to findings or recommendations. The investigation process must remain independent and impartial.
Avoid predetermined outcomes: Asking an investigator to revise their findings to support a particular outcome undermines a fair investigation process.
Person-centred does not mean complainant-focused: While complainant welfare is important, investigations must be impartial and maintain procedural fairness for all parties.
Investigator ethics
This decision underscores the fundamental ethical obligations on workplace investigators (both in-house, and external) to act impartially, fairly and with integrity.
Investigation findings should not be changed without a fair and proper basis to do so (such as new evidence emerging) — and not because a decision-maker is dissatisfied with the outcome. Investigators may consider withdrawing from an investigation if they feel compromised and, if they do so, investigators should document their concerns.
Maintaining professional independence protects both the investigator’s reputation and ensures subsequent employment decisions are defensible.
More information
Q Workplace Solutions’ national team of legally qualified and licensed investigators is trusted by public and private organisations, including ASX-listed companies and government agencies, to investigate complex and often highly sensitive allegations of employee wrongdoing. They also undertake workplace reviews, and provide training, coaching and external advisory support to internal investigators. Visit our website for more information or to contact us.
Upcoming training
Engaging skilled investigators is a key way to safeguard the quality and integrity of the investigation process.  View our upcoming online investigations training workshops at Q Workplace Training.
