Dismissed for Questioning a Cultural Protocol?

A council worker was found to have been unfairly dismissed after expressing concern about the sudden introduction of an Acknowledgement of Country at a routine team meeting. The case, Shaun Turner v Darebin City Council [2025], highlights the importance of context, communication, and fair process when managing workplace disagreements involving cultural or symbolic practices.

Mr Turner, a full-time street sweeper with several years of service, attended a toolbox meeting where, for the first time, an Acknowledgement of Country was delivered. He voiced surprise at the change and shared a personal opinion about who else he believed should be recognised.

Later in the same meeting, Turner expressed frustration about rostering and licensing issues and other off the cuff comments. The Council alleged that this, taken together with his earlier comments, breached its Equal Employment Opportunity Policy and Code of Conduct. It summarily dismissed him for serious misconduct.

However, the Fair Work Commission found there was no valid reason for the dismissal. While some of Turner’s remarks may have been ill-judged or sarcastic, they were not aggressive, threatening, or abusive. Witnesses confirmed his tone was not hostile, and no one reported being offended.

The Commission also identified significant procedural flaws in how the matter was handled. Turner was not given access to witness statements, the Council failed to substantiate previous warnings, and there was no evidence he had received or understood the policies he was said to have breached.

It was concluded that while the Council may have been entitled to issue a warning or speak to Turner about his conduct, dismissing him was disproportionate. Expressing a personal opinion on workplace practices, especially when done without aggression or disruption is not, by itself, grounds for dismissal.

The decision reinforces that promoting inclusive practices does not give employers licence to penalise lawful disagreement. Respectful dissent is not the same as disrespect. Dismissals must be grounded in clear evidence, proper procedure, and a fair assessment of context.