Fired for Protecting Your Privacy: Is my Employer Entitled to my Medical Information?
How much of your medical information is your employer really entitled to? That question was central in a recent unfair dismissal matter before the Fair Work Commission, serving as a reminder for employees on personal or sick leave, particularly when employers start pushing for deeper access to medical records. At the heart of the case was an employee who felt that the line had been crossed. And while the dismissal was ultimately upheld under the Small Business Fair Dismissal Code, the outcome raises serious concerns about consent, pressure, and power imbalances at work.
Mr Moers, had taken extended personal leave following workplace stress, including concerns he raised about management conduct. He submitted medical certificates covering his absence, but they didn’t contain detailed explanations. In response, the employer requested that he provide written consent allowing limited communication with his GP—specifically about his capacity to safely return to work. Moers refused. He was uncomfortable giving written authorisation that, in his view, risked exposing personal information beyond what was necessary. He didn’t believe the request was reasonable. Instead of proposing alternatives, he chose not to engage further. The employer then issued a warning, followed by further deadlines. When no consent form was received, the company terminated his employment for serious misconduct, citing a failure to comply with a lawful and reasonable direction.
For employees, it’s important to understand that sensitive health information can’t be shared without consent. What made the situation more complex in this case was that the employment contract contained clauses requiring the employee to participate in medical assessments if there were questions about fitness for duty. The Commission ultimately found that the request—limited to current and future work capacity—was permitted under the contract. It concluded that the employer’s direction was lawful and reasonable because of that pre-agreed condition. But this finding highlights a broader issue: many employees sign these contracts without fully understanding how their rights to medical privacy might be constrained once problems arise. The Commission acknowledged that Mr Moers had genuine concerns. He feared that the employer’s request might open the door to unrestricted access to his GP. While the letter was confined to fitness-for-work matters, his interpretation and discomfort were not unreasonable. The reality is that for many workers, saying “no” to an employer, especially in relation to personal medical details, can feel like an impossible choice.
In this case, Moers didn’t refuse out of defiance. He was concerned about protecting sensitive health information. He also believed his existing medical certificates should have been enough. But when employers demand more, and the legal framework permits it under a signed contract, employees can find themselves in vulnerable territory. There were signs that workplace stress and potential misconduct played a role in Moers’ decision to step away from work. He had raised serious concerns about management behaviour, including an allegation that he was told to drink alcohol to cope with stress. He connected that experience to the need for leave. The Commission found no evidence that the dismissal was retaliatory or that it was connected to illness, injury, or disability. But from an employee’s perspective, it’s difficult not to feel that the broader context—one involving mental health, stress, and internal complaints—was sidelined.
Key Takeaways for Employees
If you’re on personal leave and your employer asks for additional medical information, here are some key things to keep in mind:
You have a right to privacy—but contracts matter. If your agreement includes terms about participating in medical assessments, you may be legally bound to cooperate in a limited way.
Employers must stay within scope. They’re not entitled to your full medical history. Any request must be tied directly to your ability to safely do your job.
You’re allowed to ask questions. If you're unsure about the nature of a request, or you’re worried about overreach, you can ask for clarification or suggest an alternative method (like a written statement from your GP).
Get advice early. Silence can be misinterpreted. If you're feeling overwhelmed or uncertain, reach out for professional support before things escalate.
This case doesn’t set a new precedent—but it does shine a light on the increasingly blurred boundary between workplace policy and personal privacy. Moers was dismissed not because of misconduct in the traditional sense, but because he stood firm in his belief that his private health information should remain private. At Workplace Justice, we understand how stressful these situations can be. If your employer is demanding medical details you’re not comfortable sharing, or if you’re under pressure during sick leave, we’re here to help. Because standing up for your rights shouldn't cost you your job.
