$68,000 The Cost of Forgetting Procedural Fairness.

$68,000 The Cost of Forgetting Procedural Fairness. All of this could have been avoided by one conversation.

Case: Leoni Seychelles v Yass Valley Aged Care Limited – [2026] FWC 1804

What Could Have Been Different?

Looking at this case, there are clear lessons about what could have made the outcome better for everyone involved.

The HR person was trying to help resolve conflict. That was good instinct. But the execution missed something crucial: partnership, not punishment.

Here’s what could have changed the outcome:

Tell them what’s at stake. Before any dismissal decision, HR should have said clearly: “This situation needs to be resolved. We’re offering mediation. We need you to engage with this process, so we can resolve it. If not, we’ll need to discuss what that means for your employment.”

Listen to reluctance. When Mrs Seychelles was reluctant, that was information. It wasn’t obstinacy. It was fear. A Partnership Not Punishment™ approach would have asked: “Why are you hesitant? What do you need to feel safe doing this? How can we support you?”

Check before you decide. Before dismissing someone, check the facts. Verify. Communicate. Don’t decide in a vacuum.

Give them a real chance to respond. Before any dismissal letter, have a conversation. Tell them what you’re considering. Listen to their side. Give them the chance to say “Actually, I am doing this” (which is exactly what Mrs Seychelles would have said!).

This isn’t soft management. It’s fair management. It protects everyone.

Was There More Going On?

Looking at the pattern of decisions made, something else emerges.

The investigation cleared the other party of bullying. HR accepted that finding. Then pushed Mrs Seychelles to do mediation. When Mrs Seychelles was reluctant (understandably, given her stress and the trauma of workplace conflict), HR didn’t investigate why. When Mrs Seychelles seemed to hesitate, HR dismissed her.

Here’s what troubles me: HR may have seen Mrs Seychelles as “the difficult one who won’t cooperate” rather than as “an employee dealing with bullying and personal crisis (her husband had just had a serious accident).” So, perhaps having a more compassionate, understanding and working together approach would have had a better result. That’s what the Partnership Not Punishment™ approach does.

This is a crucial HR lesson: When someone is reluctant about mediation after a bullying complaint, don’t push harder. Ask why. Listen. Understand that mediation may not be appropriate when there’s a power imbalance or fear involved. And never ever dismiss someone for not “cooperating” with a process designed to help them.

Mrs Seychelles had 39 years of kitchen experience. She was a Senior Cook at an aged care facility in Yass, NSW. She did her job well, showed up every day, and put her heart into her work.

Then one day, she was fired at 3:46 pm. While she was in a mediation meeting.

Here’s What Happened

There was conflict between Mrs Seychelles and her Kitchen Manager. The aged care facility did the right thing; they hired an external investigator to look into it. The investigator recommended mediation to help resolve the conflict.

The facility arranged mediation through Pax People, conflict resolution experts. They encouraged Mrs Seychelles to participate. She was reluctant at first (understandably; workplace conflict is stressful). But by late August, she agreed.

One critical point here: When you engage a mediator or conflict resolution expert, make sure there’s clear communication about participation status. The content stays confidential. But HR should know: “Is the employee participating or not?” This should be confirmed upfront. A simple email from the mediator saying “Client confirmed participation, meeting scheduled for [date]” would have changed everything.

On 27 August 2025, Mrs Seychelles joined a confidential pre-mediation meeting with the facilitator via Zoom at 3:00 pm.

At 3:46 pm that same afternoon, while she was still in the meeting, she received an email. The facility had dismissed her.

The reason given? She had refused to comply with a direction to engage in mediation.

Except she hadn’t refused. She was literally doing it right then.

How Did This Happen?

This is where the system broke down.

When Pax People was engaged, there should have been clear communication protocols: “We’ll keep the content confidential. But we will confirm participation status back to HR.”

That didn’t happen.

So, HR didn’t know Mrs Seychelles had agreed. HR thought she was refusing. HR made a dismissal decision based on that misunderstanding. And sent a dismissal letter without warning.

That afternoon, Mrs Seychelles called HR and said: “I just finished the mediation meeting.”

HR realised immediately the dismissal was wrong.

HR did nothing. Didn’t apologise. Didn’t withdraw it. Just let it stand.

What Did the Fair Work Commission Say?

The Fair Work Commission found the dismissal was unfair for one simple reason; procedural fairness.

Here’s what procedural fairness means in plain English:

Before you dismiss someone, you must:

Tell them what the problem is
Show them the evidence or information
Give them a real chance to respond and explain
Listen to what they say
Evaluate it for reasonableness and whether it can be salvaged or turned around
Then and only then make your decision

The facility skipped all of those steps. They dismissed Mrs Seychelles without ever telling her it might happen. They never gave her a chance to say; “Actually, I am doing the mediation.” They made the decision in a vacuum.

The Cost

Fair Work Commission ordered the aged care facility to pay Mrs Seychelles $68,000 in compensation.

But the real cost was deeper. Mrs Seychelles lost her job after years of loyal service. She relocated her family from Canberra to Yass for this job. Now she can’t find work in a small regional town. She’s dealing with anxiety and stress. Her health has suffered.

All of this could have been prevented with one conversation.

The Lesson

You don’t need to be an expert to get procedural fairness right. You just need to be fair and follow a procedure that allows for all steps to be taken as well as communicate clearly.

Before any dismissal, any performance decision, any serious conversation; tell the person what’s happening. Listen to their side. Give them a real chance to respond. Consider what they say. THEN decide.

This isn’t soft management. It’s not letting people off easy. It’s fair management.

When you skip these steps, you don’t just risk unfair dismissal claims. You risk $68,000+ payouts. You lose good employees. You damage your reputation.

And honestly, you know it’s the right thing to do anyway.

What Does This Look Like in Practice?

DON’T: “You’re fired because you refused mediation.”

DO: “We’re concerned you haven’t engaged in the mediation process we’ve arranged. We think it’s important to help resolve this conflict. Can we meet and talk about where you’re at with this? What’s holding you back? How can we support you?”

Direct. Fair. Respectful. Listening.

That’s Partnership Not Punishment™ in action.

Is Your Business Doing This?

Most businesses have 5 to 10 compliance gaps they don’t even know about. Each one is a potential Fair Work claim waiting to happen.

One unfair dismissal claim costs $15,000 to $50,000+ in legal fees and settlements. Add poor morale, lost productivity, and damaged reputation; the real cost is much higher.

My Australian Employment Law HR Audit ($997) identifies your compliance gaps, including whether your dismissal procedures meet procedural fairness standards. You get plain-English recommendations and peace of mind.

Are you confident your business is following procedural fairness in your performance management and dismissal decisions?

Book your Australian Employment Law HR Audit and find out before a $68,000 mistake finds you.

Or book a free 15-minute discovery call to discuss your biggest HR and employment law risks.

$68,000 The Cost of Forgetting Procedural Fairness.