The Case

Urso v QF Cabin Crew Australia Pty Limited T/A QCCA (2018)

Mr Urso was employed as a flight attendant by QF Cabin Crew Australia Pty Ltd (QCCA). Mr Urso was rostered on a seven-day flight pattern flying from Brisbane to Los Angeles to New York to Los Angeles and then Back to Brisbane. However, Mr Urso failed to attend for work following the stopover in New York.

Mr Urso visited a bar with a work colleague where he claimed he had consumed five drinks. He passed out and was taken to hospital. When tested his blood alcohol concentration was 0.205%.

Mr Urso was discharged from hospital at 6am and was due in for work at 5.10pm but called in sick saying he was unwell and could not attend. Mr Urso later flew as a passenger back to Brisbane. Mr Urso was then stood down on pay pending an investigation into his conduct and was provided with an opportunity to respond to the allegations.

The investigation found that Mr Urso had consumed in excess of five standard drinks and breached the QCCA’s policies, including:

• not resting between flights to enable him to work on the next flight;
• failing to be ready, willing and able to perform work on his next flight;
• engaging in activity that increased his risk of illness which prevented him from performing his work; and
• consuming excessive alcohol while on his break between flights.

Mr Urso was asked to provide reasons why his employment should not be terminated.

Mr Urso claimed his drinks had been spiked and that the bartender had not measured the shots properly. He expressed remorse and said his said his behaviour was not intentional.

QCCA terminated Mr Urso’s employment. Mr Urso made an unfair dismissal application.

The Verdict

The Fair Work Commission (FWC) held the termination was not unfair and dismissed the application.

Two medical experts provided evidence that Mr Urso’s level of intoxication meant he had consumed around 14 standard drinks in 1.5 hours.

The FWC found:

• Mr Urso had consumed an excessive amount of alcohol;
• Mr Urso was responsible for ascertaining the content and quality of the drinks he consumed;
• there was no evidence of drink spiking; and
• Mr Urso put himself in a position which caused him to fail to attend for duty and this was caused by his excessive alcohol consumption.

The Lessons

This case shows that employees are accountable for their own conduct. When off duty conduct affects an employee’s work or ability to work they can be disciplined and in certain circumstances, such as the facts of this case, their employment terminated.