Dismissed for disobedience: From refusing LGBT training to donning a Trump cap
Australian employees can be fairly dismissed for disobedience if they have refused to comply with a lawful and reasonable direction. This obligation is at the heart of an employment contract, allowing an employer to exert a level of control over an employee.
In this article, we look at four recent cases of employees from around the world who were fired for disobedience. This includes a Christian who refused to attend mandatory LGBTQ training. Further a US worker who refused to take off his Donald Trump cap. We also look at the story of an Australian lawyer who was fired for refusing to lie and a recent Fair Work Commission case involving a worker who threatened to use a firearm.
Devout Christian dismissed for disobeying order to attend LGBTQ training
In March 2023, a US worker who was fired for refusing to attend mandatory LGBTQ training made global headlines. Raymond Zdunski worked as an account clerk for the Erie 2-Chautauqua-Cattaraugus Board of Cooperative Educational Services in New York. He had taken the Board to court over his dismissal, arguing that the training “aimed at changing his religious beliefs about gender and sexuality.”
Mr Zdunski filed the suit on the grounds of “unlawful religious discrimination.” He had requested exemption from the training, which was denied by the Board. After disobeying the directive to attend training, Mr Zdunski requested that his manager hold mandatory training on the persecution of Christians.
Christian loses bid for $10M in damages
Mr Zdunski claimed that the training went against his religious principles as a devout Christian. He had been employed by the Board for around seven years and was fired in 2018. Mr Zdunski was seeking $10 million in damages, backpay and reinstatement.
His legal clam, however, was quashed by a New York court in March 2023, which backed the Board in its dismissal of Mr Zdunski. The Board had argued that he had repeatedly refused to comply with the training. Which it claimed was designed to create a safer environment for students and staff. It maintained that Mr Zdunski was not fired for his relgious beliefs, but for his repeated disobedience with regard to the training.
“It just seems like the country is against the Christian way of life, and it’s for everything else,” Zdunski told media following the decision. “We’re not allowed to practice our way of life but anyone else can, it seems.” His lawyer also slammed the decision, stating that he was fired “for no other reason than his refusal to be indoctrinated with anti-biblical teaching.”
Shipyard worker fired for refusing to remove Trump cap
In September 2020, a shipyard worker in the US state of Virginia made headlines after he was dismissed for disobedience. The worker, 55-year-old Dave Sunderland, had worked for eight years at Newport News Shipbuilding, the sole manufacturer of US Navy aircraft carriers.
He explained to a local newspaper that he typically wore his Trump hat while walking from his car to his worksite and occasionally during pre-shift safety meetings. However, Mr Sunderland caught his employer’s ire when he refused to obey an order to remove his hat before a safety meeting. With the US election months away at the time, he had been warned that wearing the cap violated workplace rules around “campaigning” on the job. And that if he refused to take it off, he would be dismissed.
Mr Sunderland did not want to remove his cap, so he was escorted off the worksite by security and subsequently dismissed. In an interview with local media, he denied that he was campaigning for Donald Trump at work.
“I wore a ball cap. I wasn’t passing out bumper stickers. I wasn’t asking people to vote. I wasn’t doing anything, except for wearing a ball cap going to work,”
Mr Sunderland stated
Mr Sunderland claimed he had worn Trump hats to work for several years without issue. This is despite the company’s strict policies against political campaigning and attire. In response to the incident, a company spokesperson said that “if an employee refuses to comply with the policy, it is treated as insubordination and discipline is administered accordingly.”
“Make America A Sh*thole. Vote Democrat.”
Mr Sunderland’s experience with political paraphernalia at the shipyard was not entirely unprecedented. In a prior incident, he had been asked to remove a hat that read “Make America A Sh*thole. Vote Democrat.” He complied with the request at that time.
Sunderland mentioned witnessing colleagues wearing attire supporting Democratic candidates without repercussions. He felt that his dismissal was a violation of his First Amendment rights. “I don’t have a problem with anything anybody wears,” Mr Sunderland said. “That’s their First Amendment right to express themselves, you know, freedom of expression. That’s their right. But when I wore something, they came down on me.”
Harry Triguboff lawyer who refused to lie fired for disobedience
Turning to Australia, in May 2020 a lawyer for billionaire property developer Harry Triguboff launched a lawsuit against his former boss following his dismissal. Former senior legal adviser at Mr Triguboff’s Meriton Property Services Joseph Callaghan argued that he had been dismissed for refusing to lie.
Mr Callaghan sought $556,500 in compensation, costs and penalties. He alleged that his $350,000-per-year employment was abruptly terminated in February 2020. This was after he declined to include false information in an affidavit at Mr Triguboff’s behest. In response to his suit, Meriton Property Services stated Mr Callaghan’s claims were “completely rejected and false.”
“You write it my way or you can f**k off”
Mr Callaghan claimed that in February 2023 Mr Triguboff expressed dissatisfaction with an affidavit related to a development application before Sydney Council. The building magnate allegedly wanted the affidavit to state that the council had taken three years to approve one of Meriton’s buildings.
Mr Callaghan however refused to accede to his boss’ demands. In turn stating “I’m a solicitor and can’t include something in an affidavit which I know isn’t true”. In response, Mr Triguboff allegedly retorted, “Listen my friend, you write it my way or you can f**k off.”
When Mr Callaghan reiterated that the council did not take three years to approve the building, Mr Triguboff allegedly said, “F**k you. I pay you to win cases do you understand? You are dealing with a dog up there [pointing to the City of Sydney’s Town Hall].”
Mr Callaghan remained steadfast in his ethical stance, refusing to lie. That was when Mr Triguboff allegedly said, “Enough crap from you. Write it my way or you are no good to me.” Mr Callaghan’s final response was, “Harry I won’t do it. It’s a lie.” The lawsuit was eventually settled out of court in August 2020.
Australian worker who threatened to use firearm dismissed for disobedience
A recent Fair Work Commission unfair dismissal decision involving a worker sacked for disobedience is Richard Martin Davey v Australian Coastal Flora [2024].
Richard Davey was hired as the full-time on-site manager for Australian Coastal Flora in November 2022. His employer is located on a 100-acre property in regional South Australia where it grows edible native plants. The business is also an eco-tourism venture featuring accommodation. Mr Davey was tasked with managing the property and project development. He lived in a nearby town with his partner, who was also a contractor for Australian Coastal Flora.
Given the owner of the business lived four hours drive away in Adelaide, he bestowed Mr Davey with a high level of trust to perform his role. He was entrusted with managing contractors and employees and regularly reported to the owner.
Boss and worker butt heads
For the first 10 months of his employment, Mr Davey and the owner had a “largely productive relationship,” Fair Work Commission records stated. This was despite having “time-to-time disagreements.” But things started to turn sour in September 2023. This was when Mr Davey expressed concern with the owner that he could not continue working on the project if it went ahead as the owner planned.
The owner stated that he was “discomforted” by these remarks and questioned if Mr Davey was “fully committed” to his role. The duo also butted heads over the use of chemicals on the site and the location of a water tank. Despite these tensions, the owner renewed Mr Davey’s contract on his first anniversary with the business, giving him a pay rise.
New boss finds worker “resting in a bed in a shed”
In December 2023, the owner decided that he would move to the UK. As such, he hired a new chief executive to oversee his Australia business interests. That month, the chief executive visited the Australian Coastal Flora property and noticed “dead plantings” and that the site was “untidy.”
Mr Davey officially reported to the chief executive from January 2024. That month, she made another visit to the site and was informed that there was excessive spread of a noxious weed across the property.
On a subsequent, unannounced visit later in January, the chief executive found Mr Davey “resting in a bed in a shed.” Mr Davey told the Fair Work Commission that he found this unannounced visit “inappropriate.’ He told her “next time you need to give me prior warning and make an appointment to come here.”
Boss and worker have stoush over the phone
The central issue of this unfair dismissal cases hinges on a phone conversation between Mr Davey and the chief executive on 18 January 2024. The call lasted for about 50 minutes, turning confrontational after about 15. Both parties had differing recollection of this conversation.
The chief executive had raised the issue with a young worker being allowed to drive a bobcat tractor. She told Mr Davey that the property was “not a playground” and that operating such machinery was unsafe. Given the conflicting accounts of this conversation, it fell to the Fair Work Commission to decide the nature of the call.
“You have only got this job because you are tapping David”
At Mr Davey’s unfair dismissal hearing, the Fair Work Commission favoured the chief executive’s account of the call. It was found that Mr Davey’s demeanour was “heated and threatening”. That his account of the call was “implausible.” Meanwhile, the chief executive’s account was found to be more believable as she had taken contemporaneous notes of the call and her husband had overheard some of it.
The Fair Work Commission found that during the conversation Mr Davey said the following with a “raised voice and with varying levels of aggression”:
- “I will do what I want.”
- “You have only got this job because you are tapping David [the business owner].”
- “You think you are at the top of the pyramid, so… f**king knock you off.”
- “David is a liar, and all of the locals are sick of him throwing his millions around.”
Mr Davey also told the chief executive that the business owner was “trying to impress his millionaire mates and tells lies. He’s a f**king liar.” He also told her to “f**king back off and stay away. The locals hate you and you are not welcome in this area. F**king stay away.”
He also threatened to use a firearm concerning the placement of a water tank, according to Australian Coastal Flora. The chief executive claimed that Mr Davey had told her “five minutes after that water tank goes up there will be holes shot in it and anyone who gets in the way.” Mr Davey, meanwhile, claimed that he had simply stated, “if the tank goes up someone will put a bullet through that”.
Worker gets dismissed
The chief executive subsequently relayed Mr Davey’s words back to the business owner. Who then amongst other things, took exception to the insinuation that they were in a sexual relationship. Mr Davey continued to work for the business in the fortnight following the heated phone call. During this time, the chief executive told the owner that she was “experiencing resistance” from Mr Davey when he was told to spray the weeds.
For the next month, Australian Coastal Flora raised several issues with Mr Davey regarding his behaviour and refusal to perform certain duties. He would later file a stop bullying order with the Fair Work Commission, alleging that the allegations were bullying. Ultimately, Mr Davey was summarily dismissed in February 2024.
Fair Work Commission finds worker was disobedient
Focusing on the phone call, the Fair Work Commission concluded that Mr Davey had made “insubordinate” comments to the chief executive. And that he had “used words that were reasonably understood as threatening.” This was in reference to shooting holes in the water tank.
It was deemed that Mr Davey’s misconduct had “directly and materially undermined” the employer’s trust and confidence in him. And that it undermined the possibility of an effective employment relationship. The Fair Work Commission therefore concluded that Mr Davey had not been unfairly dismissed, and his claim was rejected.
Have you been unfairly dismissed?
If so, make sure you act fast, as you only have 21 days from the date of your sacking to make a claim. Our team at AWNA can help you take your claim to the Fair Work Commission and ensure it is a success. We are not lawyers but considered by many amoungst the nations leading representatives and commentators. Accused of abandonment of employement, employee issues or have casual employees rights questions give us a call.
We are proud of our team and the outcomes they have got for over 18,000 Australian workers who have taken action against their employers.
Contact A Whole New Approach on 1800 333 666 today and let us help you get the justice you deserve.
How much is your unfair dismissal claim worth
