Security guard caught asleep with sports stream on phone gets dismissed
A security surveillance officer who was fired for falling asleep in his personal vehicle during a night shift has won a Fair Work unfair dismissal payout. The officer had been allowed to monitor a Sydney train station from his own car due to a chickenpox scare. He argued to the Commission that he drifted off while on an entitled break and that it was unintentional. The Commission concluded that sleeping on duty was entirely incompatible with his role. However, it ruled the summary termination was unfair due to a lack of procedural fairness. In turn awarding the officer compensation of five weeks’ pay.
Dismissed for sleeping on shift while watching sports
In this article, we look at the events of this unfair dismissal NSW case Chanaka Ranawakage v MSS Security Pty Limited [2026]. Later, we explore the case of a US worker with sleep apnea who sued his employer after being dismissed for sleeping on the job.
Case Summary: Chanaka Ranawakage v MSS Security Pty Limited [2026]
- Key employee argument: He accidentally fell asleep during an authorized meal break. This was while isolating in his own car to avoid a colleague with chickenpox. He argued his phone would alert him to any security camera motion.
- Key employer argument: Sleeping on the job violated strict orders and constituted serious misconduct. It created an unacceptable commercial and reputational risk with their client, Sydney Trains.
- FWC outcome: Unjustified dismissal due to severe procedural defects. This included unfairly blaming the worker for other guards’ past misconduct and withholding his stand-down pay. Compensation of five weeks’ pay was ordered.
Unfair dismissal NSW: Chickenpox scare leads to sleeping on the job dismissal
Chanaka Ranawakage started working at MSS Security in October 2024. At the time of his termination of employment, he worked as a casual security surveillance officer, maintaining a regular night shift roster from 7pm to 5am four nights per week. Mr. Ranawakage worked at various Sydney rail sites on behalf of MSS Security’s primary client, Sydney Trains. He was chiefly tasked with detecting and preventing trespassing and graffiti attacks by deploying covert cameras and monitoring rail property.
By October 2025, Mr. Ranawakage was rostered to perform patrols alongside a shift partner. According to Fair Work Commission records, his partner informed him that his children had contracted chickenpox. As a father of five young children, Mr. Ranawakage was worried about catching the virus and transmitting it to his family. He asked a Sydney Trains surveillance coordinator permission to remain inside his own car rather than sharing the company patrol car. The coordinator granted this request.
Unfair dismissal NSW: Worker filmed asleep with sports match streaming on phone
The events that led to Mr. Ranawakage’s termination of employment occurred on his overnight shift that began on the evening of 12 October 2025. He was tasked with patrolling Waverton Station on Sydney’s north shore. Over the course of the night, his partner contacted MSS Security alleging that Mr. Ranawakage was refusing to provide operational support. Further was asleep inside his private car. This triggered a metro supervisor to visit Waverton Station at around 1am, who soon found Mr. Ranawakage sleeping on the job in his car.
The supervisor recorded a 30-second video clip showing Mr. Ranawakage asleep in the driver’s seat with the door open and a sports match streaming on his phone. The supervisor woke Mr. Ranawakage, conducted a welfare check and told him to go home. Following an internal investigation, MSS Security determined that his actions constituted serious misconduct. The company substantiated three allegations: that he had failed to conduct required patrols and had failed to support his partner during a youth incident. Also, that Mr. Ranawakage had been sleeping on the job. His summary termination of employment took place on 22 October 2025.
Why did the security officer argue unjustified dismissal?
Mr. Ranawakage subsequently lodged a Fair Work unfair dismissal claim. He made the following arguments as to why his termination of employment was disproportionate and harsh:
- Mr. Ranawakage admitted he had fallen asleep but contended it was completely unintentional.
- He was attempting to take an entitled meal break, pointing out that an open packet of sandwiches and a banana were beside him in the car.
- Watching a sports match on a break was not prohibited, as officers would still receive notifications on their phones if covert cameras detected motion.
- Mr. Ranawakage denied the secondary allegation that he failed to conduct required patrols. He argued that the covert nature of surveillance meant that stationary monitoring from a car was often more effective than foot patrols.
- He had observed a group of youths on the station concourse and determined they were not committing offences. Mr. Ranawakage noted that no formal incident report was ever provided by Sydney Trains.
- His unblemished record and the unique circumstances of the shift should have led to a warning rather than termination of employment.
Meanwhile, MSS Security argued to the Commission that remaining awake and alert was a fundamental safety requirement. The company highlighted that Mr. Ranawakage’s instructions explicitly designated sleeping on the job as serious misconduct warranting immediate dismissal. MSS Security also contended that the lapse created an unacceptable commercial and reputational risk. This was because Sydney Trains had previously complained about other security personnel bringing pillows and blankets to work sites.
Why did the Fair Work Commission find a valid reason for dismissal?
Mr. Ranawakage’s Fair Work unfair dismissal claim was heard by the Fair Work Commission in April 2026. In coming to a decision, it reviewed the communications and video evidence captured by the supervisor. The Commission determined that MSS Security had a valid reason to sack Mr. Ranawakage. Its findings included:
- MSS Security’s allegations regarding a lack of patrols and failure to support his partner earlier in the shift were dismissed. There was no direct evidence that Mr. Ranawakage was asleep at the time that his partner claimed he was.
- The separate allegation of sleeping on duty at 1am was substantiated because it was conclusively proven by the supervisor’s 30-second video footage.
- The Commission rejected Mr. Ranawakage’s argument that sleeping was acceptable because he was on an entitled meal break. It ruled that security officers are required to maintain constant vigilance.
- Mr. Ranawakage’s employment contract and instructions prohibited sleeping on the job. The Commission therefore determined that his nap constituted a sound and defensible reason for the termination of employment.
Why was the dismissal ruled unfair despite a valid reason?
Ultimately, the Fair Work Commission ruled that the summary termination of employment was harsh and unjust for the following reasons:
- Mr. Ranawakage sleeping on the job was an isolated, unintentional lapse from an employee with a clean disciplinary record.
- He had been permitted to isolate in his own car due to the chickenpox scare. He was therefore deprived of the physical presence of a shift partner who would have otherwise kept him awake.
- MSS Security had unfairly tainted its investigation by linking Mr. Ranawakage to historical complaints about other guards bringing bedding to work.
- The company had stood the worker down without pay during the initial investigation. It had failed to rectify the unpaid period until four months after the termination of employment took place.
Because reinstatement was deemed inappropriate by both parties, the Fair Work Commission ordered MSS Security to pay Mr. Ranawakage compensation. However, due to his contributory conduct in falling asleep, the Commission reduced the compensation by one week. MSS Security was ordered to pay Mr. Ranawakage five weeks’ pay plus outstanding superannuation contributions.
Worker dismissed for sleeping on job files disability lawsuit
In the United States, a maintenance worker for New York City’s Central Park made headlines for sleeping on the job. However, he later sued his employer for disability discrimination. Sixty-year-old Gregory Holder had worked for the Central Park Conservancy for eight years. He had received four promotions, advancing from a standard maintenance worker to a supervisor. Mr. Holder managed a team of 25 and received around $110,000 (roughly $AU153,667) per year. He told the media that “I loved working in the park. It was like a second home,” and noted that he wanted to stay in his job for another 12 years.
However in late 2024, Mr. Holder began experiencing severe bouts of fatigue while at work. His boss, who had suffered from sleep apnea, noticed Mr. Holder may have it too and let him know. Mr. Holder was later diagnosed with the condition, which is characterized by repeated interruptions in breathing during sleep that cause chronic fatigue. Following the diagnosis, Mr. Holder submitted a formal doctor’s note to his manager to notify him.
Disability accommodations ignored, fired for sleeping on the job
In his lawsuit, Mr. Gregory claimed that when he provided medical proof of his diagnosis to Central Park Conservancy. That, its HR department did not schedule a meeting to evaluate potential workplace adjustments. Mr. Holder argued that under US law the employer had a legal obligation to explore options that would allow him to maintain his duties. Instead of doing this, Central Park Conservancy decided to summarily dismiss Mr. Holder six months after he revealed his sleep apnea diagnosis.
In his termination of employment letter, the employer stated that he was being fired for “sleeping on the job.” Central Park Conservancy also levelled several allegations against Mr. Holder. It claimed that two days before his dismissal, he failed to attend a scheduled meeting and had taken an extra-long work break. The organization claimed that Mr. Holder had previously received multiple warnings and attended disciplinary meetings. However, Mr. Holder refuted all this. He told the media that he had never received any warnings and that his dismissal happened “so abruptly” and that he “didn’t even get an opportunity to explain.”
Claimed condition did not cause him to sleep on the job
Regarding the accusation that he was sleeping on the job, Mr. Holder said that his sleep apnea only ever caused him to drift off very briefly. He told the media that “If I’m sitting down for too long, I may close my eyes for a few seconds.” Mr. Holder’s disability lawsuit will be heard by the Manhattan Supreme Court. It will need to decide if Central Park Conservancy unlawfully dismissed him and did not provide reasonable accommodations for his medical condition.
The lawsuit seeks compensation for lost wages, alongside damages for emotional distress, humiliation and damage to his professional standing. Since his dismissal, Holder has undergone medical management. He lost 36 kilograms and has experienced an improvement in his health and energy levels. He said that he intends to return to active employment.
Dismissed for sleeping on job FAQs
1. Can I be dismissed for sleeping at work?
Yes, you can be dismissed for sleeping at work. Employers view remaining awake and alert as a fundamental duty of almost any role, particularly where safety or security is involved. However, as shown in Chanaka Ranawakage v MSS Security Pty Limited [2026], a valid reason alone does not automatically make a termination lawful.
In that case, the Fair Work Commission agreed that MSS Security had a valid reason to sack Mr. Ranawakage for sleeping on the job. However, it also concluded that the employer’s termination of employment was “harsh and unjust.” For a termination of employment to stand, an employer must still provide procedural fairness, run an unbiased investigation and weigh any unique mitigating circumstances.
2. Is sleeping on shift serious misconduct?
Generally, yes. Most employment contracts and company policies explicitly designate sleeping on the job as serious misconduct. This legally permits an employer to bypass standard warning systems and proceed to a summary termination of employment. However, the context of a sleeping on the job incident matters. In Chanaka Ranawakage v MSS Security Pty Limited [2026], the Fair Work Commission found that sleeping on shift violated company rules.
However, it found that the employee’s lapse was isolated and unintentional, aggravated by unique circumstances (being isolated in his car due to a chickenpox scare). Because the employer failed to evaluate this context and unfairly used past complaints about other guards against him, the summary termination was deemed harsh.
Have your workplace rights been violated?
We at A Whole New Approach have spent decades helping Australian workers deal with unfair dismissal, workplace bullying, discrimination, sexual harassment, forced resignations, and other Fair Work disputes. We know how stressful workplace conflict can become, especially when your income, reputation and future employment are on the line.
Our experienced team provides practical guidance and strong workplace advocacy to help you understand your rights and navigate the Fair Work process with confidence.
Strict time limits apply to many Fair Work claims, so call us now on 1800 333 666 for your free and private initial consultation.
Read similar articles to Sleeping on the Job: Employee Wins Unfair Dismissal Payout
Worker Demoted then Dismissed for Sleeping In
Dismissed for Being Hungover Drunk or Falling Asleep
