Surprise detail in Qantas sacking hearing

Yahoo

24-05-2025

Australia's most iconic airline Qantas is set to pay millions in penalties after it unlawfully sacked more than 1800 ground staff.
The airline was thrice found to have acted unlawfully when it fired 1820 staff in favour of outsourced contractors during the height of the Covid-19 pandemic.
While an earlier compensation hearing before Justice Michael Lee found Qantas should pay $120m to impacted workers, a further three-day hearing sought to decide the additional penalty Qantas must pay for the 2020 decision.
The Federal Court earlier found that Qantas had acted against protections in the Fair Work Act in its outsourcing and was partly motivated by a desire to prevent industrial action.
The airline appealed the decision to the full bench of the Federal Court and later the High Court, both of which were unsuccessful.
After losing the appeal, the union and Qantas went to mediation to determine how much Qantas would have to pay the outsourced workers for economic losses linked to lost wages.
The maximum penalty Qantas can be ordered to pay is $121m, on top of the compensation fund that is now in the process of being administered to workers.
Day 1 – Qantas 'deeply sorry'
On the first day of the hearing, Qantas people manager Catherine Walsh took the stand and issued an apology on the airline's behalf.
'I want to reinforce that we are deeply sorry, and we apologise for the impact on the workers, the TWU (Transport Workers Union), to the court for their time and to the family and friends that felt the impacts, we are deeply sorry,' she said.
'We hope we can get to the stage where there can be some finality for them in this.'
Noel Hutley SC, for the union. said Ms Walsh joined the company in 2024 and was a 'central cog' in addressing issues with culture that brought about this 'catastrophe'.
Yet, Mr Hutley put to Ms Walsh that she had not raised concerns with external advisers about since she joined the company.
'You never asked … why he behaved in an extraordinary fashion? It is extraordinary that nothing was said about a matter that was obviously an illicit reasoning for outsourcing,' Mr Hutley said.
While Justice Lee said Ms Walsh was a 'candid' witness, he criticised the airline's decision to call a witness who was not employed by the company at the time of the breach of the Fair Work Act.
'One would have thought if you were truly contrite, you would put someone in the witness box who was there at the relevant time,' he said.
'Who could say I was part of the organisation when this decision was made, and I've changed my tune.'
'And I gave them every opportunity to call Ms Hudson (Qantas chief executive Vanessa Hudson) or somebody else in that situation and a deliberate forensic decision was made for her not to be called I would infer.'
Mr Hutley said putting Ms Walsh on the stand had the look of choosing a person who 'could not be the subject of true investigation'.
'Ms Walsh had nothing to do with the events and … every time I cross-examined her about a particular event she said, 'well I wasn't there, I can't speak to that',' Mr Hutley said.
Day 2 – 'A once-in-a-lifetime opportunity'
Mr Hutley called for Qantas to pay the maximum penalty given its decision was the 'largest ever instance of the contravention of the Fair Work Act'.
He told the court that Qantas was faced with an 'once-in-a-lifetime opportunity' during the pandemic to save more than $100m per year.
Mr Hutley said the airline had the 'temptation of the potential to produce a massive profit'.
But Qantas barrister Justin Gleeson SC said any penalty close to the maximum would be 'manifestly unfair'.
'Qantas has accepted the seriousness of its conduct,' he said.
'The court can and should impose a significant deterrent penalty. However, it is in effect a first contravention (of the Fair Work Act).'
Day 3 – 'Stronger than Sunrise'
Meetings between Qantas senior managers, a group management committee (GMC) meeting and a board meeting came under the microscope in court on Wednesday.
One of the meetings between Qantas executives and lawyers discussed the legality of outsourcing ground handlers, the court was told.
It was said in the meeting that the proposal to outsource ground handlers was 'stronger than Sunrise' – a reference to the airline's ultra-long-haul Project Sunrise flights from Sydney to London and New York that are expected to begin in 2027.
'That appears to be some assessment as to whether the case for lawfulness is stronger than Project Sunrise,' Mr Gleeson said, referencing the meeting notes.
The airline has since reached an agreement with its pilots and crew who will work the ultra-long-range flights of more than 20 hours.
'Appalling act'
TWU secretary Michael Kaine said on Monday the airline's decision to get rid of a 'loyal workforce' was 'appalling' and the 'biggest case of illegal sackings in Australian corporate history'.
'The penalty to Qantas must reflect this and send a message to every other company in Australia that you cannot sack your workers to prevent them from using their industrial rights,' he said.
Mr Kaine said ground handling work for Qantas was now being undertaken by companies such as Swissport, which he alleged had 'severe understaffing' and a 'revolving door of fed-up workers'.
'This cannot be a business case for outsourcing and Qantas should not only pay the maximum legal penalty for its actions but commit to funding fair standards throughout its supply chain,' he said.
'We need to see Qantas held accountable to the fullest extent here.'
The hearing has now been adjourned, and Justice Lee has reserved his judgment.
The penalty amount will be revealed at a later date.
While Justice Lee is yet to decide exactly who will receive the money from the penalty imposed upon Qantas, there are three likely parties proposed.
The TWU is seeking a large majority of the penalty and also argued affected workers should receive further compensation.
Otherwise, the funds could go directly to the commonwealth.