A DJ and hairdresser turned mine technician who was blamed for the loss of $200,000 worth of gold has won a huge unfair dismissal payout. The Fair Work Commission found that the loss was the result of “far more qualified” colleagues failing to rectify errors. It also took into account the technician’s inexperience, noting that she had only worked in the mining sector for 15 months.
This Fair Work Commission decision shows that a worker’s inexperience can factor into whether a worker was unfairly dismissed or not. Employers are beholden to provide training to ensure workers can properly do their job. If their lack of training leads to an error, the worker generally can’t be blamed and sacked as a result.
Let’s look at the events of this unfair dismissal case: Ms. Jamie-Lee Corless-Crane v Aurenne Management Services Pty Ltd [2025]
Inexperienced mine worker dismissed for losing $200K of gold
Jamie-Lee Corless-Crane, a former hairdresser and DJ, began working as a pit technician for mining company Aurenne Management Services in October 2023. The company operates the Mt Ida open cut gold mine near Menzies in Western Australia. Ms. Corless-Crane’s duties required her to guide excavator operators to the correct mining location.
On the first day of her roster in January 2025, she was rostered on a night shift. She received her handover documentation, including maps and paperwork, after her pre-start meeting. However, the handover sheet she was provided was not for the correct mining location and was obsolete.
$200K worth of gold lost
Upon arriving at the mining site in the early hours of the morning, Ms. Corless-Crane saw that a significant amount of dirt had already been excavated during the day shift. The ground markings, which should have been used to identify the location, were obscured and difficult to read.
Ms. Corless-Crane told the Fair Work Commission that the excavator operator didn’t have a map and the GPS equipment on the excavator wasn’t working. She stated that she showed the operator the map she had. They both agreed that the block identification number marked on the ground matched the number on the map she had been given.
Despite these checks, the mining proceeded in an incorrect area during her shift. This led to an estimated 54 ounces of gold valued at about $200,000 being lost.
Dismissed for losing gold
Aurenne Management Services launched an investigation. This found that the mining in the incorrect area was due to a mistake made by three other members of the geology department, including a surveyor, a geologist and a pit technician.
Ms. Corless-Crane was stood down on full pay. A letter was sent to her on 14 January 2025 outlining three key allegations. This included a failure to take due diligence and properly execute her duties. Ms. Corless-Crane responded to these allegations on 21 January 2025. She argued that the paperwork she received contained inaccuracies and that she was unaware of this at the time. She added that she had no supervisor on night shift and relied on the information provided to her.
Aurenne Management Services didn’t buy her explanations, however, and Ms. Corless-Crane was dismissed a few days later. She subsequently lodged an unfair dismissal claim with the Fair Work Commission.
Employer argued pattern of poor performance
In response to her claim, Aurenne Management Services argued that it had a valid reason to dismiss Ms. Corless-Crane. The company told the Fair Work Commission that she failed to check critical details against the map she had been provided, resulting in 54 ounces of gold being “mined as waste.”
The company also cited concerns about her past performance history. This included a prior written warning for a speeding incident and other informal coaching conversations. Aurenne Management Services said that it no longer had faith and confidence in her ability to perform her role satisfactorily.
Worker argued they checked map, had no history of poor performance
In response to her employer’s claims, Ms. Corless-Crane asserted that she had indeed checked the critical details against the map she had been given, a fact the company had failed to prove otherwise. Her claim was supported by her own uncontested evidence that the excavator’s GPS was not functioning. This, she said, was the only way to accurately cross-reference key details.
She also pointed out that more senior and experienced day shift staff had failed to notice the missing map for the mining location. Regarding her past performance, Ms. Corless-Crane said the alleged deficiencies were only “coaching or guidance.” She said she had received a 23% pay increase in July 2024, which she saw as a sign of appreciation for her work.
Fair Work said worker not to blame for lost gold
At the unfair dismissal hearing, the Fair Work Commission found that the loss of gold resulted from multiple systems and employee failures that preceded Ms. Corless-Crane’s shift. It said that it was due to an error in the markup by “people far more qualified.” The Commission said that Ms. Corless-Crane was “the last line of defence” in a chain of successive failures.
The Commission also took Ms. Corless-Crane’s lack of experience into account. It observed that she had only worked in the mining sector for 15 months, having come from a “background in hairdressing and DJing.” The Commission said that she was the last and potentially least experienced employee to have failed to identify the error in markup.
Procedural deficiencies found
The Fair Work Commission noted that Aurenne Management Services failed to give Ms. Corless-Crane a clear warning about her unsatisfactory performance before her dismissal. It said that she was given “limited if any warning” that the company had concerns about her performance. She also was never told that her job could be in jeopardy. The Commission said that this denied her a reasonable opportunity to address any issues while still in her job.
Awarded huge unfair dismissal payout
Ultimately, the Fair Work Commission ruled that there was no valid reason to sack Ms. Corless-Crane and that her dismissal had been unfair. The Commission said that while an opportunity may have existed for her to potentially identify the error, her failure to do so didn’t warrant termination.
As both parties agreed that reinstatement was inappropriate, the Fair Work Commission ordered Aurenne Management Services to pay Ms. Corless-Crane four months’ compensation. This amounted to more than $30,000.
Dismissed bank worker blames misconduct on lack of training
A recent unfair dismissal case that involved a worker who claimed she was unfairly fired due a lack of training is Ms. Fang Liu v HSBC Bank Australia Limited [2025]. Sydney-based Fang Liu began working for HSBC Bank Australia in March 2022 as a customer relationship manager. She was responsible for speaking with the bank’s retail customers about potentially becoming accredited investors. Her interactions with such customers had strict regulatory requirements.
Ms. Liu’s role required her to comply with specific procedures and provide warnings to customers. This was because accredited investors have fewer legal protections than the bank’s other retail customers.
Dismissed for not following legal obligations
Ms. Liu’s employment was terminated on 8 November 2024 for misconduct. HSBC Bank Australia claimed that she provided information and advice to customers that was beyond what she was legally permitted to. Her misconduct was captured via recordings of her calls with customers. Ms. Liu was paid four weeks in lieu of notice. She subsequently lodged an unfair dismissal application with the Fair Work Commission.
There was a significant delay between the application being filed and the hearing at the Commission in August 2025. This was because the parties appeared to have reached a settlement on 13 December 2024. However, this agreement fell apart. The matter then proceeded to a formal hearing after Ms. Liu informed the Commission that the settlement was no longer valid.
Argued she wasn’t trained properly
At her unfair dismissal hearing, Ms. Liu argued to the Fair Work Commission that her alleged misconduct was caused by her lack of training or supervision. She claimed that she had genuinely been trying to improve her performance and contribute to the bank’s success.
Ms. Liu argued that her actions were not deliberate and she was simply “passionate” about her role, developing her skills and helping HSBC Bank Australia “to be successful.” She also contended that others in her role who were having conversations with customers in-person, rather than via recorded calls, would have likely also shown “broader compliance issues.”
Employer argued employee flouted rules
Meanwhile, HSBC Bank Australia argued to the Fair Work Commission that Ms. Liu had breached its code of conduct and other internal policies. The bank asserted that she had failed to provide a “complete general advice warning” on several calls. It also claimed that Ms. Liu had given personal financial advice to customers.
This advice included commenting on potential movements in interest rates and stating that it was “not a bad time” to get into the market. HSBC Bank Australia also claimed that Ms. Liu continued to give information to customers even after they indicated they were not interested in becoming an accredited investor. In one call, Ms. Liu also incorrectly identified the nature of her role.”
Fair Work: Employee was sufficiently trained
The Fair Work Commission accepted evidence from HSBC Bank Australia that Ms. Liu had received sufficient training for interacting with customers about becoming an accredited advisor. It accepted that the bank’s head of wealth distribution had provided detailed evidence of the training she had received.
While acknowledging that an email from Ms. Liu seeking feedback on her sales questions was not responded to, the Commission stated that this didn’t excuse her conduct. The argument that other employees may also have committed misconduct was likewise rejected as it didn’t excuse Ms. Liu’s conduct.
Employee admitted to deliberately flouting directives
The Fair Work Commission noted that Ms. Liu denied any wrongdoing and attempted to blame her conduct on other people and processes within HSBC Bank Australia. It noted that her conduct was “undoubtedly” serious given the onerous statutory obligations imposed on HSBC Bank Australia.
The Fair Work Commission noted that she admitted during cross-examination that she “deliberately” acted in breach of directions given to her by her department head. Ms. Liu said she did so because she thought his advice was not effective. She also stated she disobeyed a direction from another department head to not use information from an HSBC investment specialist brochure during her calls.
Dismissal was fair, could have helped if she admitted to wrongdoing
The Fair Work Commission agreed with HSBC Bank Australia that Ms. Liu didn’t provide a complete general advice warning to customers and that she had provided personal financial advice. It also agreed that she continued to provide information after customers had expressed disinterest. The Commission also found that she had misidentified her role to a customer.
The Commission stated that it may have considered that Ms. Liu’s dismissal was harsh if she had “consistently acknowledged” the issues with her conduct. It was noted that HSBC Bank Australia did not summarily dismiss Ms. Liu, but instead paid her four weeks’ notice.
It was observed that Ms. Liu was given a fair opportunity to respond to the allegations. She received both allegations letter and a show cause letter. She had provided written responses to both before her termination.
Ultimately, the Commission found that the bank had a valid reason to sack her and that her sacking was not unfair. Her unfair dismissal claim was therefore rejected.
Read more: Casual Worker Dismissed for Revealing Pay to Coworkers
Have been unfairly dismissed?
For over 30 years, A Whole New Approach has been Australia’s leading employee representatives. We help workers like you deal with everything from unfair dismissal and forced resignations to harassment and discrimination.
We’ve handled thousands of cases nationwide, guiding employees through complex processes with care and expertise. Free, confidential consultations are available 7 days a week.
Call 1300 766 700 to protect your workplace rights.
