A Queensland cleaner fired for allegedly swimming naked at a Christmas party has been awarded a nearly $10,000 unfair dismissal payout. The cleaner claimed he was “too drunk to remember” the incident. Meanwhile, the employer relied on “he-said, she-said” accounts from staff to justify the termination for serious misconduct. The Fair Work Commission ruled that the termination was unfair as the employer failed to produce actual witnesses to prove that the serious misconduct happened.
In this article, we look at the events of this unfair dismissal NSW case Lester Box v Sirrom Co. Pty Limited [2026]. Later, we examine why a New Zealand health worker who was fired for drunken behaviour had his termination of employment upheld.
Lester Box started working as a cleaner for Sydney-based hospitality and catering provider Sirrom in September 2024. He worked at a mining site in central Queensland, to which Sirrom provided services. The incident that led to his termination of employment occurred on 15 November 2025 during Sirrom’s Christmas party at a mining accommodation village. The party, organised by Mr. Box’s supervisor, began around 6:30pm and involved music and alcohol. By 10pm, the group had moved to the pool area.
Mr. Box admitted to consuming between eight and nine drinks and entering the pool with a guest from the mine. On 18 November 2025, Sirrom issued Mr. Box a stand-down letter alleging he “jumped into the site pool whilst naked” in front of guests and employees. The company also claimed that he had breached a 10pm curfew. During the show cause process, Mr. Box told his employer that he could not recall if he was naked during the pool incident. He said that “I can’t say, I got told that I did… I was too drunk to remember.”
On 24 November 2025, Mr. Box was summarily fired for serious misconduct. Sirrom cited the “significant” safety, behavioural and reputational risk that resulted from his misconduct.
In his Fair Work unfair dismissal claim, Mr. Box argued several reasons why his termination of employment was unfair:
In response to the Fair Work unfair dismissal claim, Sirrom maintained it had a valid reason for the serious misconduct termination due to the following reasons:
Mr. Box’s Fair Work unfair dismissal claim was heard by the Fair Work Commission in April 2026. It was highly critical of Sirrom’s “deficit” of evidence, noting that the company had failed to bring its witnesses to the hearing to be cross-examined. The Commission said that the “purported accounts” of those staff who did not appear at the hearing could not outweigh Mr. Box’s sworn testimony.
The Commission found that Mr. Box had faced unjustified termination for the following reasons:
Despite its ruling of unjustified dismissal, the Fair Work Commission significantly reduced the compensation awarded to Mr. Box. The Commission estimated he would have likely remained employed for a further six months, which would have totalled roughly $41,300 in earnings. However, the Commissioner found Mr. Box had failed to mitigate his loss by not looking for a new job.
During the hearing, Mr. Box admitted he had not looked for another job, stating he “thought he would wait and see what happened” with his Fair Work application. The Commission slammed this attitude, noting that cleaning jobs are routinely advertised. It ruled that had Mr. Box made a reasonable effort, he would have found work within six weeks. Consequently, the Fair Work Commission limited his payout to $9,543, covering only those six weeks of lost salary.
The following unjustified termination case was heard by New Zealand’s Employment Relations Authority in February 2026. Lionel Caffell worked as a hospital orderly for more than 20 years. For the last decade of his career, he worked in the Interventional Radiology (IR) department at Christchurch Hospital. The department is a high-pressure environment and the largest of its type in New Zealand’s South Island.
Mr. Caffell’s termination of employment stemmed from two complaints made by a younger orderly in September 2025. The first incident involved Mr. Caffell allegedly “forcefully stabbed” the worker in the chest with a pen. The worker alleged that while stabbing, Mr. Caffell said, “don’t you ever talk to my girls like that, only I can say things like that.”
Later that day, the younger orderly alleged that Mr. Caffell punched him multiple times and pushed him while saying, “don’t you ever f*cking talk to me like that in front of people again.” The younger worker also claimed Mr. Caffell threatened to take him outside and “beat them up.” Days later, the worker provided photos of bruising to management.
Health New Zealand suspended Mr. Caffell with pay pending its investigation, which ultimately corroborated the complaints. On 6 October 2025, he faced termination of employment for serious misconduct. Mr. Caffell subsequently lodged an unfair dismissal claim, seeking reinstatement. He contended his sacking was an unjustified termination because:
In response to the unfair termination claim, Health New Zealand admitted to its failure to disclose witness statements, describing it as an “administrative oversight.” However, the employer argued the security footage clearly showed “physically aggressive movements” that justified termination of employment. Mr. Calder denied any personal animosity toward Mr. Caffell, despite Mr. Caffell’s claim that the manager “had it in for him.”
At the hearing, the Employment Relations Authority found that Mr. Caffell did have an arguable case. It slammed Health New Zealand’s investigation, noting it was “arguably a surprisingly poor investigative procedure” for an employer of its size. However, the Authority ultimately ruled that Mr. Caffell’s termination of employment was fair due to his post-termination behaviour.
It heard how after “leaving drinks” at a bar, a drunk Mr. Caffell returned to the hospital and spoke to his former colleagues. He reportedly made abusive comments about Mr. Calder and stated he wanted to “burn his house down.” Mr. Caffell admitted he was “very drunk and upset” and “would not be saying these things sober.” But the Authority ruled this behaviour shattered the employment relationship. The Authority ruled that the “overall justice” did not support Mr. Caffell’s reinstatement, and his unfair dismissal claim was therefore rejected.
1. Can I be dismissed for my behaviour at a work Christmas party?
Yes, you can be terminated for misconduct at a work-related social event, but the employer must still prove the behaviour occurred and that it warrants termination. Even if a party happens off-site or outside of standard hours, it is generally considered to be “in the course of employment.” This means workplace policies regarding harassment, safety and professional conduct still apply.
However, as seen in the Lester Box v Sirrom Co case, an employer can’t rely on rumours or “he-said, she-said” accounts. In that instance, the sacking was ruled unfair because the company failed to provide actual witnesses or CCTV evidence to prove the worker was naked in the pool.
2. Do I need to look for work to get a full unfair dismissal payout?
Yes, you have a legal duty to mitigate your loss. This means you must take reasonable steps to find a new job as soon as possible after your termination. If you win your unfair dismissal case but can’t prove you actively sought work, the Fair Work Commission can significantly reduce your compensation payout.
In the case of Lester Box v Sirrom Co, the worker’s potential $41,300 payout was slashed to $9,543. This was because he chose to “wait and see” what happened with his claim rather than applying for available cleaning roles. The Commission ruled that because he failed to seek work, he was only entitled to a payment covering the period it should have taken him to find a new job.
3. Can my employer fire me without a warning?
An employer can only terminate an employee without notice or a prior warning in cases of serious misconduct. This refers to behaviour that is so severe it causes a fundamental breakdown in the employment relationship. This includes theft, fraud, violence or serious breaches of health and safety protocols.
Read more: Dismissed Worker Who Started Fight Claims ‘Self-Defence’
We at Australian Workplace Discrimination Representatives work with employees nationwide on unfair dismissal, general protections claims, forced resignation, workplace bullying and sexual harassment matters.
Contact us now on 1800 333 666 for a free and confidential initial consultation to ensure your rights are protected.
