A stone benchtops company that sacked a stonemason with work-related silicosis has been ordered to pay $76,000 in fines.

The Federal Circuit and Family Court fined Willis Bros Installations $44,100 for breaching section 351 of the Fair Work (FW) Act in dismissing the stonemason because of his sickness and section 340 by injuring him in his employment because he made a worker’s compensation claim.

The court imposed a further $31,500 fine for taking adverse action against the worker by terminating the worker’s employment because he exercised a workplace right to make an inquiry regarding his employment.

The fines come on top of court orders last June to pay $162,600 in compensation and damages.

The stonemason was initially engaged as an apprentice in 1997. He then advanced to production and installation manager, director, and shareholder, holding 17% ownership in the business at the time of his termination.

In or around 2018, both he and his brother, who also worked for the business, received diagnoses of lymph node silicosis.

After the stonemason's diagnosis, Willis Bros’ majority shareholder “grew increasingly hostile and intimidating” towards him, even while the company laid off his brother.

Despite knowing that his silicosis prevented him from working as a stonemason, the majority shareholder continually told him to return to his job and had him removed from his position as a director.

The stonemason went on extended stress leave and provided medical certificates, but Willis Bros stopped paying his wages and dismissed him for exhausting his leave entitlements after he had been on leave for almost four months.

In the hearing, Judge Tonkin found the conduct towards the worker was deliberate, egregious and unjust with little to no regard for the impact on the worker.

The court found the worker had to commence proceedings to obtain his proper termination and leave entitlements. The majority shareholder showed no contrition or remorse throughout the proceedings and maintained he was justified in terminating the worker’s employment on the basis he had exhausted his leave entitlements. No records of any leave entitlements had been kept, contrary to statutory requirements.

In regards to the breach of section 340 of the FW Act, the court affirmed the worker had a workplace right under a workplace law to make a complaint or inquiry in relation to his employment. 

Following the lodgement of that claim and acceptance by WorkCover in January 2019, the majority shareholder formed an intention to remove the worker from the business and acted upon that intention in an aggressive manner.

“[Willis Bros] continues to operate the stone bench top business and in those circumstances, there is a need to ensure that the company cannot simply ignore its statutory obligations to maintain employee business records and then rely on that failure to unlawfully terminate an employee’s employment,” Judge Tonkin said.

“In the event that other employees working in the business are diagnosed with silicosis (notwithstanding the protections available to employees present and future) the penalty imposed should be one that deters [Willis Bros] from engaging in the type of conduct experienced by the worker.”

The court determined that a total penalty of $75,600 be imposed and should be paid directly to the worker. 

Read the judgment

Ruttley v Willis Brothers Installation (Qld) Pty Ltd [2022] FedCFamC2G 919 (4 November 2022)