Fraser v Corrective Services NSW
[2014] NSWIRComm 21
At a glance
Source factsCourt
Industrial Relations Commission (NSW)
Decision date
2014-04-15
Before
Harrison DP
Catchwords
- NSW Attorney General's Department v Miller (2006) 160 IR 185
- Director of Public Employment v PSA (on behalf of Brown) 2008 184 IR 134
Source
Original judgment source is linked above.
Catchwords
Judgment (7 paragraphs)
DECISION 1Mr Steven Fraser was employed as a Corrections Officer by Corrective Services New South Wales (the Employer) for 26 years from 4 March 1987 to 26 September 2013. 2Mr Fraser was dismissed from employment on the basis of an opinion formed by the employer that he had inappropriate sexual contact with an inmate identified as Ms Slacke. 3Mr Fraser denies such conduct occurred and challenges the termination of his employment, seeking full reinstatement with no loss of wages or continuity of service. 4The application was filed within time. 5The matter was not able to be resolved in conciliation and proceeded to arbitration. 6Mr Reitano of Counsel appeared for Mr Fraser and brought evidence from Mr Stephen White, a Correctional Officer, and from Mr Fraser. 7Mr Benson of counsel appeared for the Employer and brought evidence from Ms Slacke, Ms Leanne Matthews, a Casual Court Security Officer, and Mr Andrew Snedden, Senior Assistant Superintendent, Investigations Branch, Long Bay Correctional Complex. 8The specific allegations of misconduct made against Mr Fraser are: (1) On 11 May 2012 whilst in the process of putting handcuffs on Ms Slacke he touched her left breast. (2) On 11 May 2012 whilst Ms Slacke was being placed in transport to convey her from Taree cells to Port Macquarie he groped her buttocks. There are other undeveloped allegations that Mr Fraser had inappropriate communication with Ms Slacke, including a a request that she "show him her boobs". (3) On 7 July 2012 he approached Ms Slacke outside Taree Courthouse asserting that he had looked her up on the internal systems to know when she would be at the court again so he could see her. It is alleged Mr Fraser asked her to dinner, sought her telephone number and kissed her on the cheek. 9The evidence establishes that Mr Fraser, Officer White and Officer Matthews were together on 11 May 2012. Their tasks that day included taking two inmates from Port Macquarie cells to Taree for court proceedings and return. 10Officer White's evidence is that he first heard of an issue in about June 2012 when he overheard a conversation between Senior Assistant Superintendent Leanne Cook and Casual Correctional Officer Emma Stewart that Mr Fraser had "touched up" a female inmate at Taree when he was working with her. 11Officer White did not enter the conversation, deposing that he checked the roster to confirm he was there on the day concerned, verified that he was, and dismissed the matter, which he described as "bullshit" because rumours were rife in the office. 12The evidence establishes that the conversation overheard by Officer White had its origin in an earlier discussion described by Officer Matthews in her statement of evidence (Ex 11) in the following terms (par 8): 8. In June 2012 whilst I was working at the Taree court cells I was having a conversation with Officer Emma Stewart and SCO Peter Stace in the office area and Officer Frasers name was mentioned. I said, "if I tell you something, can this stay here". SCO Stace said, "that depends on what you tell me". I then directed my conversation at Officer Stewart because she is a female and I wanted to make her aware of Officer Frasers behaviour with female inmates and to keep an eye on him. I felt I needed to unload what I had witnessed and tell someone as I was distressed by what had occurred. 13Officer Stewart's report to the Senior Assistant Superintendent led to the investigation, charges and dismissal of Mr Fraser. 14In the course of the investigation Mr Fraser maintained his denial of the conduct concerned, putting to the investigator that the entire matter was a malicious attack on him, being a vendetta arising from an altercation between himself and another officer, identified as Officer King. 15Mr Fraser noted that the alleged conversation between Officers Stewart, Stace and Matthews took place in June 2012. Officer Stewart did not put in a report on the matter until 24 October 2012, the day after Officer King was removed from the roster as a consequence of the altercation with Mr Fraser. 16In his interview of 31 July 3013 Mr Fraser referred to a letter from Officer Stace (Ex 9 p 17) denying that he participated in a conversation with Officers Stewart and Matthews as suggested. 17Officers Stewart and Stace were not called to give evidence. 18Mr Sneddon confirmed that Mr Fraser offered the defence that the altercation with Officer King was behind the accusation, however, he had refused to investigate this or pursue that line of enquiry as he considered it a separate matter. 19In cross examination Officer Matthews conceded that she regarded the pursuit of allegations against Mr Fraser and a request from Senior Assistant Superintendent Mr Grahame Sundin that she provide a formal report on the events of 11 May 2012, a week after the King/Fraser altercation, as too much of a coincidence. 20There are a number of matters which give rise to concern over the investigation in addition to the failure to examine a line of defence offered by Mr Fraser. The explanation given is that Officer White was not identified in the brief received from Manager of Security, Brian Cullen, and Officer Matthews told him that Officer White did not directly see anything. 21The matters of concern are: (1)Failure to interview Officer White who was a direct participant; (2)Affording inappropriate weight to the advice from Officer Matthews that she did not actually see anything but was only suspicious; (3)The interview of Officer Emma Stewart, who was not present, on the accuracy of any of the allegations; (4)Failure to specify the conduct alleged; (5)Finding that allegations of misconduct were sustained without any reasoning or consideration of credibility; (6)Failure to undertake any sort of investigation into the defence offered by Mr Fraser; (7)The approach to Ms Slacke, three days prior to her preparing her statement for the investigation, informing her that the investigator was aware of inappropriate touching and behaviour toward her. This approach was not an open enquiry of Ms Slacke and as such carries the difficulty of being suggestive to her. 22Ms Slacke deposed that when asked about the event by the investigator she could recall Mr Fraser's name from the badge worn by him whilst on duty. 23In cross examination Mr Reitano put the proposition to Ms Slacke that she had been talking to Officer Matthews in the precinct of the Commission prior to giving her evidence. 24Ms Slacke refuted this proposition, asserting that she did not know who Officer Matthews was, and could not recall what the female officer who escorted her from the cells at Taree looked like. 25I find it highly improbable that Ms Slacke has such a clear recollection of Mr Fraser and none at all of Officer Matthews. 26Mr Fraser makes further assertions that Mr Cullen and Mr Sundin were out to get him removed from the position at Port Macquarie cells. 27Mr Fraser supports this by reference to an aggressive attitude toward him on his return to Port Macquarie cells in August 2010 and a recommendation by Mr Cullen that Mr Fraser be removed from Port Macquarie cells prior to any issues arising in respect to inmate Slacke. 28Mr Fraser contends that the motivation of this recommendation and the current charges against him were to remove him to allow Officer King to return. 29It is however somewhat disturbing that the now disputed conversation between Officers Matthews, Stace and Stewart did not lead to any action until after Officer King was removed from the roster. 30It is of deep concern that there was no investigation of the King incident and its proximity to action against Mr Fraser. 31There is further cause for disquiet arising from the manner in which the report was requested by Mr Sundin. Officer Matthews was reluctant to do such a report and only did so when she was afforded three hours paid time to complete it. Mr Sundin then directed her to refrain from posting or emailing the report, rather he drove from his base in Grafton to Ms Matthew's residence in Forster to collect it. The reason for this remains unexplained. 32Officer Matthews' reluctance to file a report and her decision to do nothing other than make a contemporaneous note is inconsistent with the concern expressed to Ms Stewart.