You know, the guy caught on camera allegedly weeing into
his mouth. Well, he's re-emerged and is apparently threatening
to sue the Cronulla Sharks for unfair dismissal.
In case you were living under a rock at the time, the Sharks
acted swiftly when the images emerged and sacked Todd. Not only did
he lose his gig with the Sharks, but it ended his playing career in
At the time, the Sharks' bosses indicated they'd had
enough of his very public, private mischief. Even though this
incident, and the earlier publicised ones, occurred on his own
time, the Club apparently formed the view that he was bringing the
game into disrepute.
So now, more than a year later, we're informed by various
media outlets that he's suing the Club for "unfair
dismissal". He's on record saying he heard about his
sacking from a team mate, and thinks he was "harshly done
by" and he "wanted it to be cleaned up".
Make your own decision about what the "it" is, but as
you pundits out there would know, there is a 21 day time limit
applying to unfair dismissal claims. It's difficult to see that
Todd would get the discretion exercised in his favour to extend,
even if he is eligible to access the jurisdiction.
His lawyer seems to be suggesting that the nub of the claim is
in fact that Todd wasn't afforded "due process".
Given we're guilty of getting our info from social media, the
legal foundation of that claim is not entirely clear.
But the take home message is this: there's much to be said
for affording procedural fairness. You know, giving the
"accused" an opportunity to respond before proceeding to
terminate. If someone is eligible to access the unfair dismissal
jurisdiction, it's essential. Even if they're not,
contracts, workplace policies and enterprise agreements do have the
potential to trip up an employer that doesn't follow any
And wouldn't you love to hear Todd's explanation
We do not disclaim anything about this article. We're
quite proud of it really.
To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.
Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.
An employee that refused a reasonable offer of settlement was ordered by the FWC to pay his ex-employer's legal costs.
Some comments from our readers… “The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable” “I often find critical information not available elsewhere” “As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).