Lawful and reeasonable instruction; unfair dismissal

In what I regard as a controversial decision, in the sense that I am unconvinced by its reasoning but acknowledge that it falls within what might be regarded as a discretionary area and not necessarily easily appealable, a Fair Work Commissioner has upheld the dismissal of an employee who refused to answer questions about whether her fiancé, who had been dismissed by the employer, had gone to work with a competitor.
 
Senior Deputy President Richards said the employee knew “without any ambiguity what the purposes of her employer’s inquiries were, and had anticipated such questions might eventually be asked of her, but she refused to provide her employer with any answer to those inquiries, or to cooperate with him at the most elemental level”.
 
This led to her employer losing confidence in her as “an employee who would serve him with all due fidelity”.
 
Now this is a good example of a case where different commentators may have different views. Whilst an employee must recognize a duty of good faith and fidelity is owed to an employer, my view is that this decision may be taking that duty too far to conclude that it should be put before an employee’s natural inclination to keep ones’ personal life just that, personal.
 
Lakatos v Termicide Pest Control Pty Ltd (2014) FWC 5839 delivered on 25 August 2014