Fools Gold for Sacked Mining Worker - Breakdown of System and Trust

In a landmark decision that sends a strong message to employers about fairness and accountability, the Fair Work Commission (FWC) has ordered Aurenne Management Services Pty Ltd to compensate a young FIFO worker over $30,000 after she was unfairly dismissed for her alleged role in a $200,000 gold misplacement at a Western Australian mine site.

The case involved Jamie-Lee Corless-Crane, a former hairdresser and DJ who transitioned into the mining industry in late 2023. After just 15 months in her new role as a pit technician at Aurenne’s Mt Ida site, she was terminated for her part in a chain of events that led to 54 ounces of gold being dumped as waste. But as Deputy President Melanie Binet Lo made clear in her judgment, the real cause lay deeper within the organisation’s systemic failures.

Fools Gold for Sacked Mining Worker - Breakdown of System and Trust

The Commission found Corless-Crane was not the root cause of the costly error. Instead, more experienced staff issued incorrect paperwork, and the GPS system used did not allow for sufficient cross-referencing. Despite trying to verify the dig location with an excavator operator, she was made the scapegoat. The others involved kept their jobs.

This case reflects a broader truth in Australia’s workplace relations landscape: inexperienced or lower-ranked employees are too often punished for collective or systemic failures. Deputy President Binet recognised that Corless-Crane was the least experienced link in a chain of poor systems and miscommunication. Her limited mining experience, previous warnings (which she was never given an opportunity to address properly), and significant personal circumstances—including caring responsibilities and limited financial capacity—made the dismissal unjust and harsh.

In the end, the Commission awarded four months’ compensation, despite Corless-Crane being unemployed for six months. The FWC considered the strong demand for workers in the mining sector and determined she ought to have been re-employed within four months if not for the unfair dismissal.

This case is a wake-up call to mining companies and employers in high-risk industries: fair procedure matters. Systems must be robust, accountability must be shared, and no worker—regardless of experience—should be made the fall person for managerial or systemic failure.

Case Report: Jamie-Lee Corless-Crane v Aurenne Management Services Pty Ltd [2025] FWC 986

Facts:

• Ms Jamie-Lee Corless-Crane was employed as a FIFO pit technician at the Mt Ida mine.

• An operational error occurred resulting in the accidental dumping of 54 ounces of gold as waste.

• Corless-Crane was dismissed on the basis that she failed to check the dig site and prevent the mistake, despite the map being incorrect.

Key Findings:

• The FWC found the dismissal was unfair.

• The map error was made by more experienced employees.

• Ms Corless-Crane attempted to confirm the location with an excavator operator, who gave incorrect affirmation.

• The GPS did not assist with proper verification.

• She was the least experienced of those involved and received no real opportunity to address alleged performance issues.

Legal Reasoning:

• There was no valid reason for the dismissal under s 385(c) of the Fair Work Act 2009.

• The dismissal was harsh due to her inexperience and lack of procedural fairness.

• She was not put on notice that her job was in jeopardy nor given the chance to reform or respond.

• Dismissal inconsistent with treatment of others who contributed to the error but were not disciplined.

Outcome:

• Compensation ordered: over $30,000 (equivalent to 4 months’ wages).

• Reinstatement was not ordered due to breakdown of trust.

Implications:

• The decision highlights the importance of consistent disciplinary standards and procedural fairness.

• Employers must ensure inexperienced employees are adequately supported and not unfairly blamed for collective errors.

• The mining industry, in particular, must reinforce systems that reduce the risk of high-cost operational mistakes being pinned on individuals without due process.

Correct Decision?

• 0%Yes
• 0%No