Name
SLC
Case code
A87/2020
Date of decision
Decision reviewed
Other decision – discipline
Decision subject
Inappropriate workplace behaviour
PRSB order
Decision set aside

Application to review REDUCTION in rank and PERIOD OF INELIGIBILITY FOR PROMOTION –– s.146(1)(e) and s.146(1)(k) Victoria Police Act 2013 –– BREACH OF DISCIPLINE (DISGRACEFUL CONDUCT) –– Applicant questioned by manager about sexual relationship with police officer and falsely denied it –– whether conflict of interest that required disclosure; no line reporting relationship existing or pending, no influence, Board concludes no actual, potential or perceived conflict of interest under VPM –– Applicant’s denial of rumour of sex on premises was truthful –– whether dishonesty about personal relationship was “disgraceful conduct”: context of conversation was informal and welfare-based; no advice that Applicant could decline to answer; no warning (as in s171 or s176 interviews); no discussion over proposed use, access to etc of personal information (Information Privacy Principles, Human Rights Charter) –– requirement to provide information about private lawful sexual relationship would be unreasonably intrusive into personal life; information may be used to discriminate (Equal Opportunity Act) –– insufficient policy guidance on relationships, lack of clarity on expectations –– Public interest in parity of discipline outcomes: other party falsely denied relationship, no action –– Public interest (human rights, privacy, discrimination) –– rank-based “disciplined police force” does not authorise or require unwarranted intrusion into private life –– public interest in fair and reasonable treatment of employees ––  fair process: mandatory interview used intrusive and oppressive questioning –– Board finds Applicant’s conduct in circumstances not “disgraceful or improper” and not a breach of discipline ­–– decisions to reduce rank and ineligibility for promotion therefore “harsh, unjust and unreasonable” ––  determinations set aside and in substitution, charge is  found not proven (s. 153(1)(3)(a); s.154(2)(a)) –– Initial decision issued 3 February 2021 ­–– Corrigendum and further redactions, published on 10 February 2021.

Author
Police Registration and Services Board
Publisher
Police Registration and Services Board
Date of Publication

You may need Adobe® Acrobat® Reader or Libre Office to view the document(s) on this page.

Get Adobe® Acrobat® Reader (External link)

Get Libre Office (External link)