The appeal to dismiss the appellant due to his conviction of a serious offense was dismissed because the Board found his actions and lack of remorse were incompatible with his role as a public officer.

The appellant, a former Level 5 Area Manager with the respondent, was dismissed from his employment in April 2022 due to a conviction for possession of scheduled poisons. The respondent considered his conviction a serious offence and incompatible with his role as a public officer.

Both parties agreed that the respondent had the authority to impose disciplinary action, and the appellant did not dispute his conviction for a serious offence. However, he contended that his dismissal was disproportionate to his misconduct, and the respondent did not adequately consider the circumstances of his offence. The appellant argued he had no malicious intent when he took and stored the medications and cited a lack of clear departmental policies for medication disposal as a factor.

The appellant sought reinstatement, while the respondent countered that the appellant's reasons for keeping the medications were questionable, emphasising his careless and negligent actions, which damaged trust and confidence.

The Board ultimately dismissed the appeal, finding that the respondent’s decision to dismiss was lawfully and validly made consistent with s 92 of the PSM Act. It rejected the appellant's claims regarding his lack of knowledge and remorse, noting that he failed to properly differentiate, record, or store the medications, further eroding trust in the employment relationship and supporting the respondent’s decision.

The decision can be read here.