Canberra Hospital sonographer sacked over ultrasound errors in high-risk pregnancy unit loses unfair dismissal case after alleging supervisor was attracted to her
A sonographer at Canberra Hospital, Joy Biradee, has lost an unfair dismissal case after being sacked from the hospital's high-risk pregnancy unit over errors made during ultrasound scans. The case, heard by Australia's Fair Work Commission, is notable because Biradee had alleged that her supervisor was attracted to her, a claim she raised as part of her challenge to the dismissal.
The Commission ultimately sided with the hospital, finding the termination was not unfair, meaning the errors identified in her ultrasound work stood as sufficient grounds for dismissal. Full details of the specific errors, the supervisor allegations and the Commission's reasoning were not provided in the available article text.
- Canberra Hospital sonographer sacked over ultrasound errors loses unfair dismissal case
- She had alleged her supervisor was attracted to her
- Fair Work Commission ruled against her claim
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
The hospital can argue that a high-risk pregnancy unit must apply particularly exacting standards because ultrasound findings can materially affect care for pregnant patients and unborn babies. If repeated scan failures were properly documented, dismissal may have been a necessary patient-safety measure after fair opportunities for supervision, feedback or improvement. On this view, the tribunal’s role is to protect due process while recognising that clinical services cannot retain staff in roles where sustained performance concerns create serious risk.
The case against
The sonographer can argue that dismissal should be scrutinised closely where the allegations concern professional judgement, workplace relationships and potentially contested assessments of performance. Her claim that a supervisor was attracted to her raises the possibility, however difficult to establish, that personal dynamics affected how errors were interpreted, monitored or escalated. A fair process would require an independent examination of the evidence, proportionate support and a genuine consideration of whether retraining or another role could have addressed concerns without ending her employment.