Facing an allegation or a dismissal at a Catholic or independent school? The 21 days run from the dismissal.

The two Catholic agreements do not set out a misconduct procedure. They say what happens on dismissal for serious misconduct, and the teachers' agreement has a fitness for work process with a paid direction to leave the school. The steps of an investigation come from the employer's policy and from the law.

Beside the employer's process run four WA laws that apply in every school:

1. the Ombudsman's reportable conduct scheme, which gives the person investigated a statutory right to know the allegation and to respond before any adverse finding;
2. mandatory reporting of child sexual abuse;
3. teacher registration, including the employer's 7-day notice to the Teacher Registration Board;
4. working with children screening.

If you are dismissed, the usual route is the Fair Work Commission within 21 days. Religious schools have exceptions in discrimination law and in the FW Act. A WA Bill to narrow the State exception is before Parliament, but it is not law.

1. Why most staff are federal.
   1. The FW Act covers "national system employers", chiefly trading, financial or foreign corporations (FW Act s 14(1)(a)).
   2. The Full Bench recorded that CEWA Ltd and nine other WA Catholic education employers are "all corporations and are thus national system employers" (Independent Education Union of Australia v Catholic Education Western Australia Limited and others [2023] FWCFB 177 at [1], [24]). That point was agreed between the parties, not argued.
2. Fee-charging schools. The WAIRC has held, in at least two decisions, a fee-charging school to be a trading corporation:
   1. an Islamic school whose fees were 18.97% of its income (Michelle Hughes v Al-Hidayah Islamic Education Administration Incorporated trading as Al-Hidayah Islamic School [2009] WAIRC 00967 at [6], [14]–[17]); and
   2. a school run by an incorporated association, although both parties to that application argued it was not (The Independent Education Union of Western Australia, Union of Employees v The Moerlina School Inc. [2025] WAIRC 00150 at [8], [37], [39]–[44]).
3. The change for Catholic staff.
   1. In the Archdiocese of Perth, CEWA Ltd became the employer on 1 January 2020; before that the employer was the Archbishop.
   2. That date was common ground between the parties in Theresa Edmonds v Catholic Education Western Australia Limited [2021] FWC 3369 at [17]–[19].
   3. The Archbishop was not a trading or financial corporation, and so was outside the FW Act (Amy Bauer v Xavier Catholic Primary School [2015] FWC 4334 at [2]–[4]).
4. State laws that still apply.
   1. For a national system employer the FW Act displaces the Industrial Relations Act 1979 (WA) (FW Act s 26(1), (3)(c)), but not State discrimination, workers' compensation or safety laws (s 27(1)(c), (1A)(d), (2)(b)–(c)).
   2. The child safety and teacher registration laws below apply in every school.

1. The only paid direction to leave in the teachers' agreement is the fitness for work direction in cl 6.13 (AE523557), which is tied to the health process described above.
2. In practice employers do stand staff down on pay during an investigation.
   1. In one CEWA case a teacher was told he would be "stood down on full pay pending an investigation" into a complaint, and the stand-down was confirmed in writing (Mr Jeb Hendricks v Catholic Education Western Australia (CEWA) [2023] FWC 1553 at [97], [172]).
   2. In a South Australian case under a South Australian Catholic agreement, a college prepared a letter "standing down" a teacher "on pay pending investigation", and later told him he "would remain suspended with pay until further notice" (Mr Joshua Brewer v St Columba College Munno Para Inc T/A St Columba College [2018] FWC 7620 at [105], [109]). That case is cited here only to show the practice; it is not a WA decision.
3. What happens after a stand-down can matter later.
   1. In a WA independent school case, the Commission took no issue with standing the employee down on pay (Michael Friday v Leaning Tree Steiner School Incorporated [2025] FWC 537 at [75]).
   2. But he was then not interviewed, was presented with the outcome "as a fait accompli" and was asked by email why he should not be dismissed. The Commission found that this was not "a proper and fair process", and that the summary dismissal was harsh, although there was a valid reason (at [60], [75]–[76], [80]–[81]).
4. A suspension can trigger a notice to the Teacher Registration Board (see below), because s 42 of the Teacher Registration Act 2012 (WA) applies when a teacher is "dismissed or suspended", and the employer suspects serious misconduct or serious incompetence.
5. The agreements give no power to stand a teacher down without pay. Whether any other source does would depend on the contract. This guide has not found a published decision on an unpaid stand-down of a WA non-government school employee.

1. Who must report. The list includes a "teacher" (a person registered under the Teacher Registration Act 2012), a "school counsellor", a "boarding supervisor", an "early childhood worker", a "psychologist" and a "minister of religion", among others (s 124B(1)(a), Table; s 124A).
2. A "school counsellor" is an adult, other than a student or volunteer, employed or engaged in a school to provide counselling or pastoral care to its students (s 124A). On that wording it may reach some support staff in pastoral roles; whether it does in a particular case depends on the role.
3. The duty. A person on the list who believes on reasonable grounds that a child has been the subject of sexual abuse (occurring on or after the day the duty began for that role), or is the subject of ongoing sexual abuse, and forms that belief in the course of their work, "must report the belief as soon as practicable after forming the belief". The penalty is a fine of $6,000 (s 124B(1)).
4. To whom. The report goes to the CEO of the Department of Communities, or to a person, or a member of a class of persons, the CEO has approved (s 124B(2)). The duty is personal: reporting to the principal under a school procedure does not discharge it unless the principal is such a person.
5. The duty has applied to teachers since 1 January 2009, to boarding supervisors since 1 January 2016 and to school counsellors since 1 May 2024 (s 124A, "commencement day", and the Act's compilation table).

Mandatory reporting is separate from the reportable conduct scheme. One concerns abuse of a child by anyone; the other concerns conduct by an employee of the school. The same events can engage both.

1. Registration. A person must not teach at an educational institution unless registered, and an employer must not employ an unregistered teacher (s 6, s 7(1)).
2. The employer's notice. Where an employer "has reasonable grounds to suspect" that a teacher "may have engaged in serious misconduct or may have taught with serious incompetence", and the teacher is dismissed or suspended, or resigns or stops teaching at the institution, the employer must give the Board written notice within 7 days after the later of the two circumstances (s 42(1)–(2)). A suspension during an investigation, or a resignation during one, can therefore lead to a notice.
3. "Serious misconduct" for registration means "improper conduct of a serious kind that departs from the standard of behaviour reasonably expected of a registered teacher" (s 48B).
4. Your own notices to the Board:
   1. within 30 days of a conviction or finding of guilt for an offence punishable by imprisonment (s 38(1)(b), (2));
   2. within 14 days of being issued a working with children negative notice or interim negative notice (s 40(2)).
5. Interim orders:
   1. if the Board believes on reasonable grounds that a teacher "may pose a risk of harm to any person", it may impose, change or cancel conditions on registration (s 59(1));
   2. it may suspend registration if it believes on reasonable grounds that the teacher may pose a risk of harm to a student and suspension is necessary to protect a student (s 59(2));
   3. it must suspend registration if it becomes aware that the teacher has been charged with an "actionable offence" (s 60(1));
   4. within 14 days of an interim order the Board must refer the matter to the State Administrative Tribunal (s 61(1)).

Support staff are not registered teachers. The registration rules do not reach them, but the reportable conduct scheme and working with children screening do.

1. An employer must not employ a person in child-related employment if it is aware that a negative notice or an interim negative notice has been issued to the person and is current (s 22(3)).
2. A person employed in child-related employment must tell the CEO and their employer in writing of a relevant change in their criminal record as soon as practicable (s 29(1)).
3. A negative notice can be taken to the State Administrative Tribunal for review within 28 days after the date of the notice (s 26(1)(a), (2)). A person who did not make a submission when the CEO invited one needs the Tribunal's leave (s 26(3A)).
4. Losing a clearance does not by itself end the contract.
   1. In a New South Wales case, a religious education coordinator lost his clearance on being charged; the Commission held that the contract was not frustrated and that the end of his employment was a dismissal, and found the dismissal unfair partly because leave pending the outcome was refused (Michael Toohey v Dr Dan White, Executive Director of Catholic Schools and legal representative of the Catholic Education Office, Sydney [2017] FWC 4722 at [18], [64]–[73], [183], [191]).
   2. That decision applied NSW law, but its reasoning on frustration and alternatives to dismissal is general.

General protections

1. An employer must not take adverse action against an employee because of a workplace right (FW Act s 340), or because of a protected attribute, including sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, marital status, pregnancy, religion and political opinion (s 351(1)).
2. A dispute about a dismissal is made under s 365, within 21 days after the alleged dismissal took effect, or later on exceptional circumstances (s 366(1)–(2)). The religious institution exception is explained below.
3. Unfair dismissal and a general protections dismissal claim cannot both be run for the same dismissal (s 725; see below).

Unlawful termination

Part 6-4 of the FW Act bars termination for reasons including union membership or activity and the s 772(1)(f) attributes (s 772), with an application within 21 days (s 774(1)). It matters mainly to employees of an employer outside the federal system. For a national system employee the general protections route is usually the one available.

If your employer is in the WA system

If a school employer is not a trading or financial corporation, its staff are in the WA system.

• An unfair dismissal claim then goes to the WAIRC no later than 28 days after the employment ends, with late claims accepted only if it would be unfair not to (IR Act s 29(1)(c), (2), (3)).
• In the WA system a union could also ask the WAIRC to set aside a warning: in 2007 it declared two Catholic school teachers' first and final warnings void after finding they were denied procedural fairness and the warnings were "out of proportion" (Independent Education Union of Western Australia, Union of Employees v Good Shepherd Catholic School [2007] WAIRC 00551 at [177]–[180]).
• No current school employer in the WA system was identified for this guide.

1. Filing in the WAIRC does not stop the 21 days in the Fair Work Commission.
2. A live WAIRC claim blocks the federal one.
   1. A person must not make a federal dismissal application if an application under another law about the same dismissal has been made and has not been withdrawn or failed for want of jurisdiction (FW Act s 725, s 732).
   2. In 2026 a CEWA teacher's federal claim was barred for that reason, because her WAIRC claim was still on foot when she filed (Joanne Ferrell v St Joseph's College [2026] FWC 1373 at [16]–[19]).
   3. The Full Bench refused permission to appeal, and said her unawareness of the law was not relevant to s 725 (Joanne Ferrell v St Joseph's College [2026] FWCFB 147 at [2]–[4]).
3. When more time was allowed.
   1. An extension for a general protections application was granted where the employee's contract pointed to state awards, official advice pointed to the WAIRC, the employer agreed to conciliate there first, and the employee filed promptly once that failed (Yvonne Khan v Anglican Schools Commission T/A Swan Valley Anglican Community School [2017] FWC 6057 at [12], [18], [28]–[31]).
   2. It was also granted in the confusion after the 2020 change of Catholic employer, for a one-day delay (Theresa Edmonds v Catholic Education Western Australia Limited [2021] FWC 3369 at [25]–[28]).
4. When it was refused. An extension was refused:
   1. where the employee, once told of the employer's objection that it was a national system employer, let the WAIRC conciliation run before filing federally (Jeremy Snyder v Helena College Council, Inc. T/A Helena College [2018] FWC 4432 at [40]–[41]); and
   2. where an employee did not act after the objection (Ferrell v St Joseph's College [2026] FWC 1373 at [37]–[41], [54]).
5. A complaint to the Equal Opportunity Commission about the dismissal is also an "application or complaint under another law" for s 732, so the same bar can apply to it.

A member who has filed in the WAIRC and then receives a national system objection may be able to protect their position by withdrawing the WAIRC claim and filing in the Fair Work Commission at once, with an application for more time if the 21 days have passed (s 394(3), s 366(2)).

1. Status.
   1. The Equal Opportunity Bill 2026 (WA), Bill No. 90, was introduced in the Legislative Assembly on 21 October 2026.
   2. On 4 November 2026 its status on the Parliament's page was "Legislative Assembly Second Reading" (Bill page).
   3. If enacted, most of it would commence "on a day fixed by proclamation" (cl 2(1)(b)), and it would repeal the EO Act 1984.
2. Existing employees. As introduced, a religious educational institution could discriminate "against an employee working at the institution because of their religious conviction" only if (cl 52(5)):
   1. "conformity with the doctrines, beliefs or principles of the religion in accordance with which the institution is conducted is an inherent requirement of the employee's employment; and"
   2. "the employee discriminated against cannot meet that inherent requirement; and"
   3. "the discrimination is reasonable and proportionate in the circumstances."
3. Hiring. It would not be unlawful to discriminate on religious conviction in deciding whether to employ a person, where the person has no religion or a different religion and the institution "is conducted solely or mainly for students who are of the religion in accordance with which the institution is conducted" (cl 52(2)).
4. The general religious bodies exemption in the Bill would not apply to a religious educational institution "engaging in conduct in relation to the institution" (cl 51(2)(a)).
5. The Government's account. The WA Government's fact sheet says that in a religious school discrimination "will only be permitted on the basis of the person's religious conviction, not any other attributes (such as pregnancy or sexual orientation)" (trade unions fact sheet).
6. Complaints. A complaint would be made within 2 years, with later complaints possible on good cause (cl 103(1)–(3)). An industrial organisation could complain for a named person it represents, with that person's consent, or for a class of persons it represents (cl 100(1)(c), (2), (3)).
7. Teacher registration. The Teacher Registration Act 2012 would still prevail over the new Act (TR Act s 125, as amended by cl 209).
8. What a WA Bill cannot change. A State Act cannot amend Commonwealth law, so SDA s 38 and FW Act s 351(2)(c), s 772(2)(b) and s 195(2)(b) would stay as they are unless the Commonwealth changes them. FW Act s 351(3)(d) names "the Equal Opportunity Act 1984 of Western Australia". How that reference would operate if the 1984 Act were replaced has not been decided.

This guide does not predict whether the Bill will pass, in what form, or when.