Case Example 4

Michael is CEO of a large respite service that runs day programs and overnight respite for children with a disability across Victoria. In 2012 Michael becomes aware of complaints regarding a Carlo behaving inappropriately in the presence of children. Michael isn’t aware of the specific details but makes the decision that it would be best for the business if Carlo is moved to a different area. Carlo tells him there’s been a misunderstanding but he is happy to move to a different location for work as he is planning on moving house anyway.

 

In 2013 Michael is told by a manager of one of the day programs that they are concerned that Carlo is rumoured to be providing overnight respite to families outside of his approved work and that this is against the rules. Michael tells the manager to ask Carlo directly about this. Carlo states he was unaware this was against the rules.

 

In 2014 another 2 families make complaints about Carlo. They are from different day programs and do not know each other yet their complaints are very similar and involve the use of inappropriate physical punishment and restraint of the children. Carlo denies the behaviour. Michael isn’t convinced and suggests that Carlo might want to resign otherwise he would need to investigate further, he agrees to provide a reference to assist Carlo to find a new job. Carlo agrees to resign and Michael tells the families the matter has been dealt with.

What legislation applies? What should have happened?