Virgin Australia argues sacked flight attendant was a safety risk

The airline has claimed a former flight attendant was so incompetent, she was forced to return to her home base as a passenger rather than as a member of cabin crew.

Virgin has claimed a former flight attendant was so incompetent, she was forced to return to her home base as a passenger rather than as a member of cabin crew. Picture: Brendan Radke

A Virgin Australia flight attendant was judged to be so incompetent she was forced to return to her home base as a passenger rather than as cabin crew, court documents have revealed.

The airline has filed its defence in a wrongful dismissal case brought by Donna Waterhouse, whose position with the airline was terminated two-days before Christmas last year.

In her claim to the Federal Court in Sydney, Ms Waterhouse said she was humiliated by a superior in front of passengers and then forced to do a sham retraining exercise in which she was set up to fail.

Ms Waterhouse said from the moment she boarded a Boeing 737 flight on the morning of November 24, 2021, cabin manager Adam Joyce “officiously” observed her work, refused to explain why he was watching her so closely and told her she was “unsafe and unfit”.

When she complained about her treatment to crew leaders, Ms Waterhouse was ordered to undergo “refresher training” on two dates in November and December.

She alleged she was not told what she needed to do to pass the course, nor given proper access to the flight attendant’s manual.

Despite being told during the course she was “doing very well”, she said the same instructor failed her, which led to her dismissal on December 23, 2021.

Her unfair dismissal claim argued she was denied general protections when exercising her workplace rights, and she was entitled to compensation and damages for pain and suffering.

Ms Waterhouse first worked for Virgin on turboprop aircraft from September 2019 to April 2021, when her role was made redundant.

She was re-employed in August 2021 on Boeing 737s but did not start work on the jets until the following month after initially failing a practical assessment.

Virgin’s defence said on November 24, Mr Joyce conducted a routine daily safety brief with Ms Waterhouse and two other crew members to ensure their knowledge and experience was up to date.

He noticed Ms Waterhouse was not answering any questions so he asked her directly what procedure should be followed in the event of an electrical fire in the on-board oven.

She said she would douse the flames with water which was incorrect, so Mr Joyce asked a few more questions which she also got wrong.

His concerns increased upon landing when Ms Waterhouse began to disarm the cabin door in a way that could have killed a person opening the door from the outside.

“As a result of the failures, Mr Joyce recommended to the captain of the next flight that Ms Waterhouse be stood down, and return to Sydney as a passenger on the flight,” said the defence. “The captain accepted that recommendation.”

It was alleged Ms Waterhouse became very agitated toward Mr Joyce when he told her she was being stood down, accusing him of “micromanaging her and otherwise treating her unfairly or inappropriately”.

Virgin denied Mr Joyce’s behaviour was humiliating or inappropriate and said Ms Waterhouse acknowledged there had been deficiencies in her performance.

“The decision to terminate her employment was taken because of ongoing and serious concerns about her competency and skills and was unrelated to her exercising any workplace rights,” said the defence.

Ms Waterhouse and Virgin have been ordered to undergo mediation on August 25, in an effort to resolve the dispute.