[2018] FWC 4991 Qld Star v WorkPac P/L (“Ms Star’s dismissal was brought about by the response of WorkPac to the directive from BMA [host employer] to remove her from the Goonyella Riverside Mine site. … Ms Star’s dismissal related to conduct. That conduct was not a valid reason for dismissal. There is no evidence of any other reason – valid or otherwise – for a directive to be issued by BMA requiring the removal of a longstanding labour hire employee from the Goonyella Riverside Mine site. The dismissal was also unfair on the basis that there was no discussion with Ms Star about the decision to remove her from the site and the consequential termination of her employment prior to the termination being effected. The BMA directive was accepted by WorkPac managers as a fait accompli and there was no attempt made to discuss the directive with a relevant manager of BMA or to confirm the reason for the directive or whether the contractual provisions between BMA and WorkPac with respect to unsatisfactory performance by WorkPac personnel applied. The dismissal of Ms Star was harsh because of its consequences for her personal and economic situation and because there was no conduct sufficient to justify her dismissal. The dismissal was also unreasonable because it was decided on inferences which were not reasonably open to WorkPac on the basis of the information it had or which it could reasonably have obtained from BMA” @105-107 – in [2018] FWC 5745 reinstatement to the same position at BMA ordered against WorkPac despite no surety BMA will allow it – no purpose would be served “in requiring Ms Star to resign from the alternative employment that she has obtained – which has had the effect of mitigating the loss resulting from her unfair dismissal – any earlier than is required to take up reinstatement in accordance with the Order” @18 – continuity of employment order made and order for payment of lost remuneration)