A senior health executive has defended the decision to sack a nurse without waiting for her response to misconduct allegations, saying any explanation would not have changed things.
"The breaches were so clear-cut that I don't believe there were going to be mitigating circumstances," Cathie O'Neill, of Canberra Health Services, told the Fair Work Commission on Friday.
Ms O'Neill gave that evidence at a hearing in the case of former Dhulwa Mental Health Unit nurse Carol Sandland, who alleges she was unfairly dismissed earlier this year.
Ms Sandland, who was sacked for emailing confidential patient information to union officials and her personal inboxes, claims she did so to raise legitimate safety concerns her bosses had ignored.
Under cross-examination by Ms Sandland's counsel on Friday, Ms O'Neill admitted she had sacked the nurse without waiting for her response to proposed findings of misconduct.
Ms O'Neill also conceded she had not made Ms Sandland or the Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation aware she would be the person deciding the long-term staff member's fate, depriving them of the opportunity to raise any concerns about her.
However, she said she believed the emails contained sufficient information for her to make the "reasonable" decision to terminate Ms Sandland's employment.
"The seriousness of the breaches was so apparent that I was satisfied making the decision with the evidence in front of me," Ms O'Neill told the commission.
It was suggested to Ms O'Neill that Ms Sandland had sent the relevant emails to raise genuine concerns for the safety of staff at Dhulwa, which the nurse previously described as a violent and "dreadful" workplace.
In response, the health executive was adamant that raising such concerns "did not require the release of personal patient information".
The commission has previously heard the emails in question included the names of patients, details about their medication and plans for a man's admission, among other confidential information.
On Friday, Ms O'Neill said union officials had "no right to see personal health information".
"I just cannot see why all of that ... needed to be forwarded to the union, even if there was a security threat," Ms O'Neill said.
"All of this information was not required to seek that assistance."
Ms Sandland's counsel asked Ms O'Neill whether a person sending patient information for a laugh would be a more serious breach than one that involved a nurse seeking help from their union.
Ms O'Neill replied that the reasons for Ms Sandland's conduct were "entirely irrelevant for the distribution of personal health information".
The commission subsequently heard from James Tosh, a senior human resources director at Canberra Health Services.
Mr Tosh said once the ACT government organisation became aware of the privacy breaches, it was keen to "cut off access" Ms Sandland had to confidential patient information.
He told the commission every day this did not occur presented "another opportunity for breaches".
"We had an employee who breached the trust of health consumers, some of the most vulnerable in the community," he said.
Mr Tosh also told the commission Ms Sandland had missed a deadline to provide a response and that he had made four phone calls to a union official, who had been nominated as her point of contact, but none were answered.
Parties to the case will now provide closing submissions in writing before commissioner Sarah McKinnon gives her decision.
