The University of Melbourne has lost its appeal to stop a professor from getting his job back, after he was sacked for sending his PhD student “mawkish” romantic messages.
Professor Stephan Matthai was dismissed in December 2024 for inappropriate behaviour towards a female PhD student in 2017.
The Fair Work Commission found last year that although the now-62-year-old’s behaviour constituted misconduct and was a breach of workplace behaviour policy, the sacking was harsh and unfair.
The commission found that Matthai’s seven years of unblemished service as Professor of Reservoir and Geotechnical Engineering to the university – between the misconduct and his eventual sacking – mitigated against the academic’s dismissal. It also ordered the university to give Matthai his job back and pay $28,098 minus taxation in lost wages.
The university’s appeal questioned the finding that the dismissal was harsh and claimed a failure to consider the seriousness of the conduct, the alleged steps Matthai took to avoid detection, the importance of the university’s Appropriate Workplace Behaviour policy, and its reasons for the delay in investigating and sacking Matthai.
The university also argued there was a “significant power imbalance between an academic supervisor and a PhD candidate arising from a PhD student’s reliance on an academic supervisor”.
In early 2017, Matthai began supervising an international student, whose identity has been protected, undertaking her PhD.
In May, he invited a number of students, including the female, to his birthday party.
Responding to an email sent by the student on May 8, 2017, Matthai moved their conversation to his private email, saying it was “more appropriate” and “Nothing to be seen by UOM internet security people”.
In exchanges between the two, examined by the Fair Work Commission, Matthai described their communication as an “expedition into uncharted territory”, saying it was exciting “more than gambling is”, and that a FaceTime with her was a “moment of bliss”.
He also sent her a photo of himself in his boxer shorts, which he explained was to demonstrate the ectomorph body type.
In mid-2017, the student notified various faculty members of issues she was having with Matthai, and said she was uncomfortable with him continuing to supervise her.
Later that year, another professor became a co-supervisor, before the student eventually reported her concerns to human resources, discontinued her studies with Matthai, and began a new PhD with another professor.
Shortly after completing her studies in January 2024, the student made a formal complaint and the university began an independent investigation, analysing 141 texts and emails. Sexual harassment was not part of the investigation, and Matthai denied any abuse.
In June 2024, the investigator’s report found “on balance of probabilities”, Matthai had breached the Appropriate Workplace Behaviour policy. He was notified in October he had breached the university’s Enterprise Agreement, which amounted to serious misconduct.
In response, Matthai said he deeply regretted his behaviour that “ultimately corrupted the professional relationship” he had with his student.
He blamed a failing relationship, saying his personal life had fallen apart and described his behaviour as “insensitive” and said he was “terribly sorry that I hurt her this much”.
However, during the Fair Work Commission hearing, Matthai said he did not believe his conduct contravened the policy and argued the interactions occurred “out of hours”, in the private domain, and in a “conversation between two adults about life”.
FWC deputy president Alan Colman found Matthai’s communications used “mawkish, romantic language and discussed intimate topics” in a way that was “highly inappropriate”, and said all interactions between any professor and student should be professional.
However, Colman maintained the sacking had been unfair.
Colman believed Matthai had likely come to the “erroneous” and “specious” arguments from his representative, and that his first admission of wrongdoing was genuine.
Last week, a full bench of the Fair Work Commission dismissed the university’s appeal against Colman’s findings.
In its decision, it said Colman weighed up the valid reasons for dismissal, and whether they were harsh, unjust or unreasonable.
“A different decision-maker may have come to a different conclusion as to whether, in all the circumstances, the dismissal of Dr Matthai was harsh and therefore unfair,” the submission reads.
“That is a natural consequence of jurisdiction being conferred on a tribunal to make a broad and value-laden assessment as to whether a dismissal was harsh, unjust or unreasonable. Two decision-makers may, quite legitimately, make different decisions in relation to the same facts.”
The bench said Colman’s findings were “intensely personal assessments” of Matthai as an individual arrived at by “an experienced member of the commission”.
A University of Melbourne spokeswoman said the institution was now considering the decision and its implications, with due regard to the interests of all affected persons.
Matthai said the university was yet to contact him, but he expects he will be able to return to his previous position.
“It has been a tough experience for me and my family, and so has been the loss of their supervisor for my University of Melbourne students,” he said.
“All I can say is that I am very happy about the FWC’s decision, and the prospect of returning to Melbourne University to reconnect with my colleagues and students who are looking forward to it too.”
