Full Breakdown
Employment Relations Authority Orders Temporary Reinstatement of MPI Inspector Mujahid Khan
5/31/2026, 8:48:53 PM
Incident Overview
The Employment Relations Authority (ERA) ordered the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) to temporarily reinstate inspector Mujahid Khan within seven working days. The order follows MPI’s termination of Khan after two workplace complaints were classified as serious misconduct. MPI must comply while a substantive hearing decides on permanent reinstatement.
Background
On 10 June 2025 a female colleague said Khan pressured her to join a lunch at a friend’s house during work hours, describing herself as “highly uncomfortable” and “uneasy.” MPI confirmed the pressure but found no other misconduct. A second complaint on 12 June 2025 alleged Khan raised his voice. MPI deemed the actions breaches of its values and terminated Khan, noting a prior warning issued on 14 August 2024.
Timeline
- 14 Aug 2024 – Warning issued.
- 10 Jun 2025 – Lunch-pressure complaint.
- 12 Jun 2025 – Voice-raising complaint.
- Post-12 Jun 2025 – Termination.
- ERA – Temporary reinstatement within seven working days.
Official Statements & Responses
MPI declined comment on the ERA ruling, saying the alleged conduct destroyed trust and that Khan’s specialised role could not be reassigned. Greening, representing Khan, said the “evidential basis and category of serious misconduct… remains unclear” and that the issue “remains a live issue” for the upcoming substantive hearing. The ERA decision noted MPI’s claim that Khan’s refusal to accept responsibility underpinned the loss of confidence.
Criticism & Opposition
Greening argued MPI failed to cite the specific serious-misconduct categories in its termination letter, calling the procedural rationale “unclear.” He suggested the ministry may not have applied its disciplinary framework consistently, raising fairness concerns.
Conflicting Reports & Gaps
The ERA found the evidence linking Khan’s conduct to the defined serious-misconduct category insufficiently detailed. MPI’s termination letter omitted explicit policy references, and the investigation did not conclusively verify the voice-raising allegation, leaving the standard for “serious misconduct” unsettled.
Verbatim Quotes
- “At this interim stage, the evidential basis and category of serious misconduct, as described in MPI’s policies and relied upon by MPI in concluding Mr Khan’s behaviour amounted to serious misconduct, remains unclear,” — Greening, counsel for Mr Khan
- “It remains a live issue, to be addressed at the substantive investigation meeting, as to whether MPI, acting as a fair and reasonable employer, could terminate employment if the behaviour of Mr Khan did not amount to serious misconduct.” — Greening, counsel for Mr Khan
- “Another relevant factor, as part of this assessment, is whether, according to MPI’s policies, Mr Khan’s behaviour amounted to misconduct, and therefore a warning may have followed.” — Greening, counsel for Mr Khan
- “The basis for this loss of trust and confidence in Mr Khan, according to MPI, is his ongoing failure to accept responsibility for what occurred,” — ERA decision
Next Steps
A hearing will assess whether Khan’s conduct meets MPI’s serious-misconduct definition and whether permanent reinstatement is appropriate. MPI must also review its disciplinary records to ensure actions align with policy.
