Why ‘tick-the-box’ sexual harassment training is not enough

Vicarious liability risks remain where employers require sexual harassment training alongside work duties, with a commission finding the delivery method falls short of basic expectations, writes Emily Haar and Isabella Conner.

In a recent Queensland Industrial Relations Commission decision, the commission confirmed that vicarious liability risks remain where employers require sexual harassment training to be completed concurrently with work duties. Although finding the training content itself was appropriate, the commission found the delivery method fell below basic expectations – offering timely lessons for employers nationally.

A recent decision of the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission (QIRC) provides insights for employers regarding obligations to prevent workplace sexual harassment. In Loquias v The Star Entertainment Group and John Dwyer (Loquias), the QIRC found that a poorly implemented online training program amounted to an employer’s failure to take reasonable steps to prevent sexual harassment in the workplace, meaning that the employer remained vicariously liable for the unlawful conduct of an employee.

Under the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth) (Cth Act), employers have a positive duty to eliminate, as far as possible, sexual harassment in the workplace. Similar to work health and safety duties, the positive duty requires employers to take steps to prevent sexual harassment, rather than merely addressing the issue retrospectively. Similarly, under s 106 of the Cth Act, an employer is vicariously liable for the conduct of its employees in engaging in sex discrimination or sexual harassment unless the employer can establish that it took “all reasonable steps to prevent” the employee from doing the prohibited conduct. If an employer has complied with its positive duty, it would appear to be likely that they should be able to establish they were not vicariously liable in the event that any discrimination or harassment is engaged in by a staff member, resulting in a claim under the Cth Act.

Although Loquias concerned vicarious liability provisions contained within the Anti-Discrimination Act 1991 (Qld) (Qld Act), the QIRC’s decision provides guidance on both the positive duty and the vicarious liability provisions in the Commonwealth legislation, such that it is relevant for employers across Australia.

The issue

This case concerned allegations of workplace sexual harassment made by the complainant against a gaming area manager working for The Star Entertainment Group. The complainant alleged that the manager had sexually harassed her from September 2020 to March 2021 at their workplace, and separately on 5 March 2021 at an event away from work.

The key issue in this matter was whether the employer was vicariously liable for the manager’s conduct occurring at the workplace. Relevantly, under the Qld Act, like the provisions in the Cth Act, employers may be held vicariously liable for the misconduct of an employee where the employer has not taken reasonable steps to prevent such misconduct.

The employer argued that it had taken reasonable steps to prevent the manager’s conduct because it had maintained a range of policies related to sexual harassment, including its “Equal Employment Opportunity Policy”, and because the manager had completed the required sexual harassment training. However, the QIRC raised concerns with the implementation of the training after the manager admitted to “skipping” through training modules while completing other work for the employer.

Although the training modules were sufficient in terms of their content, the QIRC found that “the completion of online training conducted concurrently whilst completing work duties is below basic training expectations to the extent that it cannot be considered reasonable”. The measures taken by the employer were found to be particularly unreasonable as the manager had previously been found by the employer to have engaged in sexual harassment and was on receipt of a final warning.

Practical implications for HR leaders and businesses

Although the decision in Loquias focuses on employers’ obligations with respect to vicarious liability, it may provide guidance to employers on what is required to comply with the positive duty. This decision reaffirms that the general standard of precautions required to be undertaken by employers to prevent sexual harassment is high.

Despite having records that the manager completed the employer’s sexual harassment training, this was found by the QIRC to be insufficient to show that the manager had meaningfully completed the training. Consequently, employers should consider implementing mechanisms to ensure that employees are absorbing training content. Such measures to validate the completion of training are becoming particularly necessary as the growing use of online training modules is accompanied by the rising prominence of artificial intelligence.

Further, it must be recognised that employees who have had substantiated sexual harassment claims made against them pose a heightened risk to the workplace. As discussed by the QIRC, employers must facilitate additional training for these employees in order to have taken sufficient reasonable steps to prevent sexual harassment.

Employers should take the opportunity to review their sexual harassment policies and training programs, and to ensure that mechanisms are in place to guarantee that employees are receiving – and undertaking – adequate training. This could include providing employees with dedicated “training time” to complete online modules, ensuring training is repeated and reinforced, and delivering additional training in parts of the business that may pose a heightened risk.

Looking ahead

More than ever, employers are relying on the use of online modules to fulfil employees’ training requirements. However, the QIRC’s decision has made it obvious that “tick-the-box” sexual harassment training is insufficient to discharge employer obligations to prevent sexual harassment in the workplace.

This decision is likely to have a range of implications for the steps taken by employers to prevent sexual harassment in the workplace. HR leaders should not only regularly review the training modules and resources available to their employees, but should also take steps to ensure that employees meaningfully engage with the content.

Reference: Loquias v The Star Entertainment Group and John Dwyer [2026] QIRC 023.

Emily Haar is a partner, and Isabella Conner is a law graduate with Piper Alderman.

Want to see more stories from trusted news sources?
Make HR Leader a preferred news source on Google.