Sexual harassment infiltrates schools in Australia
A University of Tasmania lecturer dismissed for sexual harassment has had his reinstatement bid binned by the Fair Work Commission. His victim, known as Student A, was called on to provide evidence at the unfair dismissal proceedings. She therefore played a key role in getting justice and ensuring her perpetrator got what he deserved.
In what the Commission termed an “abuse of the power relationship,” the sexual harassment slowly escalated over more than a year. This was despite the victim’s repeated efforts to establish boundaries in their professional relationship.
The lecturer inappropriately touched Student A on multiple occasions, including unwanted hugs and massages. He also verbally harassed her – on one occasion saying she was “sexy” and could “start an OnlyFans.”
In this article, we look at the sexual harassment the student endured and how she helped the Fair Work Commission reject the lecturer’s bid for reinstatement.
Uni lecturer dismissed for sexual harassment after unwanted hugs, gifts and comments
The following events were detailed in the Fair Work Commission case Sisitha Jayasinghe v University of Tasmania [2025]. Dr Sisitha Jayasinghe started working for the University of Tasmania in October 2018 in a casual research role. In 2021, he stepped into a full-time role as Lecturer and Lead Researcher at the University’s Launceston campus. He had a doctorate in physiology, endocrinology and exercise science.
The events that led to the sexual harassment began in August 2022 when Dr Jayasinghe first contacted Student A. He asked if she wanted him to help her at a University open day. A couple of months later, he visited Student A’s workplace, a Launceston hotel, with four colleagues.
Following this, Dr Jayasinghe emailed Student A to congratulate her on earning her degree. He said it was “very nice seeing you” the other night and that it was a “shame we couldn’t chat longer!” He then proposed meeting up to discuss her future study options, telling her “don’t feel obliged for anything.”
Showed student pics of his cars, proposed meeting up
In early 2023, messages form Dr Jayasinghe and Student A seemed to indicate his intention to transition their relationship from professional to personal. In March 2023, she delivered a presentation on her summer scholarship research project. This project was led by Dr Jayasinghe. After the presentation, Dr Jayasinghe invited her to a virtual meeting to discuss the project. It was during this meeting that Student A claimed he showed her pictures of two cars he owned. Dr Jayasinghe, however, denied this claim during Fair Work Commission proceedings.
Days later, he proposed meeting Student A for coffee to discuss her research project. Later that day after meeting up, at 8:49pm, Dr Jayasinghe sent a message to Student A saying he “very much enjoyed our rendezvous earlier today!” He then proposed that they meet up again “regardless of how the research collaboration pan (sic) out.” He added a smiley face emoji at the end of his message.
Sexual harassment began with invite to ‘steamy date’
Student A did not reply to this message. A few days later, on 4 April 2023, Dr Jayasinghe sent another message to her. He asked if he should be concerned about “your radio silence?” He added: “Can deploy a search party if needed,” followed by a smiley emoji. He also asked if they could meet again soon.
Dr Jayasinghe had six further days of “radio silence” until Student A replied. She texted him “Hahaha no don’t be concerned at all!!” She then asked if he had a preference for when to meet up that week. In his reply, Dr Jayasinghe said the he had not had a good week and asked if they could “put the work talk on ice.”
He then said that “my trusty Mini Cooper and I have a steamy date planned” for the next day. He said it would involve “coffee, cruising, and chilling!!” and asked if she wanted to join. At Dr Jayasinghe’s unfair dismissal hearing, the Fair Work Commission found this to be “clearly” an invite to a date.
Student tried to stop sexual harassment with ‘rejection’ message
Student A did not reply to this offer of a date. A few days later, Dr Jayasinghe sent her another message saying that he had cc’d her in an email and that they could discuss it when they met. Student A did not respond to this message either. Then, two days later, Dr Jayasinghe messaged her again asking her if they could catch up.
Later that day, Student A responded with what the Fair Work Commission termed the “rejection message.” She said that “if I’m being completely honest” she was not sure if their interactions were on professional terms or not. She said that the way he texted her came across as “a bit more than a mentor.”
Student A said that she would “love” to work with Dr Jayasinghe on the project and that she did not mind hanging out. However, she said only if it was “purely platonic.” This was a strict boundary Student A placed, but as you will read, it did not prevent Dr Jayasinghe’s sexual harassment.
Dr Jayasinghe responded shortly thereafter. He thanked Student A for bringing up her concerns and said that his intentions were “solely professional.” To continue working on the project, he said they must “clear any doubts.” Dr Jayasinghe then proposed a meeting at the university to discuss. This meeting later took place and included two other university employees. During the meeting, Dr Jayasinghe showed Student A his calendar to show why he could not meet during work hours.
Bought student $190 bottle of perfume
The Fair Work Commission’s findings outlined a pattern of unwelcome conduct that constituted sexual harassment. Following Student A’s clear rejection message on 14 April 2023, Dr Jayasinghe was “on notice” that his attempts to pursue a personal relationship with Student A were “unwelcome.” However, his behavior “continued and indeed worsened.”
On 26 April 2023, he gifted Student A a $190 bottle of Chanel perfume for her birthday, despite her having told him not to get her anything. The Commission noted that Student A accepted the gift as she was “clearly” trying to manage the relationship with Dr Jayasinghe “without upsetting him.”
Sexual harassment got worse when lecturer professed feelings
On 14 May 2023, Dr Jayasinghe invited Student A to his home to do work after a research machine was not working at the University. Student A, who was vegan, told the Fair Work Commission that Dr Jayasinghe had vegan milk and cheese that he had previously bought for her. He had also prepared vegan food for her. Student A asked why she was at his house and “what is going on?”
Dr Jayasinghe then said that he had “feelings for her.” Student A responded by saying she was not interested and had a partner. She said that she wanted “stronger boundaries” between them. Despite this, the sexual harassment continued. Dr Jayasinghe later invited her over again the very next day.
Forced hug and squeezed hip
The next day, Dr Jayasinghe said he could meet Student A at his home and have a drink. He said he suggested meeting at his home as it would be during his work hours. She replied that after their conversation the previous day, she was not sure how “appropriate” it would be to go to his house for a drink. Student A then suggested going to a cafe.
The cafe was closed when the duo got there. Dr Jayasinghe then invited Student A into his car, driving “somewhat aimlessly out of town.” Student A said that she again stated her desire for “stronger boundaries.” In response, Dr Jayasinghe asked her to lay her car seat back, which she declined. He then made comments that Student A was “trouble” and, on the drive back, asked her for a hug. When she refused the hug, Dr Jayasinghe said “come here” and hugged her, squeezing her hip.
About a week later, Dr Jayasinghe again asked Student A to hug him while they were in the lab. She agreed, but when she tried to get away, Dr Jayasinghe said something like “just a little bit longer.” He denied that this happened.
Sexual harassment was ‘abuse of the power relationship’
The Fair Work Commission noted a particularly “disturbing” exchange via WhatsApp on 27 June 2023. Dr Jayasinghe asked Student A, “do you trust me with your future?” When Student A expressed confusion, he said he needed to know if their relationship was “worthwhile” in the long run.
He then explicitly linked Student A’s potential PhD opportunities and career in academia to his desire to “know you at a deeper level.” The Commission found this exchange was an “abuse of the power relationship” and leverage to pursue a personal relationship.
Physical sexual harassment continued with massages at gym
Student A told the Fair Work Commision that in July 2023 Dr Jayasinghe “repeatedly” hugged her in circumstances where she said no. She also testified that on another occasion, while they were marking in his office, he “repeatedly” reached out to hold her hand and touch her face.
In the same month, Student A said she was also subject to physical sexual harassment during five sessions at the gym. These incidents were captured on CCTV footage, which were viewed by the Commission. The footage showed that Dr Jayasinghe physically touched Student A when ‘spotting’ her. He had also massaged Student A’s hip area.
“I think you could start an OnlyFans”
Student A told the Fair Work Commission why she tolerated this physical sexual harassment. She said that when he “had exerted his energy” he would not harass her for “a week or so.” During these gym sessions, Dr Jayasinghe also made overtly sexual comments. He said “I think you’re sexy. He also told Student A that “you could start an OnlyFans.” He explained that if she went to the gym she will “have a big bum,” which he reasoned would help her on OnlyFans.
The disturbing comments from Dr Jayasinghe did not end there, however. He also told Student A that while she was willing to collaborate with him on research papers, “you won’t collaborate in the bedroom with me.”
Turned up to student’s workplace, asked for hug in car
Also in July 2023, Dr Jayasinghe attended Student A’s workplace and hung out at the bar for over two hours. Student A told the Fair Work Commission that when she finished her shift at 9pm he asked her for a lift home. She agreed to do so, as she “could not think of an excuse.”
Upon arrival, Dr Jayasinghe asked her to come inside his home, which she refused. His sexual harassment then took a disturbing turn. He asked her to sit with him in the car and hug him for “at least one to two minutes,” which she acceded to. The Commission deemed this request for a long hug to be “sexual misconduct.”
Sexual assaulter said student made him ‘feel like a rapist’
In early August 2023, Student A called Dr Jayasinghe back after a missed call. She told him she did not feel comfortable with his touching and grabbing and did not want to work with him anymore. Student A stated he replied by telling her “that she makes him feel like a rapist” and that she is selfish.
The Fair Work Commission found that Dr Jayasinghe’s conduct was “willful and deliberate” and constituted serious misconduct. It said his actions caused a “serious and imminent risk” to the health and safety of Student A and to the University’s reputation.
‘It takes two to tango’: Victim blamed during sexual harassment investigation
Shortley after this incident, Student A complained to the University about the sexual harassment from Dr Jayasinghe. He was placed on suspension when an investigation commenced on 4 August 2023. The Fair Work Commission found that Dr Jayasinghe was “dishonest” with the University throughout the investigation process.
He was found to have not taken accountability for his sexual harassment. It was also noted that he had attempted to “dishonestly re-characterize” his interactions with Student A in order to deflect culpability. This included describing Student A’s complaint as “concocted and fanciful.” Dr Jayasinghe also suggested that his therapists concluded that Student A was attracted to him.
He also inferred that she had engaged in a mutual courtship as “it takes two to tango.” The Commission concluded that this behavior “destroyed” the relationship of trust between Dr Jayasinghe and the University.
Procedural issues identified
The Fair Work Commission noted that while Dr Jayasinghe acted dishonestly during the University’s investigation, he was not notified that his dishonesty would also be a reason for dismissal. It was also found that he was not given an opportunity to respond to that specific point. Delays in the disciplinary process were also acknowledged as contributing to a degree of procedural unfairness.
‘Delusional:’ Denied sexual harassment despite clear evidence
A significant factor in the Fair Work Commission’s decision was Dr Jayasinghe’s “near total lack of insight” into his misconduct. His “continued insistence” that Student A had feelings for him, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, demonstrated to the Commission that the University could “not ever trust” trust him to work closely with students of staff.
The Commission said that Dr Jayasinghe lacked remorse for his sexual harassment, which it described as “egregious”. It also stated that he had a “delusional” level of denial about the allegations against him, which were backed up by evidence. The Commission said that he had a “total” denial of any wrongdoing and that it would be “unsafe” to reinstate him.
Lecturer’s dismissal upheld due to sexual harassment
The Fair Work Commission noted that Mr. Jayasinghe’s sexual harassment had a “devastating” effect on Student A. It said that she had lost “5 to 6 kilograms” due to being in a “constant state of stress.”
Ultimately, the Commission determined that the “gravity of the misconduct” and Dr Jayasinghe’s lack of insight into what he had done outweighed the procedural deficiencies. His dismissal was therefore ruled as fair and his bid for reinstatement was rejected.
Have you experienced sexual harassment?
If you’re experiencing sexual harassment at work, A Whole New Approach is here to help. For over 20 years, we have helped thousands of Australians in pursuing justice and compensation. We understand how isolating and distressing these experiences can be, and we are by your side every step of the way.
Our team of workplace advocates takes on the stress of the claims process so you don’t have to. With over 10,000 claims handled across Australia, you can trust us to help you stand up for your rights and take back control of your future.
Call us today on 1800 333 666 for a complimentary and private discussion about your situation.
Find similar articles to – “‘You could start an OnlyFans’: Lecturer dismissed for sexual harassment”
Worker forced into sex with boss wins $25,000
