Suzie Cheikho, a long-serving consultant at Insurance Australia Group (IAG), faced dismissal from her 18-year career in February this year. This was due to alleged insufficient typing activity while working remotely. The circumstances surrounding her departure warrant closer examination of who she is.

Suzie Cheikho’s dismissal came as a result of her employer’s utilization of keystroke technology to monitor her remote work performance.

Advertisement

According to the New York Post, Cheikho’s alleged job loss stemmed from a perceived lack of typing activity during her remote work hours. Despite her appeal contesting the “unfair” dismissal, Australia’s Fair Work Commission (FWC) upheld her termination. They asserted that her removal was based on a legitimate reason of misconduct.

Earlier in November 2022, Cheikho received a formal warning regarding her productivity. The company placed her on a performance improvement plan.

Records revealed that Cheikho exhibited low keystroke activity during her logged hours. They recorded zero keystrokes over extended periods. It was 117 hours in October, 143 hours in November, and 60 hours in December.

Throughout the surveillance period, her average keystrokes per hour stood at 54. This is indicative of potential inadequate work engagement, as it appeared she was not consistently fulfilling her work obligations.

Suzie Cheikho contested the claim, mentioning occasional use of different devices for logging in and disputing any shortfall in working hours.

Her role encompassed critical responsibilities, including the timely generation of insurance documentation in accordance with regulatory deadlines and oversight of “work from home compliance”. The company gave reasons of missed deadlines and meetings, instances of unavailability, failure to complete assigned tasks resulting in regulatory intervention.

Deputy President of the FWC, Thomas Roberts, determined that Cheikho did not fulfill her expected work requirements during designated hours, despite being under observation. While acknowledging the challenging situation, Roberts affirmed the dismissal as a justifiable response to misconduct.

Cheikho later asserted that her employer had a deliberate agenda to remove her from the company, alleging that they had singled her out due to her mental health issues.

However, the FWC’s investigation concluded that her dismissal was grounded in valid misconduct.