Melbourne hospital staffer refused to work more than four hours a week because of his ADHD, anxiety and depression - and then claimed it was unfair to sack him after a six month stand-off

By SARAH BROOKES - SENIOR REPORTER, AUSTRALIA Published: 05:50, 14 July 2026 | Updated: 05:50, 14 July 2026 A hospital worker told his bosses his ADHD, anxiety and depression meant he couldn't work more than four hours a week - and even that had to be over two days. Melbourne man Ryan Sim was hired by Monash Health in January 2025 as an International Medical Graduate Affairs Coordinator, a full-time role helping overseas-trained doctors secure registration and visas.  But within weeks of starting, managers raised concerns about his punctuality, attendance and ability to complete tasks, a Fair Work Commission hearing was told. After Mr Sim revealed he had ADHD, Monash Health created a support plan with flexible start times, hybrid working arrangements and mentoring. Medical certificates restricted him to two hours a day, two days a week in a 'non-stressful role', with those limitations remaining unchanged for months.   But the employment relationship deteriorated over the following months until in May 2025, Mr Sim emailed the health service saying he would not return to work until 'meaningful changes are implemented'. He later lodged complaints about alleged bullying, workload issues and psychological safety concerns, and also filed a WorkCover claim that was later rejected. From June 2025 onwards, medical certificates said he either had no capacity for work or could only work two hours a day, two days a week in a 'non-stressful role' because of an adjustment disorder, anxiety and depression.  Monash Doctors Workforce director Mathew Born (pictured) Melbourne man Ryan Sim was hired by Monash Health (pictured) as an International Medical Graduate Affairs Coordinator to help overseas-trained doctors secure registration and visas The Commission heard Monash Health repeatedly asked Mr Sim to provide more detailed medical information, including what duties he could perform, what exactly constituted a 'non-stressful role', and when he might be able to return to full duties. But Mr Sim consistently refused to provide anything beyond his medical certificates, citing privacy concerns. In October 2025, Monash Health director Mathew Born wrote to Mr Sim outlining its concerns and the lengthy history of attempts to support him to return to work and obtain further information about his condition. A medical certificate from his doctor in November 2025 stated Mr Sim could work just four hours a week in a non-stressful role due to depression, anxiety, insomnia, and impaired memory, cognitive function and judgement. By November 2025, after more than six months away from work, Monash Health concluded Mr Sim could not perform the inherent requirements of his position and moved to terminate his employment. Mr Sim launched an unfair dismissal case and argued the hospital failed to properly explore reasonable adjustments, alternative duties and an independent medical assessment before dismissing him.  However, Deputy President Ian Masson found the decision was justified and was critical of Mr Sim's refusal to cooperate with requests for additional medical information. 'It's difficult to envisage a situation where an employee could have been less co-operative,' he wrote in his published decision on Friday.  Deputy President Ian Masson found the decision was justified and was critical of Mr Sim's refusal to cooperate with requests for additional medical information '[Mr Sim] did not help himself through his persistent and inexplicable failure to provide requested medical and capacity information that would have assisted [Monash Health] in assessing whether his capacity was likely to continue or... whether reasonable adjustments could be made to enable (Mr Sims) to return to work.' Commissioner Masson said Monash Health, one of Victoria’s largest public health services with 25,000 employees, did not act 'hastily'. 'It requested and gave [Mr Sim] an opportunity to furnish further medical and capacity information on at least 10 occasions, all of which requests and opportunities were rejected,' he said. The commission further found that even if the dismissal had been unfair, he would not have been entitled to compensation because he had already received four weeks' pay in lieu of notice, more than he likely would have earned before his fixed-term contract expired.