You web browser may not be properly supported. To use this site and all its features we recommend using the latest versions of Chrome, Safari or Firefox

Elderly Bullying 0

A strong perception by an employee that they have been the subject of bullying in the workplace may be insufficient to satisfy a bullying claim under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth).

A recent case before the Fair Work Commission has highlighted the fact that reasonable management action will not be considered bullying.

The Fair Work Act defines bullying as:

(1) A worker is bullied at work if:

(a) while the worker is at work in a constitutionally-covered business:

(i) an individual; or

(ii) a group of individuals;

repeatedly behaves unreasonably towards the worker, or a group of workers of which the worker is a member; and

(b) that behaviour creates a risk to health and safety.

(2) To avoid doubt, subsection

(1) does not apply to reasonable management action carried out in a reasonable manner.

In this recent case, an aged care worker argued that her manager and supervisor engaged in repeated bullying behaviour. The employer submitted that the employee was the subject of reasonable management action and management had conducted itself in a reasonable manner including:

  • formal warning on 31 March 2015;
  • formal counselling on 12 September 2016;
  • formal warning on 19 October 2016;
  • formal counselling meeting on 12 January 2017;
  • Show cause as to why employment should not be terminated on 20 January 2017.

Despite the worker’s allegations that she had been yelled and screamed at verbally, at the conclusion of hearing all of the evidence, the Commission determined that the events leading up to and including the issue of a formal warning on 31 March 2015, was anything other than reasonable management action taken in a reasonable way. Even though the employee held a strong perception that she had been the subject of bullying, this was not borne out by the evidence.

We're here to help. If you would like to enquire about an employment case, simply get in touch online or call us on 1800 555 777 to find out where you stand.

The contents of this blog post are considered accurate as at the date of publication. However the applicable laws may be subject to change, thereby affecting the accuracy of the article. The information contained in this blog post is of a general nature only and is not specific to anyone’s personal circumstances. Please seek legal advice before acting on any of the information contained in this post.

Thank you for your feedback.

Related blog posts

Employment Law
Life after lockdown: what are your rights with returning to work?

COVID-19 has changed many things in our lives. It has made us adapt to new social norms of staying 1.5 meters apart, it has introduced face masks to our daily lives, and it has caused a mass disruption to the way we work. But now that many lockdown restrictions are easing and we start to return to more “normal” ways of working, what are your rights to continue to work flexibly? If your employer wants you to return to the office, then in most cases you’ll have to go back unless their request is unreasonable or it’s unsafe. Whether it’s safe for you to return will depend on factors such as the nature of your employer’s business and how it’s carried out, whether your employer is...

Flexible working arrangements in COVID
Employment Law
National industrial manslaughter legislation would save lives

Strong national industrial manslaughter legislation is what Australian workers need, but a national law is not supported by the Federal Government. As a Workers’ Compensation lawyer in national law firm, I see the lack of consistency across the states and believe there should be national standards to protect all workers. Workers should feel safe no matter what state they live in. The recent death of a worker in Sydney’s Port Botany who was crushed between two shipping containers, and delays in commitment from the NSW Government to investigate industrial manslaughter laws, highlight the need for national reform. In the meantime, the NSW State Government needs to take fast action on...

Outdoor construction worksafe
Employment Law
Accepting jobs through apps puts workers’ rights at risk

Workers getting jobs through apps like Airtasker and Uber Eats are not receiving the benefits they are entitled to, are often unaware of their current hourly rate and most are not covered by work-related insurance. Research from Queensland University of Technology, the University of Adelaide and University of Technology Sydney, commissioned by the Victorian Government, showed about seven per cent of 14,000 respondents had found work on a digital platform (the gig economy) in the past year and 40 per cent of those did not know how much they were earning per hour. It showed younger people (aged 18-34) and males were accepting work through digital platforms in higher proportions than other...

Shutterstock 1388236754 Resized

We're here to help

Start your online claim check now. Or, if you have a question, get in touch with our team.