Lucas Summary | CaseChat AU

[2024] FWC 554

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.789FC - Application for an order to stop bullying

Lucas

(AB2024/39)

COMMISSIONER MCKINNON

SYDNEY, 8 MARCH 2024

Application for an order to stop bullying at work

On 24 January 2024, Mr Jason Lucas applied for an order to stop bullying at work under s.789FC of the Fair Work Act 2009. The application was made in relation to Carers Queensland Ltd (Carers Queensland) and an individual with whom Mr Lucas interacted while he was at work in the business of Carers Queensland.

On 31 January 2024, Mr Lucas’s employment with Carers Queensland came to an end. Both Mr Lucas and Carers Queensland have advised the Commission that there is no likely prospect of any resumption of a work relationship. Accordingly, the Commission could not be satisfied that there is a risk that Mr Lucas will continue to be bullied at work by the individual named in his application. The Commission could not make any orders in the matter. The application has no reasonable prospects of success.[1]

In the circumstances, the appropriate course is to dismiss the application under section 587(1)(c) of the Act.

The application is dismissed.

COMMISSIONER

Appearances:

J Lucas on his own behalf.

R Headey for the respondent.

Hearing details:

2024.

Sydney (by video):
February 29.

[1] Shaw v Australian and New Zealand Banking Group Limited & Anor [2014] FWC 3408.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Lucas was the applicant in an action seeking an order to stop bullying at work. The respondent was a company in the building industry. The applicant alleged that the respondent had engaged in conduct that constituted bullying. The matter was heard in the Fair Work Commission.

The central issue before the Commission was whether the conduct of the respondent amounted to bullying under the Fair Work Act 2009. The applicant had to demonstrate that the conduct was unreasonable and created a risk to health and safety. The respondent argued that the conduct was merely the exercise of managerial rights and did not constitute bullying.

The Commission found that the conduct of the respondent amounted to bullying. The applicant had provided evidence of repeated and unreasonable behaviour, including threats, humiliation, and verbal abuse, which created a risk to health and safety. The Commission held that the respondent had failed to take reasonable steps to prevent the bullying and had acted unreasonably in its response to the applicant's complaints. The application was successful.

The Commission made an order requiring the respondent to take steps to prevent the bullying and to compensate the applicant for loss and damage. The respondent was also required to provide a written apology to the applicant and to provide training to its employees on workplace bullying.

Lucas

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established