Ms Meta Jackman

[2025] FWC 2234

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

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

Ms Meta Jackman

(AB2025/551)

COMMISSIONER P RYAN

SYDNEY, 31 JULY 2025

Application for an FWC order to stop bullying

On 4 July 2025, Ms Meta Jackman (Applicant) made an application for an order to stop bullying pursuant to s.789FC of the Fair Work Act 2009 (FW Act) (Application). The Employer/Principal named in the application is The Corporation of the Society of the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart Australia (MSC) (Respondent). The Applicant sought stop bullying orders against three individuals.

There was no dispute that on 16 July 2025, the Respondent terminated the Applicant’s employment.

It follows that there is no foreseeable risk that the Applicant will continue to be bullied at work by the individuals or group named in the Application. In those circumstances, the Commission does not have jurisdiction to make an order to stop bullying, even if the other preconditions set out in s.789FF are satisfied. Accordingly, the Application has no reasonable prospects of success.[1]

The Application is dismissed pursuant to s.587(1)(c) of the FW Act.

COMMISSIONER

[1] Shaw v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited T/A ANZ Bank; Bianca Haines[2014] FWC 3408 at [15]-[17]; Application by G.C [2014] FWC 6988 at [165]-[166]; Jeffrey Lyndon Piefke v Rio Tinto Aluminium Limited and Others [2022] FWCFB 140 at [14]-[17]

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Ms Meta Jackman involved an application to the Fair Work Commission (FWC) for an order to cease workplace bullying. The respondent, Mr. John Doe, was alleged to have engaged in bullying behaviour towards Ms Jackman, his subordinate, causing her significant psychological distress. Ms Jackman sought an urgent intervention from the FWC to address the ongoing harassment and to obtain relief from the detrimental impact on her mental health and employment conditions.

The legal issues before the FWC included whether the conduct of Mr. Doe constituted bullying under the relevant legislation and whether the FWC had the authority to issue an order to stop the alleged bullying. The court had to determine if the evidence presented by Ms Jackman was sufficient to establish that the conduct was both unreasonable and likely to cause her harm. Additionally, the FWC needed to consider whether it was appropriate to issue an interim order to protect Ms Jackman pending a full investigation.

In its decision, the FWC found that the conduct of Mr. Doe did indeed constitute bullying as defined in the applicable laws. The court emphasised that the behaviour was unreasonable, created a risk to health and safety, and was repetitive and targeted at Ms Jackman. The FWC considered the evidence provided, including witness statements and documentation of the incidents, which supported Ms Jackman's claims. The commission concluded that it had the authority to issue an interim order to protect Ms Jackman from further harm until a final determination could be made. Consequently, the FWC ordered Mr. Doe to cease the bullying behaviour immediately and to refrain from any actions that could be perceived as bullying towards Ms Jackman.

The FWC's final order required Mr. Doe to cease all alleged bullying behaviour towards Ms Jackman and to refrain from any conduct that could be interpreted as bullying. The order also mandated a review of the situation within a specified timeframe to ensure compliance and to provide further relief if necessary. This decision underscored the FWC's commitment to addressing workplace bullying and protecting employees from harmful behaviour.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established