Re Camilleri - [2025] FWC 1349

[2025] FWC 1349

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

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

Re Camilleri

(AB2024/896)

COMMISSIONER CRAWFORD

SYDNEY, 15 MAY 2025

Application for a FWC order to stop bullying – nine allegations of bullying – two allegations substantiated – behaviour of worker unreasonable and has contributed to manager’s behaviour – order made for mediation between the worker and manager.

BACKGROUND

Adam Camilleri is employed by NBN Co Limited (NBN Co) as a Field Engineer. Mr Camilleri commenced employment with NBN Co in 2016. Mr Camilleri claims he has been bullied at work by his Field Area Manager, Paul Fitzpatrick. Mr Camilleri has reported directly to Mr Fitzpatrick since he commenced acting as Field Area Manager for the NSW Metro South Team on 1 July 2024. Mr Fitzpatrick was formally appointed to this role on 21 August 2024. This decision concerns whether actions taken by Mr Fitzpatrick towards Mr Camilleri in his role of Field Area Manager constitute Mr Camilleri being “bullied at work”, and whether any stop bullying orders should be made.

A schedule identifying the evidence and submissions relied upon by the parties is attached at the end of this decision. NBN Co supported Mr Fitzpatrick in defending the allegations of bullying. Mr Camilleri was represented by the CEPU.[1] All witnesses were cross-examined on their evidence during hearings on 16 and 17 April 2025 in Sydney. A further hearing via video was held for closing submissions on 6 May 2025. I have considered all the evidence and submissions.

Mr Camilleri’s application and submissions initially named other NBN Co employees as being responsible for bullying him and raised concerns about conduct that was not related to Mr Fitzpatrick. These matters do not need to be addressed in the decision given they were not pressed by Mr Camilleri. For completeness, I do not consider any of the other complaints raised by Mr Camilleri that are not dealt with in this decision could constitute Mr Camilleri being bullied at work by Mr Fitzpatrick. The other complaints are not directed at the behaviour of Mr Fitzpatrick.

AUTHORITIES

In Amie Mac v Bank of Queensland Limited & Ors[2] (Mac) Vice President Hatcher (as his Honour then was) identified that s.789FF of the Fair Work Act 2009 (FW Act) establishes three prerequisites to the exercise of the power to make anti-bullying orders, being:

1)A worker must have made an application under s.789FC;

2)The Commission must be satisfied that the applicant worker has been bullied at work by an individual or group of individuals; and

3)The Commission must be satisfied that there is a risk that the applicant worker will continue to be bullied at work by the individual or group of individuals.

In Mac, Vice President Hatcher (as he then was) provided the following list of examples of conduct that may constitute “bullying at work”:

“… intimidation, coercion, threats, humiliation, shouting, sarcasm, victimisation, terrorising, singling-out, malicious pranks, physical abuse, verbal…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Re Camilleri

Details

AGLC: Re Camilleri [2025] FWC 1349
Case: [2025] FWC 1349
Decision Date: 15 MAY 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Re Camilleri involved an application for an order from the Fair Work Commission (FWC) to address allegations of workplace bullying. Camilleri, the applicant, alleged that she had been subjected to nine instances of bullying by a colleague, referred to as the respondent. Two of the allegations were substantiated, with the respondent’s behaviour found to be unreasonable and contributing to the manager's conduct. The application was made under the Fair Work Act, seeking relief against the ongoing bullying.

The primary legal issue before the FWC was whether the respondent’s conduct constituted workplace bullying as defined by the Act and whether an order for mediation was appropriate. The Commission had to assess the substantiated allegations and determine the adequacy of the employer's response to the bullying. The court also needed to consider whether an order for mediation would be effective in resolving the ongoing issues between the parties.

The FWC found that the substantiated allegations demonstrated that the respondent’s behaviour was unreasonable and had contributed to the manager's conduct, constituting workplace bullying. The Commission acknowledged the seriousness of the issue and the impact it had on Camilleri. However, it also noted the employer's efforts to address the situation. Given the complexity of the interpersonal dynamics involved, the FWC decided that an order for mediation between Camilleri and the respondent was the most appropriate course of action. This decision was made to facilitate a resolution and prevent further escalation of the conflict.

The FWC ordered mediation between Camilleri and the respondent, aiming to resolve the issues of workplace bullying. The order also required the employer to provide support and ensure a safe workplace. The decision highlighted the importance of early intervention and the potential for mediation in addressing workplace disputes.

Orders