Cites possibility of encountering alleged bullies at new job
The Fair Work Commission (FWC) recently dealt with the case of a worker who applied for orders to stop bullying at work, with one catch – she doesn’t work there anymore.
The worker argued that she and her former “bullies” reside in a small town, and she feared the bullying would continue even at her new job. She also said that her new boss is a client of her former company.
Will the application prosper?
Account manager in small town
The worker was an animal health account manager by Esperance-based business The Trustee for KJ & LJ Forsyth Family Trust, trading as “South Coastal Agencies.” In December 2022, she resigned from her employment with South Coastal Agencies.
She started a new job and filed an anti-bullying application for the following reasons:
“Firstly, that Esperance is a small town with limited employment opportunities, and if she is to continue working in her professional field, she might return to work for South Coastal Agencies.
Secondly, that she has a new casual job as a machinery operator on a farm that is a client of South Coastal Agencies, and if she progresses in her employment in the new business, she may undertake work that brings her into contact with the persons named as having engaged in bullying at work at South Coastal Agencies.”
Latest News
The woman argued that her former co-workers “might one day attend the farm and encounter her there.”
And lastly, she said the co-workers “have continued to bully her since her employment ceased, by making enquiries and comments about her to third parties in her absence, which she later found out about.”
Meanwhile, the employer argued that her application should not be accommodated “because her employment relationship will not be restored.”
It also said the worker’s role no longer exists “due to a business decision not to continue with the role of animal health accounts manager and the redistribution of her duties among other employees.”
HRD previously reported on the case of a Menulog rider who filed a bullying claim against the McDonald’s crew, sparking a discussion about workplace bullying allegations between delivery riders and restaurants.
In another case, an employer who was sued for bullying claimed the defence of “cultural differences,” arguing that “manhandling” is “part of Asian culture.”
The FWC’s decision
The FWC said the worker’s argument that she might be bullied at her new job because her former employer had ties with her new company was “speculative at best.”
“Her arguments rely on the prospect of a promotion to a new and different role after being in the job for a matter of weeks, and separately on an unplanned potential encounter in the future (and not necessarily while at work),” the decision said.
It also said the worker’s alleged report that her former co-workers were talking about her was “hearsay” since she could not prove that had happened.
“The one thing that can be said with certainty is that she is no longer a ‘worker’ or ‘at work’ in the business of South Coastal Agencies. This is due to her resignation,” the commission said.
“For this and the reasons above, there is no current or reasonably foreseeable risk of her continuing to be bullied at work.”
“There is also no reasonably foreseeable risk that she will continue to be bullied by in her current, separate employment as a casual machinery operator in a different business, in a different place, where the prospect of their likely interaction is not established.”
“The Commission can only make an order to stop bullying at work in this case if satisfied that there is a risk that an employee will continue to be bullied at work, but in this case, such risk does not exist,” the decision said.
Thus, the worker’s application was rejected.