The employer owed $250K to the ATO — and sacked her without a single conversation
A NSW aged care worker who flagged her employer's financial problems was fired while on workers compensation — and the Fair Work Commission has sided with her.
In a decision handed down on 23 March 2026, Deputy President Wright found that the dismissal of Mrs Leesa Zaicos by Tamworth Dementia Respite Service Inc (TDRS) was harsh, unjust and unreasonable, ordering the organisation to pay $20,141.90 gross plus superannuation in compensation.
Zaicos had worked as Executive Manager of TDRS — a small not-for-profit in regional New South Wales providing centre-based dementia respite programs — since March 2021. During her four years in the role, she secured funding increases that effectively doubled the organisation's operational budget and expanded services from 20 clients and carers to approximately 90 high-needs dementia participants.
The trouble began when staff raised concerns about unpaid superannuation. Zaicos brought the matter to the voluntary committee of management, which refused to act. She then instructed a solicitor, which led to the cessation of the external accountant's services. It turned out the accountant had failed to remit superannuation and GST to the Australian Tax Office over several years, leaving the organisation with a debt of approximately $250,000.
In 2024, the committee increased Zaicos' duties to five days per week to help manage the fallout. The pressure eventually caused a psychological injury, and she was certified unfit for work from 4 April 2025.
Four days later, the committee appointed a voluntary administrator. On 23 April 2025, the administrator terminated Zaicos' employment while she remained absent on workers compensation, citing a restructure. There was no consultation.
That last point proved critical. A Full Bench of the Commission had already confirmed that TDRS was required to consult with affected employees under clause 8.1 of the SCHADS Award before making major changes likely to have significant effects on staff. The administrator made no attempt to do so.
Deputy President Wright found the termination decision was based solely on Zaicos' rate of pay, without any assessment of the qualifications, responsibilities and duties needed to run the facility. The administrator, who had no qualifications in delivering services to aged participants, had simply redistributed Zaicos' work to two existing part-time employees during the two months he managed the organisation.
The Commission also noted that reducing Zaicos' hours could have been explored as an alternative — particularly given she had previously adjusted her working days in line with available funding throughout her employment.
Zaicos represented herself at the determinative conference. No TDRS personnel attended or gave evidence.
The compensation was ordered payable in three instalments through to June 2026, with the Commission taking into account that TDRS remains subject to a Deed of Company Arrangement.
For HR professionals, the case is a straightforward reminder: consultation obligations under modern awards do not pause because an organisation is in financial distress. And dismissing someone on workers compensation leave, without exploring alternatives, remains a fast track to an unfair dismissal finding — no matter how dire the books look.
