Complex trauma and workplace bullying claims tested against business accommodation limits
The Fair Work Commission (FWC) recently dismissed an unfair dismissal application from a sales worker who was terminated due to medical incapacity following a 15-month absence from work.
The case arose when the employee, who worked from home and experienced severe domestic violence, was unable to return to work due to complex post-traumatic stress disorder and generalised anxiety disorder stemming from prolonged trauma and workplace bullying.
The worker argued she was unfairly dismissed after being forgotten by the employer and excluded from reintegration planning, maintaining that her psychological injuries were partially work-related and deserving of workers' compensation protection.
She contended that the dismissal was premature, given her willingness to cooperate and explore support options through appropriate channels.
The employer contested the unfair dismissal claim, arguing the worker's extended incapacity and medical evidence indicating no prospect of return in the short-to-medium term provided valid grounds for termination.
Domestic violence creates complex workplace challenges
The employment relationship involved a business advisor performing sales work from home who had endured shocking domestic violence since 2008, including multiple attempts on her life recorded on internal home security cameras.
The worker's personal circumstances significantly impacted her work capacity, with the employer offering family violence support, including ten days paid leave and alternative safe workplace arrangements away from the domestic situation.
In August 2023, the worker transitioned to part-time flexible working arrangements to care for her daughter's hospitalisation and ongoing eating disorder treatment.
Between June and December 2023, she took 32 days off work, with more than 20 days dedicated to caring for her daughter's medical needs during this challenging family period.
In January 2024, after returning from approved leave to move house, the worker believed she was being bullied by her manager and experienced a rapid mental health decline, including thoughts of self-harm.
She commenced stress leave that extended for approximately 15 months until her dismissal, during which time the problematic manager was subsequently demoted and later made redundant.
Medical evidence documents severe psychological impact
Clinical psychology assessments revealed the worker suffered from complex post-traumatic stress disorder and generalised anxiety disorder resulting from prolonged domestic violence and workplace trauma.
Medical reports consistently indicated extreme anxiety levels and stress significantly impacting her ability to function, particularly regarding work capacity and parental responsibilities.
Throughout 2024, the employer received ten medical certificates of increasing duration, progressing from one month to six months as the worker's condition showed no improvement.
Three treating practitioners aligned in their assessment that the worker's psychological condition originated from domestic violence experiences, with later reports identifying workplace bullying as a contributing factor.
By March 2025, medical evidence indicated the worker remained unfit for work with severely compromised capacity to undertake tasks, maintain focus, meet deadlines, and achieve targets due to post-traumatic stress symptoms affecting brain functioning.
Clinical recommendations suggested reviewing return-to-work capacity around mid-2025 at the earliest, with no guarantee of successful rehabilitation.
Fair opportunity process precedes dismissal decision
The employer implemented a fair opportunity letter process in March 2025, providing the worker with formal notification of potential dismissal based on medical incapacity after reviewing extensive medical evidence spanning the 15-month absence period.
The letter outlined the employer's position that continued accommodation of ongoing absence was no longer sustainable for business operations.
The worker was given until 10 April 2025 to respond with any additional medical information or arguments against termination, which she used to raise potential workers' compensation claims based on domestic violence incidents occurring in her home workplace during work hours.
She requested that no employment decisions be made until workers' compensation processes were finalised.
The employer considered the worker's response but determined it did not provide additional medical evidence to support continued employment or indicate improved capacity to perform role requirements.
Termination was confirmed on 11 April 2025 with two weeks' pay in lieu of notice and accrued entitlements, following comprehensive consideration of all available information.
Commission applies incapacity dismissal principles
The Commission determined that valid reasons existed for dismissal based on the worker's extended 15-month incapacity and medical evidence indicating no prospect of return to work in the short-to-medium term.
The FWC applied established principles that employers are not required to hold positions open indefinitely for employees unable to perform inherent role requirements.
While acknowledging legislative protections against dismissal within three months of unpaid illness leave, the Commission found the 15-month absence period far exceeded reasonable accommodation expectations.
The decision emphasised that employers have legitimate business needs to organise operations and cannot be expected to maintain indefinite employment arrangements for incapacitated workers.
The FWC rejected arguments that potential workers' compensation claims should have prevented dismissal, noting that injury classification determinations were matters for workers' compensation authorities rather than the Commission.
Even workplace injury findings would not necessarily preclude dismissal for extended incapacity periods affecting operational requirements.
Procedural fairness requirements satisfied
The Commission found the employer provided appropriate procedural fairness through the fair opportunity letter process, giving the worker adequate time and opportunity to respond to proposed dismissal reasons.
The FWC noted the worker was properly notified of dismissal grounds and afforded reasonable opportunity to present contrary evidence or arguments.
The decision recognised the employer's compassionate approach throughout the worker's absence, including regular supportive contact, family violence policy implementation, and flexible working arrangements.
The Commission found no evidence of unreasonable refusal to provide support persons or procedural deficiencies that would constitute unfair treatment.
While acknowledging the worker's difficult personal circumstances and traumatic experiences, the FWC concluded that business operational needs ultimately justified the termination decision after extensive accommodation efforts and proper procedural steps were followed throughout the extended absence period.
