A recent Fair Work Commission (FWC) decision in Eales vs Equifax Australasia Group Services Pty Ltd [2025] FWC 621 has clarified that a return-to-work directive does not necessarily constitute workplace bullying.
The case highlights key considerations for employers managing workplace complaints, performance issues, and return-to-work policies. Employers should ensure that all management actions, including employee directives and performance management, are reasonable and well-documented to prevent legal disputes.
Understanding workplace bullying under Australian law
Workplace bullying is defined under the Fair Work Act 2009 as repeated, unreasonable behavior directed at an employee that creates a risk to health and safety. Reasonable management action, carried out in a reasonable manner, is excluded from this definition. The case of Eales vs Equifax demonstrates the importance of distinguishing between legitimate performance management and genuine workplace bullying.
Fair Work Commission case: key findings on workplace bullying allegations
Ms. Amanda Eales alleged workplace bullying by Equifax and various coworkers, citing a range of grievances, including lack of support following traumatic personal incidents, workplace humiliation, unreasonable management actions, and safety concerns. However, the FWC found no evidence to support these claims and determined that Equifax’s actions were reasonable and lawful management responses.
Major findings from the case
- Employer support following personal incidents: Ms. Eales claimed inadequate support following sexual assault (2019) and domestic violence (2021). However, evidence showed Equifax provided substantial assistance, including hospital visits, transport, and increased security measures.
- Workplace humiliation allegations: Ms. Eales alleged that she was mocked and humiliated at work. The Commission found no evidence to substantiate these claims.
- Claims of managerial undermining: Ms. Eales argued her manager undermined her by requesting leave balance reconciliations. The FWC ruled this was reasonable management action.
- Performance management and client complaints: Ms. Eales claimed she was not given a fair opportunity to respond to a major client complaint. The Commission determined Equifax’s performance review and improvement plan were reasonable.
- Return-to-work directive and relocation concerns: Ms. Eales opposed returning to Melbourne, citing safety concerns. The FWC found no evidence of ongoing risks and deemed the directive appropriate for her Melbourne-based role.
- Threats of employment termination: Ms. Eales claimed repeated threats of termination constituted bullying. The FWC determined that Equifax’s communications were reasonable, given her extended absence from work.
- Workers’ compensation disputes: Ms. Eales alleged that Equifax provided false information to insurers. The FWC found no supporting evidence for this claim.
- Concerns over workload and internal communication: Ms. Eales raised additional grievances related to workload and communication, which the Commission did not classify as workplace bullying.
Ultimately, the FWC ruled that Equifax acted within its rights and dismissed Ms. Eales’ application.
Lessons for employers and HR professionals
The outcome of this case highlights several key takeaways for businesses:
- Document all management actions: Clear documentation is essential when addressing employee performance concerns, return-to-work directives, or workplace disputes.
- Ensure fair and transparent processes: Employers should follow proper procedures when issuing directives or addressing grievances to minimize claims of unfair treatment.
- Communicate effectively with employees: A lack of communication or misunderstanding can often escalate workplace tensions. Employers should engage in open discussions with employees regarding expectations and workplace requirements.
- Provide adequate support when required: While Equifax was found to have provided support to Ms. Eales, employers should always assess whether additional measures—such as workplace adjustments or mental health support—are needed to assist employees facing personal challenges.
Who should be aware & what this means for you
This case is particularly relevant for employers, HR professionals, and employees navigating workplace disputes and return-to-work directives.
- For employers & HR professionals: This case highlights the importance of proper documentation, clear communication, and fair handling of workplace complaints and performance issues to avoid legal challenges.
- For employees: Not all negative workplace experiences qualify as bullying under the law. Reasonable management actions taken in a lawful and appropriate manner do not constitute mistreatment.
- For legal advisors: This ruling underscores the necessity of ensuring procedural fairness and compliance with employment laws when managing workplace concerns.
Get expert employment law advice
If you need assistance with workplace bullying claims, performance management, or return-to-work policies, MST Lawyers’ Employment Law team is here to help. Contact us on +61 3 8540 0200 or email workplace@mst.com.au for expert legal support tailored to your workplace needs.
Article by: By Chao Ni, Principal and Caryna Ha, Law Graduate
