Upward Bullying Emerging as Growing Workplace Risk, Experts Warn
New research and expert commentary suggest bullying is no longer only a top-down issue, with “upward bullying” by employees towards managers emerging as a significant workplace concern contributing to leadership turnover. A global study of nearly 500 senior leaders found 71% reported experiencing bullying from subordinates, while 80% had witnessed it in others. Behaviours described included undermining instructions, exclusion, gossip, and reputational damage – which experts say are often subtle and difficult to evidence or formally classify as bullying.
Employment lawyers note that upward bullying is frequently underreported due to stigma, with managers reluctant to raise concerns for fear it may undermine perceptions of their competence or leadership capability. Legal experts also highlight evidentiary challenges, particularly where conduct involves informal communication, innuendo or workplace exclusion.
Federal Reforms Give Employers More Time to Meet Gender Equality Reporting Targets
Australian employers will be given an additional year to set gender equality targets under new federal legislation aimed at reducing regulatory burden and reforming reporting obligations to the Workplace Gender Equality Agency (WGEA). Under the proposed changes in the Regulatory Reform Omnibus Bill 2026, large employers would have more time between reporting on gender equality outcomes and setting new targets, extending the current three-year cycle. The reforms are intended to allow organisations to develop more considered strategies rather than meeting shorter administrative deadlines.
FWC Rejects Unfair Dismissal Claim Involving Psychosocial Hazards Allegations
The Fair Work Commission has dismissed an unfair dismissal claim brought by a risk manager who alleged she was forced to resign from a charity connected to serving Traditional Owners due to workplace psychosocial hazards. The employee argued she did not receive an effective handover, felt coerced to work on the Australia Day public holiday due to pressure regarding “Invasion Day”, and that other actions created a psychologically unsafe work environment, contributing to her resignation.
The Commission rejected the claim, preferring the evidence of the employer’s witnesses, and found that on multiple occasions the employee had been violent towards objects and abusive towards staff. The Commission did not find that the employee had been forced to resign, and therefore constructive dismissal was not available to her.
Sexual Harassment in Australian Workplaces: A Surge in Cases Under New Laws
This fortnight has seen an unusually high volume of sexual harassment cases determined by Australian courts and tribunals, reflecting the expanded scope and reach of laws that now capture conduct occurring “in connection with work” – regardless of whether the perpetrator is an employee, contractor, customer, or person in a position of authority. Taken together, these cases illustrate both the significant penalties now available to courts and the high bar set for employers seeking to demonstrate they took “all reasonable steps” to prevent harassment. No policy, no training, and no action on complaints are no longer defensible positions.
Casual Waitress on Visa Sexually Harassed – First Case Under New Fair Work Laws
In the first case heard by the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia under the new Fair Work sexual harassment laws, a young casual waitress on a visa was sexually harassed by her manager around the time she questioned whether she was being paid correctly. The manager sent another worker out of the kitchen and then hugged the waitress from behind whilst she washed dishes, pinning her arms and pressing her against the sink. He pressed his body against her, made lewd comments and offered her cash, before kissing her.
When the other worker re-entered the kitchen, the manager instructed him to go home, causing the waitress to fear worse behaviour if left alone. However, the other worker realised something was amiss and remained until the waitress was ready to leave. She did not return to work after that date. Over the following days, the manager repeatedly messaged her asking her to keep the incident secret from his wife and to return to work.
The court ordered the manager to pay compensation and pecuniary penalties totalling $90,000. The restaurant business went into liquidation shortly before the court hearing. A spokesperson from the ACT Women’s Legal Centre hailed the judgement as a “landmark” decision but acknowledged the difficulty of such claims, noting the waitress “faced denial of her allegations, threats of costs, and even the employer company going into liquidation on the eve of the hearing. It takes extraordinary courage to see through a case like this.”
Fair Work Sexual Harassment Cases Under New Laws Deliver Significant Penalties
A male storage facility manager was awarded $116,000 after being subjected to sexual harassment and physical intimidation by a contractor and a customer. The cleaning and maintenance contractor began targeting him with homophobic and sexualised comments, as well as unwanted physical contact including shoving and bumping. A regular customer then joined in with similarly degrading comments.
The manager reported the incidents to his employer but felt his complaints were ignored. After providing a recording as proof, he was told he had contravened the Privacy Act. He was subsequently dismissed by his employer. The court awarded $90,000 in compensation and an additional $13,000 in pecuniary penalties from each of the two perpetrators.
The court confirmed that protections under s.527D of the Fair Work Act apply regardless of whether the perpetrator is an employee, contractor or third party such as a customer, as the Act covers sexual harassment occurring “in connection with” being a worker. The court also found the employer’s response to complaints was inadequate. This case is an important reminder that employers can be legally responsible for the conduct of contractors and customers, and that complaint management processes must be thorough and defensible.
Young Trainee Awarded $125,000 After Severe Workplace Sexual Harassment
A young worker with pre-existing mental health conditions has been awarded $125,000 after the Federal Circuit and Family Court found she was sexually harassed by her employer during a job trial in Western Australia. During a two-week trial with a heating and cooling business, her employer allegedly subjected her to repeated sexualised questioning and unwanted physical contact. The court heard the conduct escalated to comments and physical proximity that left her feeling trapped, intimidated and unable to safely leave the workplace.
The court found a clear power imbalance, with the employer aware of the worker’s vulnerability including her anxiety and OCD, and that the conduct would reasonably be expected to cause offence, humiliation or distress. The harassment significantly worsened her mental health, leading her to disengage from work and delay re-entering employment.
A subsequent HRD analysis of the case highlighted a critical lesson for employers: the company had no policy, no training, and no defence. The judge found the employer could point to nothing when arguing it had taken “all reasonable steps” to prevent the conduct – a timely reminder that reasonable steps must be documented and real, not assumed.
Regional Psychiatrist Receives Reduced Suspension Despite Repeated Sexual Harassment
A WA psychiatrist employed by WA Country Health has been suspended for three-and-a-half months after admitting to repeatedly sexually harassing a nurse over a two-month period. The misconduct included persistent messages across WhatsApp, and when the nurse made clear she was not interested and blocked him, he contacted her via SMS and then sent a handwritten note and Facebook request, ultimately declaring “I can’t help but love you even more (even if it means losing my AHPRA license or being kicked out of Australia).”
The nurse made a formal complaint and the doctor was suspended on full pay, required to attend boundary management training, transferred to another team and placed under supervision. The WA State Administrative Tribunal approved an agreement between the psychiatrist and the Medical Board of Australia, which accepted the conduct amounted to professional misconduct. While a longer suspension was considered, the Board took into account a shortage of psychiatrists in the region, noting the practitioner was the sole psychiatrist responsible for inpatient mental health care in the area.
Lawyer Behaviour Seen as Critical to Success of Victoria’s New Sexual Harassment NDA Laws
Victoria’s new laws restricting the use of non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) in workplace sexual harassment settlements may reduce secrecy, but their effectiveness will depend heavily on how lawyers interpret and apply the reforms. The Restricting Non-Disclosure Agreements (Sexual Harassment at Work) Act 2025 limits the use of confidentiality clauses in settlement agreements, requiring that secrecy provisions only be included where requested by the victim-survivor.
Legal commentators warn that entrenched settlement practices within the legal profession could undermine the reforms if confidentiality continues to be treated as the default approach. NDAs have historically been used in sexual harassment matters to protect reputations and limit disclosure, but have also been criticised for concealing systemic issues and preventing oversight of repeat behaviour.