The PsychProof Newsroom

HRD Australia reported on a Fair Work Commission decision from June 15, 2026, where a worker's general protections claim, which involved allegations of workplace bullying and questioning compliance, was dismissed on the preliminary issue of whether a dismissal had occurred.

On June 24, 2026, the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia dismissed a supervisor's general protections claim, affirming his dismissal for bullying an employee with a disability. The court highlighted the importance of contemporaneous documentation and credibility in such cases.

A Federal Circuit and Family Court decision (Mejia v Capital City Cafe-Bar [2026] FedCFamC2G 468) ordered a total of $90,000 to be paid by a Canberra café owner and director for unlawful sexual harassment and multiple contraventions of the Fair Work Act. This ruling emphasizes that sexual harassment is a significant governance and compliance risk for employers.

New research across 22 jurisdictions reveals Canada lags Australia on preventing work-related psychological injuries. Australia's consistency stems from Safe Work Australia, which developed a national code of practice now adopted by every state and territory. Australian jurisdictions have also largely abandoned individual resilience-building as a primary strategy, and are now focused on organizational-level interventions.

A former senior executive at Woolworths has filed a Federal Court action alleging workplace bullying, excessive working hours (up to 90 hours per week), and a culture of favouritism, leading to constructive dismissal in February 2025. The executive alleges being publicly belittled by a managing director and paid significantly less than a male colleague in a comparable role.

The Fair Work Commission ruled a resignation was a dismissal when a Board kept a harassing director in place, despite substantiated findings of sexual harassment. The Commission found the employee's resignation was forced due to an unsafe working environment.

Excessive job demands are being increasingly scrutinized under psychosocial safety obligations. Organizations must proactively manage job design, role clarity, and workloads to prevent them from becoming psychosocial risks, as highlighted by a recent FWC case.

Workplace ostracism, often subtle, can lead to breaches of psychosocial safety obligations. HR should design organizational structures that prevent exclusion and foster supportive cultures, fulfilling legal responsibilities.

The Legal Brief explores how psychosocial safety is now central to how Australian regulators assess organisational competence and leadership, especially given organizational restructures, change programs and the rapid adoption of artificial intelligence.

New research indicates OHS and HR professionals are more likely to act on psychosocial risks when role clarity and confidence are strong, pointing out gaps in workplace risk management. This suggests a need for better support and training for OHS professionals in addressing psychosocial risks.