[2025] FWC 658
Citation: [2025] FWC 658
What happened
the Applicant was dismissed from her role as a production employee at Bengalla Mining Company Pty Ltd, primarily operating water and haul trucks. The dismissal stemmed from allegations that she interacted with her mobile phone while operating a truck on 10 occasions between January and June 2024, and for having her phone turned on in the cab. the Applicant denies the allegations, claiming her phone inadvertently turned on after being plugged into a portable battery pack during a crib break. Bengalla also alleged a breach of their 'PHMP – Roads or Other Vehicle Operating Area' safety policy regarding mobile phone use. Evidence was presented by a witness who monitors operator fatigue and distractions.
What was decided
The Fair Work Commission dismissed the Applicant’s unfair dismissal application. The Commissioner found Bengalla had a valid reason for the dismissal, based on the alleged breaches of company policy regarding mobile phone use while operating machinery. The Commission acknowledged the seriousness of the allegations and applied the 'Briginshaw' standard, requiring a high degree of satisfaction before finding misconduct. While the Commission permitted Bengalla to advance a secondary case regarding the policy breach, it ultimately sided with the employer’s findings based on the evidence presented.
What it means for employers
Employers have a right to enforce safety policies, and dismissing employees for breaches, particularly those involving safety risks, can be a valid reason for dismissal. Thorough investigation and clear communication of policies are crucial. Employers should ensure they have sufficient evidence to support allegations of misconduct before taking disciplinary action.
What it means for employees
Employees should be aware of and adhere to company policies, especially those related to safety. If an employee disputes allegations of misconduct, they should present evidence to support their case. It's important to understand that the Fair Work Commission will consider the seriousness of the allegations and the evidence presented by both sides.
Want this applied to your situation?
Reading the decision is free. FairWork Mate goes further — it reads the full case library and applies precedents like this one to your specific facts, citing the cases as it reasons. General information, not a guaranteed outcome or legal advice.
Every statement above is drawn from the published decision. Read the original here:
https://www.fwc.gov.au/documents/decisionssigned/pdf/2025fwc658.pdfWant more cases like this?
FairWork Mate tracks Fair Work Ombudsman, Fair Work Commission and Federal Court decisions across Australia. The AI advisor answers plain-English questions grounded on the full corpus — awards cited, industry, penalty amounts and affected employee counts — with a citation to the underlying decision on every answer.
Individual case summaries on this site are free. Full-corpus advisor access is a paid product — Business Solo from $99/mo, 50% off your first 3 months for the first 100 signups.
Get notified on new Fair Work cases
Free email alerts when we publish new underpayment decisions, penalty orders, and workplace law updates.
Free forever. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
This summary was drafted from the published decision and reviewed before publishing. It is general information, not legal advice. For your specific situation, speak to the Fair Work Ombudsman (13 13 94) or a qualified lawyer. About these summaries & corrections →