[2025] FWCFB 6
Citation: [2025] FWCFB 6
What happened
Dylan Macnish, a cabin crew member for Virgin Airlines Australia, was dismissed after consuming a glass of prosecco at a Christmas party approximately 7.5 hours before a flight. Virgin Airlines has an 'eight-hour rule' prohibiting alcohol consumption before duty. Macnish believed this rule was a guideline and disclosed his alcohol consumption to a supervisor, consulting the Drug and Alcohol Management Program (DAMP) Manual for guidance. He used a breathalyser and confirmed a zero BAC level before reporting for duty. Virgin Airlines initially alleged multiple misconducts, including fatigue risk management system breaches, but ultimately focused on the alcohol consumption breach. Macnish self-reported rumors of being drunk on duty.
What was decided
The Fair Work Commission initially ordered Virgin Airlines to reinstate Macnish, finding his dismissal unfair. Virgin appealed this decision, arguing the reinstatement was manifestly unreasonable or plainly unjust. The Full Bench of the Fair Work Commission dismissed Virgin's appeal. The bench acknowledged Macnish breached the eight-hour rule but found it was not unreasonable for him to believe it was a guideline. They also considered Macnish's steps to ensure fitness for duty and his self-reporting of the incident. The order for reinstatement remains in place.
What it means for employers
Employers should ensure policies are clear and unambiguous, particularly regarding safety-critical roles. Regularly communicate policies and provide adequate training. Consider the reasonableness of employee interpretations of policies, especially when guidelines are presented. Encourage open communication and self-reporting of potential breaches, and avoid relying on outdated or unsubstantiated allegations.
What it means for employees
Employees should seek clarification on company policies and understand their obligations. If unsure about a policy's interpretation, seek guidance from supervisors or HR. Taking steps to ensure fitness for duty and proactively addressing potential issues can mitigate risks.
Every statement above is drawn from the published decision. Read the original here:
https://www.fwc.gov.au/documents/decisionssigned/pdf/2025fwcfb6.pdfWant more cases like this?
FairWork Mate tracks Fair Work Ombudsman, Fair Work Commission and Federal Court decisions across Australia. The full dataset, with structured fields for awards cited, industry, penalty amounts and affected employee counts, is available through the Business API. FairWork Mate AI answers plain-English questions grounded on the full corpus.
Individual case summaries on this site are free. API + AI access is a paid product. Contact us for pricing or a 50% off first month.
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 by AI 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 →