the Applicant v Uniting NSW, ACT
Citation: [2026] FWC 2744
At a glance
- Employees affected
- 1
What happened
the Applicant was employed as a Clinical Nurse Consultant at Uniting NSW, ACT from March 2024 to December 2025. She was dismissed for serious misconduct after it was discovered she had forwarded work documents containing sensitive client information (names, health conditions, medications) to her personal iCloud email account as 'backups'. the Applicant raised concerns about IT security, which were addressed by the Respondent. An investigation revealed 85 instances of emails with confidential information being sent to her personal account between November 1 and 30, 2025. She claimed ongoing IT issues prompted this action but refused to delete the data from her personal account.
What was decided
The Fair Work Commission dismissed the Applicant’s application for unfair dismissal. The Deputy President found there was a valid reason for the dismissal related to serious misconduct, specifically breaches of Uniting NSW, ACT's Code of Conduct and Privacy Policy regarding confidential information. the Applicant failed to provide a response to the Show Cause letter and refused to sign an undertaking to delete the data from her personal account. The Commission considered the circumstances outlined in s.385 of the Fair Work Act but found the dismissal was not unfair.
What it means for employers
Employers have a right to protect confidential information and enforce policies regarding data security. Thorough investigations, clear communication of allegations, and opportunities for response are crucial when considering disciplinary action. Failure to address employee concerns about IT systems does not automatically excuse breaches of policy.
What it means for employees
Employees must adhere to employer policies regarding data privacy and confidentiality. Using personal accounts as backups without authorization is a serious breach. Employees should raise legitimate IT concerns through proper channels and cooperate with investigations.
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/2026fwc2744.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 →