the Applicant v The Security Hub Pty Ltd
Citation: [2026] FWC 2805
At a glance
- Employees affected
- 1
What happened
the Applicant, a casual security officer, commenced employment with The Security Hub Pty Ltd in June 2025. In April 2026, he filed a general protections application alleging unfair dismissal following an alleged bullying incident during his first shift and subsequent complaints that were not addressed. He claims to have been dismissed via text message in March 2026. The company denies the Applicant's dismissal and disputes the details of the alleged bullying.
What was decided
The Fair Work Commission has dismissed the Applicant’s application because he was not dismissed from his employment. the Commissioner found that the Applicant continued to be offered shifts and received text messages about available work, even after raising concerns about bullying. The Commission had to determine if a dismissal occurred before considering the merits of the general protections claim. the Applicant's claims were largely based on AI generated materials and lacked specifics.
What it means for employers
Employers should ensure they have clear procedures for handling employee complaints, especially regarding workplace bullying or harassment. Promptly addressing concerns and documenting communication is crucial. Regularly communicating with employees about available shifts, even if they decline them, can help demonstrate continued employment.
What it means for employees
Employees need to provide specific details when making a complaint to their employer. Vague allegations and reliance on AI generated materials will not support a claim. Employees should also be aware that declining offered work does not automatically constitute dismissal.
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/2026fwc2805.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 →