Application by the Applicant
Citation: [2026] FWC 2833
At a glance
- Employees affected
- 83
What happened
the Applicant applied to the Fair Work Commission for a stop bullying order against Loyalty Pacific Pty Ltd (trading as Flybuys) and the Respondent. He alleged that the Respondent subjected him to excessive performance scrutiny, excluded him, and communicated harshly. He also implicated his colleague in his allegations of bullying. Loyalty Pacific began an operational review affecting approximately 83 roles, leading to changes and a consultation process which commenced on July 15, 2026. the Applicant was on medical leave at the time.
What was decided
The Fair Work Commission dismissed the Applicant’s application for a stop bullying order. The Commissioner found that there was no risk of continued bullying due to his colleague's impending departure, the Respondent’s role change and redeployment, and the elimination of the Applicant’s position within the restructure. The decision was made before determining whether he had been bullied. Section 789FF of the Fair Work Act requires a risk of continued bullying for such orders.
What it means for employers
Employers should ensure they have clear performance management processes and documentation to avoid claims of excessive or unfair scrutiny. Restructuring processes require careful communication and consultation with employees, even those on leave. Addressing employee concerns promptly can prevent escalation to formal complaints.
What it means for employees
Employees experiencing workplace bullying should document incidents and consider seeking legal advice. However, the Fair Work Commission will assess whether there is a risk of continued bullying before granting stop bullying orders. Medical leave does not automatically protect employees from performance management processes.
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/2026fwc2833.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. The full FWC and Federal Court library behind every advisor answer is on Pro.
FairWork Mate AI
This is one decision. Pro reads all of them.
Free case pages cite the top 250 decisions. Pro opens the full Fair Work Commission and Federal Court library, cross-references your own situation against it, and cites the decision behind every answer — plus document upload, so it can read your letter or contract line by line. 150 questions a month, cancel anytime.
Just need today sorted? A Day Pass is 25 questions over 24 hours, no account. Get a Day Pass — $4.99
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