[2026] FWC 434
Citation: [2026] FWC 434
At a glance
- Employees affected
- 1
What happened
Cassandra Cooke, a First Officer (pilot) with 27 years of service at National Jet Express Pty Ltd, was dismissed after allegedly making disparaging comments about a colleague, Wayne Ovens, to a work colleague, Victoria Portelli. Portelli reported the comments to Ovens, who filed a written complaint. The comments reportedly included claims about Ovens’ work and personal life. Cooke denied making the comments. An investigation substantiated the allegations, leading to her dismissal for 'serious misconduct' despite receiving payment in lieu of notice. Cooke initiated an unfair dismissal application under the Fair Work Act 2009.
What was decided
The Fair Work Commission found Cooke’s dismissal was unfair, despite a valid reason for dismissal based on her alleged misconduct. The Commission noted Cooke had a long tenure and no prior disciplinary issues. While acknowledging the seriousness of the alleged misconduct, the Deputy President considered the censure of dismissal to be harsh. Reinstatement was ordered, with the period of dismissal to be treated as continuous service. The Commission declined to order back pay, citing Cooke’s conduct as a factor.
What it means for employers
Employers must ensure thorough investigations are conducted when allegations of misconduct arise. They should consider the employee's length of service and prior record when determining appropriate disciplinary action. The Commission's decision highlights the importance of a balanced approach, considering the severity of the misconduct against the employee's history and the impact of the penalty.
What it means for employees
Employees have the right to challenge unfair dismissal decisions. Even if misconduct is proven, the penalty imposed must be proportionate to the offense and consider the employee's history and tenure. Employees should document any concerns or explanations provided during investigations.
Every statement above is drawn from the published decision. Read the original here:
https://www.fwc.gov.au/documents/decisionssigned/pdf/2026fwc434.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 →