[2026] FWC 512
Citation: [2026] FWC 512
What happened
Eric Jordan was dismissed from Pacific National Services Pty Ltd on 26 May 2025. The company alleges he performed Nazi salutes at Mittagong Railway Station on 6 March 2025, breaching workplace policies and damaging the company's reputation. Jordan denies the allegations, claiming he used an 'all clear' signal or a gesture of camaraderie. The company issued a final written warning to Jordan on 17 April 2025 for failing to follow a roster direction. CCTV footage and witness statements were presented as evidence. A workplace investigation was conducted, with a senior employee relations specialist initially handling it before being transferred to a manager based in Queensland.
What was decided
The Fair Work Commission dismissed Eric Jordan’s unfair dismissal application. The Deputy President found that Pacific National had a valid reason for dismissal, based on Jordan’s alleged conduct and the clear CCTV footage. The Commission accepted the Respondent’s evidence and rejected the Applicant’s denial of the actions. The decision turned on whether the dismissal was harsh, unjust, or unreasonable, and the Commission found it was not. The Applicant was represented by the RTBU, and the Respondent by Australian Business Lawyers & Advisors.
What it means for employers
Employers should have clear policies regarding appropriate workplace conduct and ensure these are communicated to employees. Pacific National’s policies were found to be relevant to the case. Even a single instance of serious misconduct, such as the alleged gestures, can be grounds for dismissal if it damages trust and confidence and brings the company into disrepute. Thorough investigations, including gathering evidence like CCTV footage, are crucial.
What it means for employees
Employees are expected to adhere to workplace policies and maintain professional conduct, even when off-duty and identifiable as company representatives. The case highlights the potential consequences of actions that could damage a company's reputation. If an employee is accused of misconduct, they should respond to allegations and present any evidence supporting their position.
Every statement above is drawn from the published decision. Read the original here:
https://www.fwc.gov.au/documents/decisionssigned/pdf/2026fwc512.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 →