[2026] FWC 67
Citation: [2026] FWC 67
At a glance
- Employees affected
- 1
What happened
Mr Suresh Upadhyay, the head priest at the Shree Ram Krishna Mandir in Austral, Sydney, made a bullying application against his employer, Shree Sanatan Dharm Sabha of NSW Inc (SSDS), and its president, Ajay Singh. Mr Upadhyay alleges bullying by Mr Singh, who denies the allegations, claiming it was reasonable management action. SSDS runs the temple, and Mr Upadhyay is the only employee. The matter has been ongoing since April 2025, with investigations and conferences already undertaken. Mr Upadhyay has been off work due to illness.
What was decided
The Fair Work Commission Deputy President Slevin did not make interim anti-bullying orders under section 789FF, as the Commission wasn't satisfied that Mr Upadhyay had been bullied or that there was a risk of continued bullying. However, the Commission made procedural orders under section 589 to facilitate the resolution of the dispute. These orders, to be published separately, restrict communications to work-related matters, require clarification of Mr Upadhyay’s duties, establish rostering protocols, and protect him from victimisation for nine months. The application is otherwise dismissed, but Mr Upadhyay can return if the issues aren't resolved.
What it means for employers
Employers should ensure management actions are perceived as reasonable and not bullying. Independent investigations and addressing employee concerns are important. The Commission's willingness to make procedural orders to facilitate resolution highlights the importance of good faith engagement in resolving workplace disputes.
What it means for employees
Employees experiencing bullying can seek assistance from the Fair Work Commission. While interim orders weren't made in this case, the Commission can still facilitate resolution through procedural orders. Employees retain the right to re-engage the Commission if the issues aren't resolved within the timeframe.
Every statement above is drawn from the published decision. Read the original here:
https://www.fwc.gov.au/documents/decisionssigned/pdf/2026fwc67.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 →