A Sydney bus driver’s false bullying claim has seen his unfair dismissal claim rejected by the Fair Work Commission. The driver had made the claim against a union co-delegate, who he regularly called “kid” and intimidated by telling him to “put your balls on the line.” The claim was made in public, before fellow union members, which the Commission found to be “more serious” than making it in private.
The Commission rejected his unfair dismissal claim despite his employer failing to notify him of its intention to fire him for the false bullying allegation. He therefore was not given the chance to respond to the allegation prior to his sacking. This means, in the opinion of the Commission, that his misconduct was so bad that it outweighed his lack of procedural fairness.
In this article, we look at the events of this case – Anthony Lipari v Transit Systems West Services Pty Ltd [2025]. Later, we will look at another recent unfair dismissal case of a South Australian mechanic who called three female colleagues “bitches” on an almost daily basis, then claimed he had been bullied by them.
Anthony Lipari began working for Transit Systems West Services as a bus driver in March 2021. The company operates bus services for Transport for NSW – the state’s government transport department. Mr. Lipari’s employment contract included clauses requiring compliance with Transit Systems’ Code of Conduct Policy and a Respectful Workplace Behaviours Policy.
On 18 September 2024, a meeting of Transport Workers’ Union of Australia members was held at Mr. Lipari’s bus depot in Sydney. The meeting was convened by union delegate Bill Pagalis. At the time, Mr. Lipari was a union co-delegate for his bus depot. When the meeting got underway, Mr. Pagalis told members about an increase in union membership fees. He also told them he would be the sole union delegate for the bus depot.
This latter announcement surprised Mr. Lipari. It caused him to interrupt Mr. Pagalis to address the attendees about the importance of unity. When Mr. Pagalis attempted to end the meeting, Mr. Lipari told him “not to interrupt him and to sit down.” As Mr. Pagalis walked to leave the room, Mr. Lipari said, “stay here and answer the questions.”
Following Mr. Pagalis’s departure, Mr. Lipari continued to address the other attendees. This is when he made comments about Mr. Pagalis’s personal situation. This included that he was on workers compensation and was experiencing a mental health or psychological injury. Mr. Lipari also claimed that Mr. Pagalis’ driver licence was suspended.
When Mr. Pagalis returned to the meeting, Mr. Lipari started making strong statements to or about Mr. Pagalis, which were captured on an audio recording. He said that problems at the company stemmed from Mr. Pagalis, who was engaged in “bullying, intimidation and harassment” of him. Mr. Lipari claimed that he had “evidence left, right, and centre” of this.
Mr. Lipari publicly declared he would be “filing a case in Fair Work Commission” for a stop bullying order against Mr. Pagalis. He claimed that Mr. Pagalis was “going to get caned in the Fair Work Commission.” He also challenged Mr. Pagalis, telling him to “put your balls on the line. C’mon kid.” He repeatedly referred to him as “kid” during the meeting.
That night, Mr. Pagalis lodged a complaint about Mr. Lipari’s conduct to Transit Systems management. The company subsequently reviewed CCTV footage and collected witness statements. On 3 October 2024, he was stood down with pay.
About a week later, a Transit Systems manager issued Mr. Lipari a ‘Show Cause Notice.’ It alleged that his behaviour during the meeting contravened the company’s Code of Conduct and Respectful Workplace Behaviours Policy. Mr. Lipari provided written responses to the letter. He denied disclosing personal details about Mr. Pagalis or acting aggressively.
He did not convince Transit Systems of his innocence, however, On 21 October 2024, Mr. Lipari was dismissed for “misconduct.” Specifically, the company cited his aggressive and intimidating behaviour and unlawful disclosure of confidential personal information. Transit Systems claimed he had disclosed this information to further his “personal ambitions.”
Feeling he had been hard done by, Mr. Lipari lodged an unfair dismissal application with the Fair Work Commission the same day.
Mr. Lipari’s unfair dismissal claim was heard by the Fair Work Commission in January 2025. It found that Mr. Lipari may have been “caught off guard” by Mr. Pagalis’ announcements at the meeting. However, the Commission concluded that this provided “no basis” to make a false bullying claim and to intimidate and harass Mr. Pagalis.
The Commission also took issue with Mr. Lipari referring to his co-delegate as a “kid” and provoking him by saying “put your balls on the line.” It also focused on his comments about Mr. Pagalis getting “caned” at the Commission and that he would be put “before a specific presidential member.”
The Commission concluded that Mr. Lipari’s aggressive behaviour towards Mr. Pagalis during the meeting constituted a valid reason for dismissal. It called out Mr. Lipari for making a false bullying claim as well as intimidating Mr. Pagals and addressing him disrespectfully.
The Fair Work Commission found that Mr. Lipari had no intention of filing a stop bullying order, which meant that he “clearly intended to intimidate” Mr. Pagalis. It also concluded Mr. Lipari’s comments aimed to help him gain favour with other union delegates, by giving them the impression that he knew information they were not privy to.
In particular, the Commission noted the “public way” in which Mr. Lipari made a false bullying claim against Mr. Pagalis. This public accusation was deemed to be “more serious” than had he made those allegations “quietly in a complaint to management.”
The Fair Work Commission also examined whether Mr. Lipari had unlawfully disclosed confidential information about Mr. Pagalis. It found that while Mr. Lipari did discuss Mr. Pagalis’ workers compensation and injury, this information was “common knowledge” at the depot. The Commission therefore concluded there was “no evidence” that Mr. Lipari disclosed confidential medical records or health information during the meeting.
While the Fair Work Commission found a valid reason for Mr. Lipari’s dismissal, it noted several shortcomings with the way in which he was fired. It found that Mr. Lipari was not notified of the valid reason for his termination. He was also not given any opportunity to respond to that reason prior to his sacking.
Specifically, Mr. Lipari was not given a chance to defend himself against the false bullying claim. The accusation was never brough up during the show cause process. The Commission also found there was “no evidence” of Transit Systems otherwise notifying Mr. Lipari of this reason.
But despite these procedural deficiencies, the Fair Work Commission ultimately concluded that they were outweighed by Mr. Lipari’s misconduct. His unfair dismissal claim was therefore rejected.
Another recent unfair dismissal case that involved a false bullying allegation is William Daws v Pringles Ag-Plus Pty Ltd T/A Emmetts [2025]. William Daws was employed by Pringles Ag-Plus Pty Ltd, trading as Emmetts, as a diesel mechanic at the company’s site in South Australia’s Eyre Peninsula.
The 41-year-old’s role involved supervising several younger employees and allocating tasks. Emmetts, which sells and services rural farming equipment, told the Fair Work Commission that Mr. Daws engaged in inappropriate conduct. The company contended that his actions led to a “toxic nature” in the workplace, with some employees reportedly leaving as a result.
Emmetts alleged to the Fair Work Commission that Mr. Daws had engaged in bullying of several colleagues. The company said that he had referred to two female managers as “the bitches upstairs” and/or “the service bitches” almost daily. A colleague testified that on one occasion Mr. Daws approached him aggressively, asking who had “snitched him out.” He then said to the colleague, “I bet it was you dog ass.”
Another Emmetts employee said that Mr. Daws used his power to allocate less enjoyable jobs and frequently referred to a female manager as a “bitch.” He stated that Mr. Daws’ treatment of women and the way he ran the workshop created a “horrible atmosphere to work.”
Yet another Emmetts employee told the Fair Work Commission that Mr. Daws belittled staff. She recalled an incident on 4 July 2024 where he “got angry and swore” at a female manager during an argument about invoices.
The company also told the Commission that Mr. Daws had been subject to a performance management plan in August 2023. This had been due to a complaint of “picking on” a staff member. This plan aimed to “educate” Mr. Daws about language and effective communications in the workplace.
On 14 August 2024, Mr. Daws was suspended with pay pending an investigation by Emmetts. Later that month he lodged a stop bullying complaint with the Fair Work Commission against the three female managers he had regularly called “bitches.” Mr. Daws told the Fair Work Commission that the three managers were trying to “push him out of a job.”
He was however dismissed by Emmetts in October 2024. Mr. Daws’ stop bullying application was therefore discontinued. Mr. Daws denied to the Commission that he had bullied the female managers. He claimed that he had never seen Emmetts’ anti-bullying policy and code of conduct. He also claimed that he had never received anti-bullying training. This claim, however, was rejected as records showed that he had indeed taken the training.
At Mr. Daws’ unfair dismissal hearing, the Fair Work Commission described his testimony as “less than impressive” and said that he “came across as belligerent.” On the other hand, it described an Emmetts employee who had testified as a “witness of truth.” Another employee was also described as an “impressive witness with a good recollection of the events.”
The Commission accepted that Mr. Daws was responsible for supervising employees and interacting with admin staff, some of whom were female. It noted that he had “more work experience, more life experience and was physically larger” than his direct reports.
The Commission found that Mr. Daws had unfairly allocated “dirty or less preferred work” to his subordinates. He had also used “inappropriate language” towards female colleagues, in particular referring to one as a “bitch.”
The Fair Work Commission also found that Mr. Daws has acted in a way “not conducive” to a collaborative team environment. This was backed up by testimony from his direct reports, who said they felt like that they had to “walk on egg shells” whilst in his presence.
The Commission also slammed Mr. Daws for trying to identify the source of a complaint against him and for bullying a manager in the process. It concluded that Mr. Daws’ conduct towards this manager was considered “sufficient enough” to constitute serious misconduct.
The Fair Work Commission had considered Mr. Daws’ contention that he had been under stress. Also, his anti-bullying claim made against the three female managers. After examining his claim, the Commission was “not persuaded” that the managers were “trying to push Mr. Daws out of his job.”
Instead, it said that his own conduct was the cause of his “downfall.” Given Mr. Daws’ seniority and supervisory role, the Commission emphasised that he “should have known” that his conduct was “grossly inappropriate.”
Ultimately, the Commission concluded that Emmetts had a valid reason to dismissed Mr. Daws. His termination was also not deemed to be harsh, unjust or unreasonable, and his unfair dismissal claim was therefore rejected.
If you have been unfairly dismissed, forced to resign or mistreated at work, Australian Workplace Discrimination Representatives is here to help. With over 30 years’ experience, our team has handled over 16,000 claims across Australia. We specialise in unfair dismissal, workplace bullying, sexual harassment and discrimination. Our expert team is recognised for helping clients achieve maximum compensation. A free, confidential consultation could be the first step towards justice. Call 1800 333 666 to speak with a workplace expert today.
