When Cultural Conversations Collide: The “Sorry Day” Case Heads to the Commission

The Fair Work Commission has recently allowed a case to proceed that sits at the intersection of workplace culture, probationary employment, and technical filing rules. The matter involves an employment services worker, dismissed just a week after Sorry Day 2025, who alleges his termination was tied to raising concerns about an “inappropriate” workplace conversation.

The worker, James Mulready, had only been employed with Joblink Plus for two months when he says a colleague initiated an uncomfortable discussion after a Sorry Day event. Mulready claims that when he voiced his concerns, a senior executive not only failed to address them but appeared to align with the colleague’s remarks. A formal bullying complaint followed soon after. Within days, he was told he was “not fitting in with the team” and dismissed on 3 June 2025.

When Cultural Conversations Collide: The “Sorry Day” Case Heads to the Commission

Joblink Plus, a not-for-profit provider, maintains the dismissal had nothing to do with political opinion or cultural expression. Instead, it argues Mulready had shown ongoing issues with conduct, communication, and team cohesion. It further alleges that on the day of his termination he acted aggressively, verbally abused colleagues, and behaved in a way that posed health and safety risks—so serious that police were nearly called.

The Filing Technicality

Normally, an unfair dismissal or general protections dismissal claim must be lodged within 21 days. Mulready filed a Form F9 (unlawful dismissal) late, then quickly filed the correct Form F8 (general protections dismissal) less than an hour later. Registry staff contacted him just after the statutory deadline, creating confusion about whether he could continue with two overlapping applications. Believing he needed to withdraw the first, he cancelled both and re-filed his Form F8—this time one day out of time.

Commissioner Alana Matheson accepted that while registry officers likely did not instruct him to cancel both forms, they did point out the technical error of lodging two at once. She held that his subsequent action amounted to a “telephone discontinuance” of the unlawful dismissal claim. Because he had acted promptly and the allegations were consistent, Matheson found “exceptional circumstances” to extend the deadline by one day.

Why This Case Matters

This decision highlights three critical issues for both employers and employees:

1. Cultural Sensitivity in the Workplace – Discussions following significant events like Sorry Day can carry deep personal and political meaning. Workers raising concerns about such conversations are exercising workplace rights, and dismissing them soon after may open the door to general protections claims.

2. Probationary Periods Are Not Absolute Protection – Employers often assume they can dismiss probationary employees without challenge. This case shows that even probationary staff can pursue claims if their termination is linked to a prohibited reason, such as political opinion or complaints of bullying.

3. The Weight of Technicalities – A single day late can usually be fatal to a claim. Yet here, the Commission recognised that filing mistakes are common, especially for self-represented applicants, and chose fairness over strictness.

Looking Ahead

The substantive question—whether Mulready was dismissed for a prohibited reason or due to genuine behavioural issues—remains unresolved. What’s clear is that cultural conversations in the workplace must be handled with care. Employers cannot brush off concerns or respond with dismissal without exposing themselves to significant legal risk.

For workers, this case is a reminder: raising issues about workplace culture and respect is a protected right, and even a one-day delay may not bar justice if the Commission sees “exceptional circumstances.”

The case, James Mulready v Joblink Plus Limited [2025] FWC 2203, now proceeds to a full hearing where these sensitive and important issues will be examined in depth.