Marcus Wibmer lost his unfair dismissal case against Fujifilm Data Management Solutions, then tried to appeal on seven separate grounds. A Full Bench of the Fair Work Commission knocked back every one of them and refused him permission to appeal at all.
What the Commission decided
Mr Wibmer had been dismissed after Fujifilm lost confidence he would follow its workplace conduct policy or behave appropriately if he stayed employed. The original decision, made by Deputy President Slevin, found his misconduct outweighed anything in his favour, so the dismissal was not harsh, unjust or unreasonable.
On appeal, Mr Wibmer argued the Deputy President had promised early in the hearing that the case would be decided only on the reasons stated in his termination letter, then went beyond that. The Full Bench disagreed, finding the remark was just an attempt to help him structure his own case, not a formal limit on what the Commission could consider. It also noted that when working out whether there was a valid reason for a dismissal, the Commission is not restricted to only the reasons an employer gave at the time.
Mr Wibmer also challenged a finding that he had been dishonest, pointing to an email exchange with a colleague, a Mr Grieves. The original decision had found Mr Wibmer honestly believed he'd received a particular email, but was then dishonest when he claimed he had read it and saved proof of it under a specific file name, a file that turned out not to exist. The Full Bench found no inconsistency in these findings.
A further ground claimed the Deputy President failed to deal with five separate arguments Mr Wibmer had raised, including about the disciplinary process and alleged inconsistencies in a witness's evidence. The Full Bench held a decision maker does not have to respond to every submission made during a hearing, and found these particular points were not central to the outcome anyway.
Mr Wibmer argued the Commission had wrongly labelled him
What this means
This case is a reminder of how the Fair Work Commission process for appeals works: a Full Bench will not disturb findings of fact or interlocutory case-management comments unless there is a genuine error affecting the outcome, and it will not readily grant permission to appeal simply because a dismissed worker disagrees with how the original decision-maker weighed the evidence.