-
Posted by David Sexton
- |
-
8 July, 2026
QUBE Ports has failed to appeal a Fair Work Commission (FWC) order to reinstate a wharfie originally fired for using crude language and sharing a colleague’s bikini photo.
Experienced stevedore Robert Smith (aged 62 in September 2025) was fired in January 2025 but successfully appealed to the FWC in the same year.
In 2024, Mr Smith, who had worked with the company since 2009, showed a photo of two female co-workers in bikinis to fellow staff, allegedly zooming in suggestively.
The company sacked him on the basis he had also allegedly made vulgar threats regarding a colleague's sandwich.
In a letter to Mr Smith, Qube stated that “your employment is no longer tenable with us”.
Qube said there were valid reasons for Mr Smith’s dismissal, including serious instances of misconduct, and that he was provided procedural fairness.
The Fair Work Commission, however, took a different view, ruling the sandwich allegations as not sufficiently substantiated.
While the handling of the bikini photo was ruled inappropriate, it was ruled this did not constitute sexual harassment or bullying, making the sacking "harsh and unjust".
In his summary last year, Commissioner Connolly wrote that “there was a valid reason for dismissal arising from an incident involving showing pictures of co-workers in March 2024”.
The commissioner wrote that Mr Smith already had been issued a final warning regarding the pictures and that the allegations of bullying were not supported by evidence.
Commissioner Connolly made orders for reinstatement, lost renumeration and continuity of employment.
Qube subsequently lodged 12 grounds for appeal in November last year, submitting that the Commissioner failed to have regard to several matters including Mr Smith’s denials in the show cause meeting that he did not say any of the words alleged ‘at all’.
Qube referred to a repeated pattern of behaviour involving denial, blame and involving management where the other employees responded to harassing conduct.
The FWC stated that it did not consider that any error had been demonstrated in the findings from Commissioner Connolly and the the only order that should be made is that permission to appeal is refused
Read the September ruling here.
