The Fair Work Commission (FWC) has awarded 12 weeks’ compensation to an employee who was dismissed after a dispute involving bereavement leave. The employer demanded to see proof of the death before the employee was able to provide it, and dismissed her after the employee’s mother made allegedly “aggressive” phone calls to the employer. 

 

Facts of case 

The employee telephoned her manager to say that her grandmother had died suddenly and she would not be coming to work for the next two days, but would provide an update in three days. When she did the latter, she said she would apply for both bereavement leave and personal leave. Her manager emailed her to ask for proof of death but the employee said that it was not yet available. The manager then asked to see a death certificate, funeral notice or statutory declaration.  

The employee’s mother called the next day to repeat that the information was not yet available and the manager described her tone as “demanding and threatening”. The manager then set a deadline of four days for the information, and the mother called again, and was again allegedly aggressive.  

The employee’s cousin then emailed the manager, claiming that the circumstances of the grandmother’s death had caused great distress to the employee and requesting that her application for bereavement leave be processed pending supply of documentation. The manager then suggested that the employee take personal leave instead of compassionate leave.  

The employee then sent a medical certificate and police event number, but the employer still insisted on the evidence it had originally requested before paying for bereavement leave. Three days later she sent a funeral notice and also notified her right to disconnect. The employer rejected the notice, issued a written warning and told her she could face disciplinary action in relation to “communication issues”.  

She was summarily dismissed the next day, the reason being that she had provided the manager’s contact details to her mother, who had then made a threatening phone call, had refused lawful directives from the employer to provide evidence, caused distress to her manager who was pregnant, and refused to communicate when required.  

 

Decision 

The FWC found that the mother’s phone calls were the main reason for dismissal, but rejected the claim that they were “rude and abusive”, even though they may have been firm. The employee’s requests for time to provide the evidence of death were reasonable. 

The FWC found that the employee was unfairly dismissed. She had asked for compensation of four weeks’ pay, but the FWC increased the amount to 12 weeks, or $7,596.  

 

What this means for employers 

It is very likely that an employee who seeks bereavement or compassionate leave is under stress at the time. It is also clear that formal proof of a death is not immediately available and may take several days to produce. For both these reasons, some flexibility and compassion from the employer is recommended. But in this case, the employer took exception to intervention by the employee’s mother and then decided to take a hard line with the employee. In doing so, it acted unfairly and paid a price. 

 

Read the judgment 

Bianca Knott v Tru Ninja Pty Ltd [2026] FWC 298 (3 February 2026)