A workplace tribunal in Australia has upheld an employer’s decision to dismiss a long-serving employee who had taken 114 sick days within a 12-month period, ruling that the company was not at fault in terminating her employment.
According to a report by news.com.au, the case involved Jodie Daunis, a customer service operator who worked on ferries in Brisbane. She was dismissed last year by transport operator Kelsian Group after the company determined that she could no longer reliably perform her job duties.
Health issues and extended leave
Tribunal documents cited in the report stated that Daunis’s health problems began in April 2024 when she developed Deep Vein Thrombosis. The condition led to blood clots that caused inflammation and persistent pain.
Doctors subsequently referred her for surgery. However, she was placed on a waiting list at a public hospital after her insurance provider declined to cover the cost of the procedure.
Her situation worsened in 2025 when she was hospitalised and remained away from work for approximately a week.
Although she later returned to her job, she was able to work only two shifts before informing her employer that she would remain absent for three months following medical advice from a vascular surgeon and a blood specialist.
Employer’s position
Daunis underwent an independent medical examination and argued that the assessment indicated she could return to work after undergoing the planned surgery.
However, Kelsian Group stated before the tribunal that the medical report did not demonstrate that she would be capable of performing the essential duties required in her ferry operations role.
The company also argued that allowing reduced working hours for Daunis would place additional pressure on other employees who would have to cover the operational gaps created by her absence. On this basis, the company eventually terminated her employment, stating that it could not accommodate her medical restrictions.
Tribunal ruling
Daunis challenged the decision, but the case was heard by the Fair Work Commission, which ruled in favour of the employer.
Commissioner Chris Simpson stated in the ruling, as cited by news.com.au, that the independent medical examination report did not conclusively establish that Daunis would be able to meet the inherent requirements of her role in the future and that the available evidence did not support such a conclusion.
Simpson further stated that altering the employee’s rostering arrangements would not be practical, taking into account the nature of the working arrangements, the impact on other staff members and the costs to the employer.
The commissioner concluded that the proposed accommodations were neither practical nor reasonable in the circumstances and that there was no viable adjustment that could have enabled Daunis to continue performing the essential functions of her role given the nature of the job and her current or future incapacity.