A childcare worker who claimed an "ongoing negative environment" and unhandled complaints of bullying, targeting and harassment forced her to quit has lost her unfair dismissal case.
The former trainee educator took the now-closed Canberra centre to the Fair Work Commission alleging she was unfairly dismissed.
In an August 2026 decision, deputy president Lyndall Dean dismissed the application after finding the woman left voluntarily, primarily to accept a leadership position offer with another provider.
The employee claimed she was targeted and bullied at the centre, where she said her concerns about staff-to-child ratios and workplace conduct were not taken seriously.
She claimed the centre did not take steps to address her complaints, and in fact punished her for raising them.
The woman, who began working at the centre in February 2025, said problems emerged after a new director started in October.
She claimed colleagues watched and followed her, spoke to her disrespectfully and gossiped about her.
She also said she was left alone with children during her traineeship despite not being qualified to do so.
In October, the employee made a formal complaint about the bullying she said she was experiencing at work.
The following month, a colleague allegedly threatened to feed the worker's daughter, who was enrolled at the centre, food she was allergic to.
After the worker's partner contacted management about the alleged food allergy threat, the child's enrolment was terminated.
The worker emailed her resignation on November 24 and worked through her notice period until December 8.
She told management in an email that the workplace environment had affected her mental health and she felt that "moving to a new environment is the best step for my wellbeing and professional development".
Giving evidence, the centre's managing director said the worker had emailed management on November 4 inquiring about internal management roles after receiving an outside leadership offer.
She noted that the centre had responded in writing to concerns about her daughter's food intake. She also testified that the worker's partner yelled at and threatened the director during a phone call about the allergy threat, leading to the child's enrolment being terminated.
In dismissing the application, Ms Dean found the worker had not been forced to resign because of the centre's alleged conduct.
The deputy president accepted the centre had met with her days after her bullying complaint and had also responded to concerns about her daughter's food intake.
Ms Dean also found the decision to end the child's enrolment followed the interaction between the worker's partner and the centre director, rather than the worker's complaints.
She said the alleged conduct, even if it had occurred, was not objectively serious enough to leave the worker with no choice but to resign.
