The Fair Work Commission has dismissed a Services Australia worker’s claim that her ADHD caused her to repeatedly swear at and insult her colleagues, resulting in her sacking. The worker had described a manager as having a “barely developed prefrontal cortex,” called a coworker “f**king useless” and called another manager a “creep.” She had also defied her employer’s directions, texting a colleague that “their directions can eat a bag of day old dick.” The Commission found ADHD is not a “licence” to disrespect coworkers, and rejected her Fair Work unfair dismissal claim.
In this article, we look at the events of this unfair dismissal case Jessica Stunden v The Commonwealth of Australia, as represented by Services Australia [2026].
Case summary: Stunden v The Commonwealth of Australia, as represented by Services Australia [2026]
- Jurisdiction: Fair Work Commission
- Key employee argument:The worker argued her ADHD explained her conduct and that she was not properly supported.
- Key employer argument: The worker had repeatedly failed to treat colleagues with respect and had breached lawful and reasonable directions.
- Fair Work ruling:Justified dismissal. The worker’s ADHD was “not a licence to verbally abuse others.”
Unfair dismissal QLD: Worker repeatedly swore at and insulted colleagues
Brisbane-based Jessica Stunden started working as a services officer for Services Australia in July 2022, becoming a permanent employee in early 2024. Towards the end of that year, she was involved in multiple incidents. In October 2024, Ms Stunden was alleged to have raised her voice at a customer and said, “your 10 minutes is up I’ll reassign you.” Then in November 2024, Ms Stunden was alleged to have raised her voice at another customer, who had accused her of generating a false letter and becoming “incredibly hostile.”
When the customer asked her for her surname to lodge a complaint, Ms Stunden yelled “no, you are not privy to my surname!” Her manager told the Fair Work Commission that he later found her “on the ground crying, then yelling and screaming at other employees, pacing the office area, then back to crying on the ground.” Ms Stunden subsequently took leave for the next five days.
Read more:Unsure If You’ve Been Dismissed? Here’s How You Can Find Out
Claimed her neurodivergence was misinterpreted as inappropriate behaviour
Ahead of her return to work, Ms Stunden sent her manager a series of emails alleging disability discrimination. She wrote that she had “ADHD, OCD, and CPTSD (complex post-traumatic stress disorder).” Ms Stunden claimed that these conditions sometimes lead to stress-induced outbursts “that are misinterpreted as inappropriate behaviour.” Ms Stunden also said that a coworker had failed to make eye contact with her, leaving her feeling isolated. She claimed that other employees had yelled at each other across the office, which supported her belief she was being unfairly targeted due to her disability.
Ms Stunden attended a formal counselling session to address the previous incidents. She agreed to stop raising her voice and claimed that “I want to do the correct thing; I feel when I make a fuss about things I am the scapegoat.” Ms Stunden later told her employer that her “naturally loud voice” was being mislabelled. She was warned further breaches of the Australian Public Service code of conduct could result in disciplinary action or termination of employment.
Read more: Medically Unfit for Work: One Dismissal Fair, One Wasn’t
Unfair dismissal QLD: Said employer could ‘eat a bag of day old dick’
Despite this, in late November 2024 Ms Stunden told her team leader in relation to some missing paperwork, “I hate it when people move my stuff, why would someone fu**king move my stuff.” She then added “F**k! People need to not move my sh*t!” On 12 December 2024, she told a colleague “don’t f**king talk to me.” She later described the same colleague to a manager as “f**king useless” and someone who “can’t do their job.”
The next day, Ms Stunden was notified she would be investigated for suspected breaches of the code of conduct. She was stood down, initially with pay, and directed not to discuss the allegations with anyone or contact any coworkers. Despite this, Ms Stunden sent text messages to a colleague discussing the investigation. In one message sent in March 2025, she wrote that Services Australia’s “directions can eat a bag of day old dick.” She also made disparaging comments about her managers. She called one “a creep” and said that “Harry is unintelligent and Brian is a narcissist.”
‘You can’t terminate a dead girl’: Worker disclosed suicide attempts
Ms Stunden experienced a significant mental health crisis throughout these events. At one point, a manager contacted emergency services to request a welfare check after Ms Stunden made comments during a phone call referencing suicide. On 1 May 2025, after being told her code of conduct breach had been substantiated, Ms Stunden sent an email titled “You can’t terminate a dead girl.” She said that she had made preparations to end her life. Police performed a welfare check and confirmed she was safe.
In her email on 1 May 2025, Ms Stunden also said that her managers’ “unadulterated dislike of me” could be put down to her “being pretty and having an opinion,” which she claimed “terrifies weak people.” She accused Services Australia of “targeting a disabled girl, with a face card that doesn’t decline.” Ms Stunden claimed that she handed all evidence of Services Australia’s “systemic abuse” to her psychologist so that they could release the information upon her death.
Ms Stunden reserved special insults for one particular manager, saying he had a “barely developed prefrontal cortex.” She questioned why he was in a position of authority and claimed he made “sexually inappropriate” remarks to her. Ms Stunden later lodged a formal sexual harassment complaint against the manager. She raised nine allegations including that he had stared at her inappropriately and used the word “hysterical” to describe her.
Ms Stunden faced termination of employment on 4 August 2025. Services Australia cited that she failed to treat others with respect and had shown “aggressive” behaviours.
Why did the employee argue she had faced unjustified dismissal?
In her Fair Work unfair dismissal claim, Ms Stunden argued:
- Her ADHD explained much of her conduct, including difficulties regulating her vocal tone and volume in stressful situations. She believed she had been fired for being “opinionated.”
- The investigation was biased, unreasonably delayed and had failed to properly consider her disability.
- Her suspension without pay was imposed before any finding against her had been made. It was harsh and financially devastating.
- Sending her termination letter via her treating psychiatrist, at her own prior request, was mishandled by Services Australia.
- Her comments during May 2025, including messages that could be read as threatening, were made in a state of acute psychological distress following suicide attempts and should be viewed in that context.
Ms Stunden “specifically advised” the Fair Work Commission that she did not wish to be anonymised during proceedings.
Read More: Autistic Teen’s Secret Recordings Fail To Save Unfair Dismissal Case
Why did Fair Work find the dismissal was justified?
The Fair Work Commission handed down its decision in August 2026. It found that her breach of a lawful and reasonable direction combined with her disrespectful conduct provided a “strong valid reason” for termination of employment. Ms Stunden’s Fair Work unfair dismissal claim was therefore thrown out, based on the following findings:
- Ms Stunden seemed like an “unreliable narrator.” She denied comments like describing a colleague’s “barely developed prefrontal cortex” were disrespectful at all.
- Ms Stunden’s ADHD may have contributed to her raising her voice at colleagues. However, an ADHD diagnosis, or feeling overstimulated, is “not a licence to verbally abuse others at work without consequence.”
- Ms Stunden’s ADHD “might explain her behaviour,” but it “does not erase the effect that behaviour has on others.” It is the “bare minimum” for an employer to expect that a worker will treat colleagues with respect.
- Complying with the code of conduct was an inherent requirement of her role. It was not harsh to expect her to follow the code.
- Ms Stunden showed “wilful disregard” for the directions issued to her by managers. This was highlighted by her writing to a colleague that “their directions can eat a bag of day old dick.”
- Messages sent by Ms Stunden, including one stating “I will inundate every avenue if necessary. I’m not nearly done, but you will be”, could reasonably be read as threatening.
Unfair dismissal FAQs
- Is it appropriate to fire an employee for disrespect?
Yes, in the right circumstances. Under the Fair Work Act 2009, an employer can have a valid reason to dismiss an employee for serious or repeated disrespect towards colleagues. This is particularly the case when the conduct breaches a code of conduct or workplace policy and the employee has already been warned or counselled about it. A termination of employment must be a proportionate response, and the employee must be given a fair opportunity to respond before being sacked.
In Jessica Stunden v The Commonwealth of Australia, as represented by Services Australia [2026], the worker had been fired for a pattern of insulting behaviour. This included describing a colleague as “f**king useless” and calling a manager “unintelligent.” The Fair Work Commission found that expecting an employee to treat colleagues with respect was “the bare minimum.” Her repeated disrespect, combined with her breach of her employer’s directions, provided a valid reason for her sacking.
- Can an employee’s ADHD excuse workplace misconduct?
A disability such as ADHD can be relevant to how an employer assesses workplace conduct. Employers are generally expected to make reasonable adjustments to support employees with a disability under laws such as the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cth). However, this does not mean a disability excuses an employee from meeting the inherent requirements of their role, including a requirement to treat colleagues with respect.
In Jessica Stunden v The Commonwealth of Australia, as represented by Services Australia [2026], the Fair Work Commission accepted the worker’s ADHD may have affected her ability to regulate her vocal tone in stressful situations. However, it found her ADHD was “not a licence to verbally abuse others.” The Commission noted the employer had offered her reasonable support and accommodations, finding her termination of employment was justified.
We can help you get justice for unfair dismissal
Losing your job can be devastating, especially when you feel your employer never gave you a fair go. We at A Whole New Approach can guide you through the process of taking action via the Fair Work Commission. With our over 20 years of experience, our team can let you know your options and help you lodge an unfair dismissal claim.
Your first consultation is free and completely confidential, and we work on a no-win, no-fee basis. Strict time limits apply to unfair dismissal claims, so don’t wait to get advice. Call us seven days a week on 1300 766 700.
Read more: Meta Glasses at Work: A Workplace Privacy Nightmare?
