An AFL umpire who grabbed a jogger and told him to “f*cking leave” a football field has had his Fair Work unfair dismissal claim rejected. The six-foot-four umpire also asked the jogger “are you retarded?” while “towering” over him, before “frog-marching” him to the exit. The Commission rejected the umpire’s “nonsensical” claim that he had done so out of concern for the safety of the umpires under his care.
In this article, we’ll explore the events of this unfair dismissal NSW case Frank Kalayzich v Australian Football League [2025]. We’ll also look at another recent Fair Work unfair dismissal claim by a lawyer who was fired for attending an interstate footy match while on sick leave.
Dismissal justified for umpire who manhandled jogger
Sydney-based Frank Kalayzich had served as an umpire and coach for the Australian Football League since 1986, employed on a series of seasonal contracts. Prior to his dismissal, he was employed on a nine-month fixed term contract that was set to end in late September 2025. He worked 15 hours per week and his official position was Elite Umpires Coach and Administrator NSW/ACT. Mr Kalayzich’s contract required him to be a “fit and proper” person. It said that he could face termination of employment for serious misconduct or causing a health and safety risk.
The event that led to Mr. Kalayzich’s termination of employment occurred on 8 April 2025 at North Sydney Oval. During his Fair Work unfair dismissal claim hearing, the Commission reviewed CCTV footage of the incident. It took place between Mr. Kalayzich and a member of the public known throughout proceedings as Mr. CS. As Mr. CS was not called to give evidence, the Commission accepted Mr. Kalayzich’s version of events.
Dismissed umpire confronted member of public
On the day in question, Mr. Kalayzich arrived at 5pm at North Sydney Oval and saw that Mr. CS was running laps around the field. Mr. Kalayzich told him that the oval was a “closed” training venue for the AFL umpiring group. However, Mr. CS disagreed, saying that it was open to the public and that he had been running for the past half hour. Mr. Kalayzich responded by saying that the AFL had booked the ground from 5pm.
After Mr. CS refused to leave, stating he only had a few more laps remaining, the interaction escalated. Mr. Kalayzich continually stood in the path Mr. CS wished to take, actively blocking the jogger and moving from side to side for approximately two and a half minutes. Mr. Kalayzich claimed to the Fair Work Commission that Mr. CS “grabbed” him on his right shoulder. Mr. Kalayzich then manhandled Mr. CS and frog-marched him to the oval gate around 40 metres away.
CCTV footage showed that Mr. Kalayzich grabbed at Mr. CS’s shirt and appeared to shake him. At one point after letting go, he pushed Mr. CS backwards and “shaped up” with partially raised fists by his side.
Called man ‘retarded,’ told him to ‘piss off’
Two AFL employees, Will Abbott and Tyler Hollingworth, approached the situation. Mr. Kalayzich claimed that he called for assistance. However, the workers told the Fair Work Commission that they came over because they saw Mr. Kalayzich grabbing the jogger’s shirt and “shoving” him. When asked what happened, Mr. Kalayzich stated he was trying to tell Mr. CS that it was a closed training venue. Mr. CS told the workers that Mr. Kalayzich had physically and verbally “abused me.”
Mr. Abbott recounted that he heard Mr. Kalayzich ask the man “are you retarded?” and told him to “piss off” and “f*cking leave.” Mr. Abott then stepped in between the two men. He noted that the six-foot-four-inch Mr. Kalayzich was “towering” over Mr. CS and trying to intimidate him. Mr. Hollingworth and Mr. Abbott then escorted Mr. CS off the field, apologising for the coach’s behaviour. Mr. CS subsequently used his phone to record the incident details on the AFL integrity portal, requesting the names and emails of the two AFL workers. Mr. Kalayzich continued his duties but did not immediately report the inappropriate behaviour himself.
Claimed he was ambushed during investigation
A week after the incident, the AFL initiated an investigation and Mr. Kalayzich was stood down with pay pending its outcome. The company warned him that if the allegations of misconduct were substantiated, he could face termination of employment. A day later, the AFL sent him a letter detailing the allegations of misconduct. These included using intimidating and abusive verbal language, as well as aggressive physical behaviour.
In a subsequent disciplinary meeting, Mr. Kalayzich was shown the CCTV footage. Later, during his Fair Work unfair dismissal claim hearing, he said that he was “shocked.” This was because he felt like it was shown to him after he had given his side of the story, to “catch me off guard.” Mr. Kalayzich said he was shown the footage only once on a small digital screen and felt the results had already been determined.
Ended with umpire’s termination of employment
The AFL later sent Mr. Kalayzich a show cause letter. This outlined that both allegations concerning offensive language and aggressive physical behaviour had been substantiated. The AFL concluded his behaviour amounted to misconduct, breaching its code of conduct. In a meeting in early May 2025, Mr. Kalayzich expressed “genuine regret” for the incident. He admitted that he “overreacted” and that his actions were not appropriate.
The AFL ultimately decided that Mr. Kalayzich would face termination of employment on 8 May 2025. It cited his “significant” breach of the code of conduct and said that it had “lost the trust and confidence” required for the employment relationship to continue. The next day, Mr. Kalayzich filed his Fair Work unfair dismissal claim.
Argued “HR bias” got him dismissed
Mr. Kalayzich argued to the Fair Work Commission that he should be reinstated. He claimed that his termination of employment was procedurally and substantively unfair. Mr. Kalayzich alleged an “HR bias” and a “CCTV footage ambush”. He contended that the refusal to allow him to properly review and address the footage before his dismissal was unreasonable.
Mr. Kalayzich argued his actions were motivated by a genuine concern for the health and safety of the umpires under his care and the security of their belongings. He maintained he was an “upstander” not a “bystander.” He said that his conduct should be evaluated in light of the fact that the AFL had not provided training or guidance on how to handle non-participants on the field.
Fair Work dismissed umpire’s ‘nonsensical’ claims
Mr. Kalayzich’s Fair Work unfair dismissal claim was heard by the Fair Work Commission in November 2025. It found that the AFL had a valid reason to terminate his employment. The Commission concluded the CCTV footage and witness evidence were “largely conclusive and telling” of what occurred. It said that Mr. Kalayzich’s testimony showed a “tendency to incorrectly characterise his actions” in an attempt to reduce the severity of his conduct. For instance, he refused to use the word “shove,” stating only “I’m moving him in the right direction.”
The Commission ruled that Mr. Kalayzich’s conduct was a clear breach of the AFL’s code of conduct. Dismissal was therefore judged to be a proportionate response. It said that it was “nonsensical” for Mr Kalayzich to suggest that his actions were in the name of ensuring the safety of the umpires. The Commission concluded that he “simply wanted [the jogger] off” the oval immediately.
Fair Work unfair dismissal claim rejected
The Fair Work Commission rejected Mr. Kalayzich’s argument that he was not afforded procedural fairness. It accepted that he was notified of the reasons for termination of employment and given a real opportunity to respond. The complaint of HR bias was found to have “lacked substance.” The Commission also dismissed his claim that he had been denied the chance to review the CCTV footage. It said that he was shown the footage during the investigation and was able to respond to the allegations “weeks before” his dismissal.
While the Commission acknowledged Mr. Kalayzich’s long tenure with the AFL, this did not outweigh the seriousness of his misconduct. It said that he had shown “limited genuine remorse,” noting his written response contained “guarded and conditional” concessions. Given the valid reason for dismissal and the finding that procedural fairness was granted, the Commission concluded that the unfair dismissal was not unfair.
Lawyer’s dismissal upheld after Instagram exposes “sick leave” footy trip
Another recent Fair Work unfair dismissal claim that involved the footy, this time a spectator, is xxx. Mitchell Fuller started working as a solicitor at Melbourne-based law firm Madison Branson Lawyers in January 2023. The firm was considered a small business employer as it had six employees at the time of his dismissal. The events that led to Mr. Fuller’s termination of employment occurred in April 2024. That was when he decided to join friends in Adelaide for the AFL ‘Gather Round’ games. During the first week of April, he booked flights and tickets for the game.
He attended work during this week as normal, making no application for annual leave. This was despite believing his boss would only approve leave applied for one month in advance. On the evening of 4 April 2024, Mr. Fuller flew to Adelaide. The following morning, a regular work day, he emailed his colleagues saying that he would be taking sick leave. Mr. Fuller claimed that he had a “tough time sleeping last night” and that he was not feeling up to coming into the office. He said he would get a medical certificate.
Secret uncovered via Instagram photos
That night, Mr. Fuller went to the AFL game. Over the weekend, he attended a South Australian National Football League game, visited the beach and went to a pub with his friends. On Monday, Mr. Fuller began the return journey to Melbourne by car. At 8.07 am, he emailed the firm, stating he was “still in a bit of discomfort.” He said that he did not think he could “hack taking public transport quite yet.” Mr. Fuller obtained a medical certificate for this day from an online provider.
The firm was unaware of the Adelaide trip at the time, and Mr. Fuller was initially paid sick leave. But in July 2024, it caught wind that he had travelled to Adelaide for the game. The firm found out while Mr. Fuller was facing a performance show-cause process related to continuing to work on a “locked” file. A HR consultant engaged by the firm reviewed Mr. Fuller’s social media accounts. They showed the firm photos he had posted on Instagram while at the Gather Round weekend.
Termination of employment after ‘glib’ response to photo evidence
On 1 August 2024, Branson Lawyers sent Mr. Fuller an email alleging that he had travelled to Adelaide for the footy while claiming to be sick. The email had five of his Instagram photos attached. Mr. Fuller’s response was described by the firm as a “glib deflection,” focusing instead on the lack of evidence of reputational damage. A few days later, Branson Lawyers decided to terminate his employment with immediate effect.
The decision to terminate was based on the view that Mr. Fuller had made a false statutory declaration, falsified leave requests and had been dishonest. Branson Lawyers also referred the matter to the Legal Services Board + Commissioner for Victoria. Mr. Fuller later lodged a Fair Work unfair dismissal claim.
Argued his ADHD entitled him to ‘mental health day’
In his Fair Work unfair dismissal claim, Mr. Fuller provided a witness statement detailing a series of grievances against his employer. He argued that his poor mental state, linked to his Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and a nationwide medication shortage, should be considered. Mr. Fuller asserted that he was unwell and entitled to take the sick leave, and that he genuinely believed he was entitled to a “mental health day.” He contended that taking sick leave for a mental health day did not amount to misconduct. Mr. Fuller also submitted that the dismissal process involved a “systemic failure” to provide him with procedural fairness.
In response, Madison Branson Lawyers raised the Fair Work Act 2009 Small Business Fair Dismissal Code as its primary defence to Mr. Fuller’s unfair dismissal claim. A dismissal is consistent with the Code if the employer “believes on reasonable grounds” that the employee’s conduct was “sufficiently serious to justify immediate dismissal.”
The firm’s principals said that Mr. Fuller had misled and deceived the firm. They contended that their belief was based on reasonable grounds, namely the Instagram photos and ticket purchases that contradicted his claims of being unwell and unable to travel.
Lawyer slammed for ‘inexcusable’ conduct
Mr. Fuller’s Fair Work unfair dismissal claim was heard by the Commission in April 2025. It found that the emails he sent to Branson Lawyers while he was travelling were “knowingly evasive” and “misleading.” Regarding Mr. Fuller’s claim that he had spoken to a doctor, the Commission found that it was “false in nearly every single respect.” It said that his testimony to the Commission was “conduct no witness should engage in,” and was especially “inexcusable” for a practicing solicitor.
The Commission therefore concluded that Mr. Fuller was not sick or unfit on the days he had taken personal leave. It also ruled that his termination of employment had been consistent with the Small Business Fair Dismissal Code. The Commission was satisfied that Branson Lawyers genuinely believed Mr. Fuller’s conduct was serious enough to warrant immediate dismissal. They had also fired him based on reasonable grounds, given the “highly credible evidence” of his false statements.
Fair Work unfair dismissal claim rejected
The Fair Work Commission stated that even if the Code defence was unsuccessful, it still would not have found Mr. Fuller’s dismissal unfair. His dishonesty and wrongful claim for paid sick leave constituted multiple valid reasons for termination. The Commission noted that Mr. Fuller was given multiple opportunities to respond to the clear allegations of dishonesty.
The Commission concluded that Mr. Fuller’s behaviour and attitude was “utterly incompatible” with his ongoing employment as a solicitor at the firm. It noted that in such a position, integrity and honesty are “paramount.”
Read more: My Employer Has Dismissed Me Unfairly – Can I Lodge An Unfair Dismissal Claim?
Have you faced unfair termination of employment?
A Whole New Approach (AWNA) has supported thousands of Australian workers through some of the toughest moments in their careers. If you’re dealing with unfair dismissal, unsafe workplace behaviour, discrimination, unfair deactivation or a breach of your workplace rights, we can guide you through the Fair Work process.
We offer a free, confidential first consultation to help you understand your rights and what you can do next. But act fast, as strict deadlines apply for Fair Work claims. Contact us today on 1300 766 700.
