Have you been dismissed for swearing at work? When it comes to unfair dismissal claims, the Fair Work Commission often has to determine whether swearing in the workplace is acceptable or if it’s a fireable offense. The outcome often comes down to context.
It’s likely you’ve experienced different levels of toleration for curse words depending on where you’ve worked. In some workplaces, swear words are used more often than words like “it” and “the.” In others, a mere drop of an F-bomb might land you in a stern meeting with HR for unprofessional conduct.
Context matters with swearing at work
Whether swearing at work is considered acceptable (or at least not a fireable offence) often hinges on the nature of the workplace. Some, like construction sites, high-pressure sales environments or kitchens, are known for their liberal swearing culture.
This kind of context is often considered by the Fair Work Commission when it decides on unfair dismissal or general protections cases involving swearing. Often, an employee who was fired for swearing may win their case if their workplace was one where that kind of behaviour is considered normal.
Targeted swearing is another story, however
An exception to this is when swearing is directed at someone in particular and it’s in a threatening or intimidating manner. This was the case in a recent general protections case heard by the Fair Work Commission – Ali v DMG Building & Electrical Services Pty Ltd [2025].
In this case, the Commission acknowledged that the swearing took place in what it described as a “blue collar” atmosphere. That is, where swearing is often heard. However, the way in which the swearing took place – from a boss to a subordinate – was seen as intimidating and therefore deemed unacceptable.
“Are you f**king serious”: Fair Work finds boss’s swearing forced tradie to resign
The general protections claim was made by Melbourne based electrician Suhayl Ali. He began working for DMG Building & Electrical Services in September 2024. He resigned around two months later, in November 2024.
Mr. Ali subsequently filed a general protections application with the Fair Work Commission. He alleged he was forced to resign due to what he described as “various alleged business practices” and abusive and bullying behaviour by his boss.
DMG Building & Electrical Services lodged a jurisdictional objection to the general protections claim. The company argued that Mr. Ali had voluntarily resigned and was therefore not dismissed. The Fair Work Commission therefore had to decide if he had been dismissed, which is a fundamental requirement for an employee to make a general protections claim.
Secret recording captured boss’s swearing
A key piece of evidence in the case was a covert audio recording made by Mr. Ali of a conversation with his boss in late November 2024. Mr. Ali had recorded the conversation as he had previously felt verbally abused by his boss with no witnesses present.
The recording captured the duo’s discussion about Mr. Ali’s work performance and his request to take time off for prayer. The discussion then became heated after the boss said Mr. Ali was “self-absorbed” and that he had “not got a good vibe” about him.
The boss brought up an incident where Mr. Ali did not reveal he was taking time off to pray, saying it was “deceitful.” The boss then reminded Mr. Ali what he told him during the interview process; “I can’t f**king tolerate people who steal and people who lie.”
Boss continued his expletive-laden tirade
He went on to say that he didn’t want “any negative nancies” in his company “f**king becoming toxic to other blokes.” The boss said that if any staff act in that way he would “f**king weed them out.”
The boss then brought up the fact that Mr. Ali hadn’t been performing well, before the duo discussed how Mr. Ali could take time off to attend prayer. The next day, Mr. Ali called in sick, texting his boss that his mental health was “not in the right place.” A day later he resigned.
Employer said he was respectful because he offered glass of water
The boss didn’t deny to the Fair Work Commission that the recording was authentic. However, he argued that he had not been disrespectful, unprofessional or aggressive. In an attempt to prove this, the boss told the Commission that he had offered Mr. Ali a drink of water during the discussion.
DMG Building & Electrical Services also pointed out that a WorkCover claim made by Mr. Ali for a mental injury had been rejected. The company contended that this rejection showed Mr. Ali’s claim of unsafe behaviour was unfounded.
Fair Work: Swearing inappropriate despite ‘blue-collar’ atmosphere
The Fair Work Commission acknowledged that Mr. Ali’s boss may not have intended for him to resign. It noted that he had shown a willingness to accommodate Mr. Ali’s religious practices.
However, the Commission found that his behaviour during the recorded conversation was “not appropriate or acceptable” in any workplace. This was despite acknowledging that they worked in a “blue-collar environment” where swearing is “likely to be part of the everyday work culture.”
Tradie had no choice but to resign
The Commission also noted that the relationship between a boss and employee isn’t on a level playing field, with the boss in a position of power. It said that the boss’s behaviour was aggressive and confrontational, and that this would have made anyone intimidated.
The Commission also stated that the outcome of Mr. Ali’s WorkCover claim was not relevant to the proceedings. It was found that the probable result of the boss’s conduct was that Mr. Ali had “no effective or real choice but to resign.”
The Commission acknowledged that swearing was “likely” part of DMG Building & Electrical Services’ “everyday work culture.” However, the fact that in this case it was directed at an employee in an intimidating manner made it inappropriate.
The Commission therefore dismissed DMG Building & Electrical Services jurisdictional objection. It found that Mr. Ali was dismissed within the meaning of the Fair Work Act. Mr. Ali’s general protections claim was allowed to proceed to a mandatory conciliation conference between the parties.
‘F**king mong’: Driver’s dismissal deemed unfair despite offensive language
This unfair dismissal case, which made headlines in late 2024, comes to us from the UK. This case is an example of where swearing was deemed acceptable by a UK employment tribunal due to the nature of the workplace. And given the UK’s employment laws share similarities with Australia’s, the Fair Work Commission would likely approach a similar case with a comparable perspective.
Manchester-based Robert Ogden had been employed as a driver/trainer at wholesale company Booker since 2016. The incident that led to his dismissal in July 2023 involved an office discussion about doughnuts, dieting and weight loss.
During this exchange, Mr. Ogden directed offensive terms at a female colleague. The victim stated that Mr. Ogden aggressively used derogatory words, including “f**king” and “mong.” She claimed these terms were used either together or in the same sentence.” The victim said that the insult humiliated her and made her anxious. She later took time off work, telling her manager that she was “sick of it” and had “had enough.”
Driver explained context of swearing
At his unfair dismissal hearing, Mr. Ogden didn’t shy away from the fact that he had sworn at his colleague. He explained that he had said, “You can’t do that, are you a fucking mong? No wonder it takes you 19 weeks to lose a stone, it hasn’t taken me 19 weeks.”
However, Mr. Ogden clarified that his comments were made in the context of his own dieting efforts. He also explained his use of the word “mong.” He denied that it was a reference to individuals with Down’s Syndrome. Instead, he argued that it was a term commonly used in the north of England (where Manchester is located) which means stupid.
‘Fat club’: Office banter often rowdy
Mr. Ogden also highlighted his “exemplary” work record at Booker. He said that the incident was a one-off and that he had been singled out. He also drew attention to the “cultural issues” at the company. He described the workplace as “lawless” and “toxic.” He also said it had a “jovial” atmosphere where there was a lot of joking around.
This included his colleagues making comments about each other’s weight, using terms like “chubs.” Mr. Ogden also claimed that colleagues would chat about “fat club” and hang up fake certificates commending the “gainer of the week.” He claimed that the colleague he swore at was given “as good as she [got].”
Tribunal considered context of swearing
The tribunal agreed with Mr. Ogden that there was a “significant” amount of banter in the Booker office. It also agreed that it had a toxic and lawless office culture, where employees weren’t instructed about workplace norms by managers. In fact, the tribunal said that the managers were “part of the problem.”
It found that Mr. Ogden had not been reprimanded for similar comments previously. It said that this likely created a false sense of security in terms of such comments not being a disciplinary issue. The tribunal also said that there was a “free-for-all” in the Booker office when it came to making offensive remarks. It determined that Mr. Ogden was singled out and “made an example of” by being dismissed.
Using F-word ‘common in the North’
The unfair dismissal tribunal agreed with Mr. Ogden that his use of the word “mong” was as a “vague” term of abuse and not a reference to someone with Downs Syndrome. With regard to Mr. Ogden using the F-word, the tribunal said that such swearing should be unacceptable in the workplace.
However, it explained that there are far worse words to use, like the N-word or F-word (referring to homosexuals). But most tellingly, the tribunal highlighted the fact that “particularly in the north” of England, the F-word is “quite often spoken in the public sphere.”
Based on all this, the tribunal ruled that Mr. Ogden’s dismissal for swearing at work had been unfair. His compensation was ordered to be determined at a further hearing.
Context matters when swearing at the work
The decision in this unfair dismissal case shows you just how much context can factor when swearing is involved. Mr. Ogden’s workplace was one where horseplay and raucous banter was normal. However, had he made the same comments to a colleague in a less informal workplace, like a law firm for example, it’s likely they would have been deemed inappropriate by the tribunal.
Adding to his defence was the fact that the F-word was commonly used publicly in the north of England, according to the UK tribunal. This goes to show that even contextual factors beyond the workplace can factor into a tribunal’s decision.
What’s more, his employer had never previously disciplined him for making similarly offensive comments in the past. They had not trained staff on not making such comments, nor had they any workplace policies in place regulating that sort of behaviour. The fact that those senior in position to Mr. Ogden were also making inappropriate comments weighed heavily on the tribunal’s decision.
The difference between Mr. Ogden’s swearing and that of the boss in the previous case is that the latter swore in an intimidating manner at a subordinate. The power imbalance between the duo was a serious factor noted by the Fair Work Commission.
Mr. Ogden’s swearing was also directed at a colleague. However, they were of similar levels of seniority and his comments were not aggressive or intended to intimidate.
Read more: Forced To Resign Due To Bullying
Have you been dismissed for swearing at work?
Every case is different, and what’s acceptable in one workplace may be grounds for dismissal in another. If you’ve been dismissed or forced to resign over swearing or abusive language, you may have rights under unfair dismissal or general protections laws.
At A Whole New Approach, we’ve helped thousands of employees across Australia fight back against unfair treatment. With over 30 years’ experience representing workers, we know how to navigate the Fair Work system and give you the best chance of success.
Call us today on 1300 766 700 for a free, confidential discussion about your situation.
