Australia: Beyond the four walls: the shifting boundaries of the modern workplace

Last Updated: 26 October 2016
Article by Fay Calderone (formerly with DibbsBarker)
Services: People & Workplace
Industry Focus: Agribusiness, Energy, Financial Services, Insurance, Life Sciences & Healthcare, Property

This article first appeared in Precedent, the journal of the Australian Lawyers Alliance, issue 135, published in August 2016. It has been reproduced with the kind permission of the ALA. A PDF version of the article can be found here. For more information about the ALA, please go to:

You've heard it before – the boundaries of the workplace are changing. In this ever-connected world, where we can log on remotely, speak to people from cars, and check emails from our bedrooms, where does the workplace end and our private life begin?

No longer can employers consider the physical boundaries – the office, the warehouse, the workshop, the building site – as defining the workplace. If an employee is injured while performing work from home, does that injury arise from the course of employment? If an employee harasses another on Facebook from home is that considered to have occurred 'in the workplace'?

Fortunately, a number of recent cases provide guidance to employers on this disruptive and evolving issue.

Festive fisticuffs

The Fair Work Commission (FWC) has recently considered whether an employee's conduct at an employer-sponsored social event occurred 'in the workplace'.

In Keenan v Leighton Boral Amey Joint Venture [2015] FWC 3156, Mr Keenan attended a work Christmas party, organised and paid for by the employer, where unlimited, free alcohol was served. During the Christmas party, Mr Keenan generally behaved inappropriately, telling a company director to 'f*** off' when he tried to join a conversation, asking a female colleague for her phone number, and saying to another female colleague 'who the f*** are you? What do you even do here?'

After the official Christmas party had ended, Mr Keenan went to the public section of the venue upstairs with some of his colleagues. There, Mr Keenan called one female colleague a 'bitch' and kissed another on the mouth in 'an unsolicited and unprovoked manner', telling her he was 'going home to dream about [her]'.

Mr Keenan estimated that from the time of his arrival at the Christmas party until about 11.15pm, he drank a total of about ten beers and one spirit. The FWC accepted that Mr Keenan had become drunk quickly. Mr Keenan had not been refused service of alcohol at any point during the Christmas party and in fact he served himself beer during the night. No one addressed Mr Keenan about his inappropriate behaviour, told him he should stop drinking, or asked him to leave the function.

The employer undertook an investigation into the complaints arising from Mr Keenan's conduct at the Christmas party and gave Mr Keenan an opportunity to respond to the allegations. Ultimately, the employer made the decision to terminate Mr Keenan's employment because of his conduct at the Christmas party, and as a result, Mr Keenan filed an unfair dismissal application with the FWC.

In a somewhat surprising decision for employers, the FWC found that Mr Keenan had been unfairly dismissed because the conduct in question occurred after the official Christmas party had ended and therefore a higher level of misconduct was required to warrant Mr Keenan's dismissal.

While the FWC found that Mr Keenan kissing another employee on the mouth constituted sexual harassment under the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth), the FWC held that the incident had not been sufficiently connected to Mr Keenan's employment because the social interaction at the upstairs bar was not 'in any sense organised, authorised, proposed or induced' by the employer.

With regard to Mr Keenan's conduct at the official Christmas party, the FWC found that, while unpleasant, it was not sufficiently serious to justify dismissal. It considered that while some misconduct may have constituted a valid reason for dismissal, that being his aggressive question 'Who the f*** are you? What do you even do here?' to a female colleague, the substance of this allegation was not sufficiently communicated to Mr Keenan and he therefore did not have a proper opportunity to respond to the allegation.

Vice President Hatcher found that Mr Keenan's behaviour had been the result of his intoxication and stated:

'it is contradictory and self-defeating for an employer to require compliance with its usual standards of behaviour at a function but at the same time to allow the unlimited service of free alcohol. If alcohol is supplied in such a manner it becomes entirely predictable that some individuals will consume an excessive amount and behave inappropriately.'

The FWC took into account Mr Keenan's good work record and considered that there were substantial disciplinary alternatives available to the employer in lieu of dismissal.

In finding that employers must adjust their expectations of employees where unlimited alcohol is provided at the employer's expense, there are implications on how employers organise social events. For example, the FWC was particularly critical of the employer for not having a person in charge of monitoring the venue's service of alcohol. In view of these findings it is essential that employers delineate official work functions from social functions which are likely to be considered private social events.

Conduct at an official work Christmas function was also considered in McDaid v Future Engineering and Communication Pty Ltd [2016] FWC 343.

The employer, a WA-based engineering company, organised a Christmas party which involved a day of go-karting followed by an event at their offices that evening where the employer supplied alcohol without setting a limit on how much employees were permitted to drink.

It was uncontested that Mr McDaid got very drunk and pushed a senior colleague into a swimming pool, fully clothed. When Mr McDaid's boss told him to leave, Mr McDaid responded 'You f*** off.'

Mr McDaid then pushed his boss hard enough for him to fall backwards and crash into a gate, after which both men exchanged blows. Mr McDaid had his employment terminated on the basis of his conduct at the Christmas party.

As in the Keenan case, the FWC was critical of the employer for supplying employees unlimited alcohol, Commissioner Williams said it was 'unsurprising' that Mr McDaid had been terminated for his conduct and found the dismissal to be fair, with Commissioner Williams saying:

'Whilst in some circumstances an employer that provides alcohol at a work function and takes no steps to ensure it is consumed responsibly may be culpable for events attributable to the consumption of alcohol, such as a drunken employee being injured falling down stairs, employees who drink will also be held responsible for their own actions. The fact that someone has been drinking when they behave badly may in part explain their actions but it should not be accepted as an excuse for that misbehaviour. How much alcohol someone drinks is a choice they make and with that choice comes consequences. Society no longer readily accepts alcohol consumption as an excuse for bad behaviour and certainly not for physical violence.'

High Court hijinks

In Comcare v PVYW [2013] HCA 41, the High Court of Australia was required to consider whether an injury sustained by an employee while having sex in a hotel room on a work trip was a compensable injury which occurred in the course of employment.

In 2007, the public servant (whose name was supressed) was sent to a country town by her employer to provide training and to look at budget reviews. Once she had finished her work for the day, the public servant called a friend to have dinner. Following dinner, they went back to her hotel room to have sex, during which a light fixture fell from above the bed, injuring the public servant's nose and mouth severely enough that she had to be taken to hospital. She later developed depression and was unable to continue working for the government.

The public servant made a claim for workers' compensation through Comcare, the government's insurance provider. Comcare initially accepted the claim, but later rejected it.

Initially, the case went to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT), which found that the government and Comcare were not liable for her injuries. However, the Federal Court found the AAT had erred in its finding, saying that the employer was liable for everything that happened in the hotel room except 'misconduct' because the public servant was on a work trip and the hotel was chosen by the employer.

On appeal, the High Court had a simple proposition before it: Did the injury (regardless of what caused it) occur within the 'course of employment'?

In considering this question, the High Court held that simply being present at a certain place does not establish that the injury arose 'in the course of employment'.

The High Court set out the following determining factors:

  1. Initially, determine if the employee suffered an injury, but not while engaged in actual duties.
  2. Consider what the employee was doing when the injury occurred, and how the injury was brought about – did it arise out of an activity or a place?
  3. If it arose at and by a 'place', such as a wall falling on the employee, did the employer induce or encourage the employee to be in that 'place'?
  4. If it arose out of an 'activity', did the employer induce or encourage the employee to partake in that activity?

The High Court's rationale is that inducing or encouraging an employee to be at a particular place does not provide the necessary connection to employment where an employee is injured while engaged in an activity at that place.

Although the public servant had been present in the hotel room, being the 'place', because her employer induced or encouraged her to be there, her mere presence was not what caused the injury to occur. The injury arose out of an 'activity' she engaged in without her employer's inducement or encouragement. Therefore, the High Court held that the injury did not occur within the course of employment and the employee was not entitled to compensation.

The lesson for employers is that care needs to be taken when directing employees to work remotely or offsite. The same type of risk assessment conducted in the physical workplace needs to be undertaken when employees are performing work outside of the physical boundaries of the employer's workplace. Employers must also be clear about the duties an employee is expected to perform while working remotely or at an off-site location.

Not in the office, but still in the workplace

In Vergara v Ewin [2014] FCAFC 100, Ms Ewin made allegations of sexual harassment against Mr Vergara, a labour-hire accountant who had been brought in to work with her. Ms Ewin alleged that Mr Vergara engaged in the following conduct:

  1. Turning off the office lights and touching her hand, followed by asking her to go to a pub with him across the road from the workplace. At the pub, Mr Vergara sexually propositioned Ms Ewin and tried to kiss her when out on the street.
  2. The following day, Mr Vergara again sexually propositioned Ms Ewin while they were both at the offices of KPMG.
  3. The day after that, Mr Vergara requested a sexual favour from Ms Ewin, and then following an evening work function in a bar, Mr Vergara had non-consensual sexual intercourse with Ms Ewin back at the workplace.

The Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth) provides that it is unlawful for a person to sexually harass another person at a place which is a 'workplace of either or both of those persons' and defines a workplace as 'a place at which a workplace participant works or otherwise carries out functions in connection with being a workplace participant'.

The Federal Court found that Mr Vergara sexually harassed Ms Ewin, including that he engaged in non-consensual sexual intercourse, and awarded Ms Ewin $474,163 in compensation.

Mr Vergara appealed the Federal Court's decision to the Full Court of the Federal Court on various grounds, including that the King Street footpath and Waterside Hotel in Sydney did not constitute a 'workplace' under the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth).

The Full Court of the Federal Court accepted that Ms Ewin had agreed to go to the pub because there were other witnesses there, and she did not wish to remain in the offices with Mr Vergara alone after hours, saying:

'Ms Ewin did not go to the Waterside Hotel in acceptance of Mr Vergara's sexual advances but, on the contrary, because she wanted to deal with what she had repeatedly sought to discourage.'

'...going to the Waterside Hotel was triggered by a need to deal with the resumption of Mr Vergara's unwanted sexual advances... [which] had commenced at the workplace'.

The Full Court of the Federal Court dismissed Mr Vergara's appeal on the basis that the function of both Ms Ewin and Mr Vergara at the hotel was to deal with what had commenced at the workplace and therefore they were 'carrying out a function' in connection with being a workplace participant.

Beyond four walls

The case law clearly demonstrates that the workplace extends beyond the physical boundaries of an employer's place of business. The predictions and reports as to the future of work indicate we are moving towards more flexible workplaces and contingent workforces. While many organisations will continue to provide flexible working arrangements as part of a modern and mobile workplace, careful consideration and planning needs to go into how these more nebulous concepts of the workplace will be managed. Communicating expectations will go a long way toward helping employees to understand the delineation between 'workplace' and 'non-workplace', both in terms of 'place' and 'activity', in the absence of physical boundaries and traditional parameters.

This article is intended to provide commentary and general information. It should not be relied upon as legal advice. Formal legal advice should be sought in particular transactions or on matters of interest arising from this article. Authors listed may not be admitted in all states and territories

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Fay Calderone (formerly with DibbsBarker)
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Sparke Helmore Lawyers
Some comments from our readers…
“The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable”
“I often find critical information not available elsewhere”
“As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”

Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Sparke Helmore Lawyers
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions