Sacked Over Social Media?

Antoinette Lattouf’s win against ABC is a warning on politics, fairness, and free speech at work.

Journalist Antoinette Lattouf successfully pursued an unlawful termination claim against Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC). The case of Lattouf v Australian Broadcasting Corporation (No 2) [2025] FCA 669 fundamentally reshapes how employers must approach employee political opinions and procedural fairness.

Behind the Curtains

In December 2023, Ms Lattouf was working as a casual presenter for ABC Radio Sydney. During her engagement, ABC received complaints about her social media activity, specifically, a repost of a Human Rights Watch video (the “HRW Post”) about the Israel/Gaza conflict.

She was removed from her remaining shifts without being told which policies she had allegedly breached or given a chance to respond. She alleged unlawful termination due to her political opinions and a breach of procedural fairness under the ABC Enterprise Agreement 2022-2025 (“Enterprise Agreement”).

Judgment Day (But Make it Legal)

On 25 June 2025, the Federal Court of Australia found that ABC breached section 772(1) of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (FW Act) by terminating Ms Lattouf’s employment for reasons including her political opinion opposing the Israeli military campaign in Gaza.

Political Opinion

ABC argued that:

1. Ms Lattouf had only claimed to hold political opinions, not to have expressed them

2. Its decision was not based on political opinions at all, but rather on a perceived breach of the social media guidelines and concerns about her impartiality on air

3. Ms Lattouf’s employment was not terminated but simply ended at the conclusion of her casual engagement.

The Court rejected these arguments. It held that the termination was indeed for reasons including her political opinion. Importantly, it clarified that protection under the FW Act is broad and extends to both the holding and expression of political views, including those expressed on personal social media.

Procedural Fairness

The Court also found that ABC contravened s 50 of the FW Act by breaching multiple clauses of the Enterprise Agreement.

ABC failed to:

1. Provide written notice of the alleged misconduct

2. Inform Ms Lattouf of her right to representation

3. Outline the process for investigating the allegations

4. Inform her that her alleged conduct could amount to serious misconduct

5. Offer a genuine opportunity to respond.

Importantly, the Court found Ms Lattouf had only been given advice, not a management direction, regarding social media posts. Her HRW Post did not breach ABC’s Social Media Guidelines and therefore did not amount to serious misconduct. Preventing her from presenting her remaining shifts was deemed unauthorised disciplinary action.

Compensation

On 24 September 2025, Justice Rangiah imposed financial penalties totalling $150,000 in Lattouf v Australian Broadcasting Corporation (Penalty) [2025] FCA 1174, broken down as follows:

1. $75,000 for contravention of ss 772(1) and 50 of the FW Act through breach of cl 55.4.1(f) of the Enterprise Agreement (termination).

2. $12,500 for contravention of s 50 of the FW Act through breach of cl 55.2.1(a)-(c) of the Enterprise Agreement (failure to advise).

3. $12,500 for contravention of s 50 of the FW Act through breach of cl 55.2.1(f) of the Enterprise Agreement (failure to allow response).

4. $50,000 for contravention of s 50 of the FW Act through breach of cl 55.2.2 of the Enterprise Agreement (failure to notify of serious misconduct).

Ms Lattouf had previously been awarded $70,000 for non-economic loss, bringing the total amount ABC has now been ordered to pay her to $220,000.

Employer Survival Guide

1. Follow Fair Procedures: Employers must strictly comply with enterprise agreements and internal policies when managing performance, conduct and grievances. This includes providing written allegations with particulars, representation rights, a clear process, and a genuine chance to respond.

2. Political Opinion is a Protected Attribute: Section 772(1)(f) of the FW Act protects both holding and expressing political views. Employers must not base termination decisions (even partly) on an employee’s political beliefs. Balancing reputational concerns with anti-discrimination obligations is essential.

3. Apply Social Media Policies Fairly: Policies must be clearly written, consistently enforced, and accessible. Training and educations are a must.

4. Remember the Reverse Onus: Under s 361 of the FW Act, once an employee alleges a prohibited reason for dismissal, the burden shifts to the employer to prove otherwise.

Final Word

The Antoinette Lattouf case is a timely reminder that employment decisions, especially in politically sensitive contexts, must be lawful, transparent, and fair. Above all, fairness isn’t just a legal requirement – it’s a reputational safeguard.

If you’re an employer, now’s the time to train managers, refresh policies, and protect your reputation. Contact our Employment Law Team today to ensure your workplace practices are compliant and defensible.