In this episode of P.I. Case Note, Michelle Wright examines the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission’s decision in Wilton v Workers’ Compensation Regulator [2025] QIRC 279, which demonstrates the serious risks of informal workplace agreements and compensation claims when management disciplinary action triggers psychiatric injury. The case involved Mr. Wilton, a plant operator and trainer/assessor at BHP Group who felt overwhelmed with his training duties and arranged an informal break from that role with his supervisor, but was then subjected to disciplinary proceedings when he refused a training task requested by a different supervisor—with his psychiatric injury claim ultimately rejected under section 32(5) of the Workers’ Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003 (Qld) as arising from reasonable management action taken in a reasonable way.
The Commission’s analysis reveals how informal workplace agreements and compensation claims can fail when the agreement lacks documentation and operational needs override informal arrangements. Mr Wilton had expressed frustration about the training role to the Production Superintendent, who did not interpret this as a request to alter duties or a health and safety concern. Mr Wilton then spoke to his direct supervisor who agreed to give him a break from training—however, this agreement was qualified (Mr Wilton would complete current training first) and could be overridden by operational needs. When a second supervisor requested Mr Wilton perform an assessment due to genuine operational need and shortage of operators, Mr Wilton refused multiple times, citing the informal agreement and his health and safety. The supervisor escalated the matter, formally directing Mr Wilton to comply with a “lawful and reasonable direction,” and when he refused, he was stood down and subjected to BHP’s disciplinary process over three days of meetings. Critically, the Commission found that even after the second supervisor became aware of the informal agreement with the first supervisor, continuing with disciplinary proceedings was reasonable because the agreement was “only an informal one that could be overwritten by the operational needs of the business.” The Commission also found the first supervisor’s inaction in not intervening or enforcing the agreement was not unreasonable.
Listen for Michelle Wright’s detailed analysis—including her unusually frank critique—of this decision on informal workplace agreements and compensation claims. If you’re experiencing workplace stress and considering requesting modifications to your duties, the experienced team at accident legal understands the critical importance of formalising any agreements about duty adjustments. As Queensland’s trusted personal injury lawyers, we know that informal workplace agreements and compensation claims rarely provide protection when management takes disciplinary action, and we’ll advise you on properly documenting health and safety concerns, obtaining written confirmation of duty modifications, and building a compensation claim that can withstand section 32(5) challenges. Contact us for a free consultation on 1800 942 853—we’ll help you protect your rights by ensuring workplace agreements are properly formalized and health concerns are adequately communicated before they escalate into disciplinary proceedings.
