No pineapple, no job: Chef sacked over pizza principles

An Italian-born chef who refused to follow a customer’s order to put pineapple on pizza has run out of time to prove his dismissal was unfair, despite also allegedly receiving multiple warnings from his employer.

The applicant, who was also in the process of applying for a sponsored permanent residency, lost his unfair dismissal claim in the Fair Work Commission primarily on the basis that he filed the application after the 21-day deadline.

Davide Tamburella was employed at The Trustee for La Costa Hospitality Unit Trust Rocket Property Group (trading as La Costa) from January 2023 until his dismissal in May 2026.

The employee had injured his hand on a metal handrail in April 2026, fracturing two metacarpals.

According to the respondent, this incident was connected to alleged “inappropriate language and escalation of the situation during service”, a “failure to manage the situation in accordance with previously discussed expectations” and repeated issues with inappropriate communication, and a refusal of a customer request.

The refusal in question allegedly related to a request for pineapple on a pizza, which the chef said was an insult to his culture.

This was also allegedly not the first time this direction had been refused by Tamburella, with the employee also having received a formal warning from management directing him to comply with requests, follow workplace directions, and improve his conduct.

Prior to termination, on around 6 May, restaurant management had a meeting with the employee to address conduct issues, including the refusal to make pizza as directed by a customer.

However, the chef maintained that he should not have to engage in any preparation that was offensive to his culture, further arguing that the respondent should understand the importance to Italians that pineapple not be put on pizza.

Due to the latest refusal and ongoing conduct and behaviour issues, Tamburella was terminated on 20 May.

The chef applied for unfair dismissal on 8 July 2026, claiming he was let go for refusing a direction on cultural grounds, and that adverse action was taken against him in connection with the hand injury.

He further argued that management used the conduct and pizza disagreement unfavourably in the dismissal rather than offering accommodation and compromise.

Given that the application was made 28 days out of time, it was first necessary to determine whether there were exceptional circumstances that would allow commissioner Jennifer Hunt to grant an extension of time.

The judgment cited the Macquarie Dictionary’s definition of exceptional, which explained it as “[forming] an exception or unusual instance; unusual; extraordinary”.

On determining that it would be necessary to consider the circumstances leading up to and after the termination, Hunt heard that Tamburella had experienced challenges to his mental health, that he was having difficulty sleeping, and that the medication tapentadol (Pallexia), which was taken for the hand injury, was causing drowsiness at work.

Tamburella also expressed concern about his visa status in relation to the termination of his employment, explaining that he prioritised discussions with legal specialists over the unfair dismissal process.

He also claimed to have not known about the 21-day deadline.

However, Hunt said: “While I accept that Mr Tamburella was suffering some pain, brain fog and was taking strong prescribed drugs following his dismissal on 20 May 2026, he had capacity to engage with his first and then second migration lawyer, use his mobile phone, provide instructions to his fiance and also enjoy two weekends away to relax.”

“It cannot be said that Mr Tamburella was without capacity to bring his application within time.”

Further, it was noted that Tamburella delayed applying until he had his sponsorship withdrawn, and only then sought help from the commission.

Hunt said: “Having regard to Mr Tamburella’s capacity to engage in some ordinary activities, making a choice not to bring the application soon after his dismissal on account of hoping for a better outcome, and then not making haste to bring his late application to the Commission upon learning of the 21-day time limit, I am not satisfied that the reasons for the delay are supportive of an extension of time being granted.”

As such, Hunt dismissed the application and refused an extension of time, finding no exceptional circumstances.

Due to the application dismissal, there was no need to make a determination of cultural obligations when it comes to fruit on pizza.

Want to see more stories from trusted news sources?
Make HR Leader a preferred news source on Google.