Worker also raises issues that negatively affected mental health
The Fair Work Commission (FWC) recently dealt with a case involving a worker who claimed he was forced to resign from his position at a large employer due to workplace conduct issues. The case hinged on whether the worker's resignation could be considered a dismissal under the Fair Work Act 2009.
The case touched on several important employment law issues, including workplace relationships, mental health concerns, and proper procedures for addressing employee complaints.
The decision highlights the challenges employers face in managing workplace dynamics and the importance of clear communication and documentation in employment matters.
Background of the case
The worker began his employment with the employer on 23 August 2021 as a payroll team lead, managing a small team of about nine employees. He reported directly to the payroll manager.
In mid-2023, concerns were raised by colleagues about a potential conflict of interest between the worker and one of his direct reports. The employer investigated these concerns but did not substantiate any breaches of their personal relationship procedure.
Additional issues arose when the worker gave an unsolicited gift to a colleague, which apparently made the latter uncomfortable. The gift was equivalent to $700 and was given prior to the colleague leaving for a holiday abroad.
The payroll manager warned the worker about gifting in this manner, as it had made the colleague uncomfortable.
The worker claimed that the work environment became toxic and stressful, leading to difficulties in completing work and causing psychological injury. He also cited structural and remuneration issues as contributing to a negative work experience.
Latest News
On 19 January 2024, the worker resigned from his position, with his final day of employment being 25 January 2024.
The employer’s arguments
The employer argued that the worker was not dismissed for the purposes of section 365 of the Fair Work Act. They emphasised that the worker had resigned voluntarily and worked out a notice period before his employment ended.
The payroll manager provided evidence about their positive working relationship with the worker. She stated that she had sent job advertisements to the worker to support his professional development, not to push him out of the organisation.
The payroll manager explained that as she intended to remain in her current position until retirement, the only positions available for the worker to reach his career goals would be external.
Regarding the conflict of interest concerns, the payroll manager detailed the feedback received about potential favouritism and discomfort among colleagues.
She explained that management initially observed the situation before escalating it to HR. Following HR's advice, she had a discussion with the worker about temporary changes, including additional training and a change in reporting lines for his direct report.
The worker's claims
The worker argued that his resignation was forced by the employer's conduct, meeting the definition of dismissal under section 386(1)(b) of the Fair Work Act.
He cited several factors that he believed left him with no alternative but to resign, including:
- Organisational structure issues
- Concerns about mental health being ignored
- Poor procedures in response to complaints against him
- Interpersonal issues, including exclusion and rumours
The worker provided evidence of text messages and discussions with management where he raised concerns about his mental health and workplace stress.
He also detailed interdepartmental issues, specifically between the HR and payroll teams, which allegedly caused friction in the workplace.
Allegations and workplace dynamics
The case involved several allegations and workplace dynamics that contributed to the worker's decision to resign. These included:
- Concerns about a perceived relationship between the worker and a direct report
- An incident involving an unsolicited gift to a coworker
- Tensions between different departments within the organisation
- Changes in reporting lines and team structures
In June 2023, the worker and two of his direct reports conducted site visits. Following these visits, further concerns were raised about the worker's relationship with one of his direct reports. In August 2023, a formal complaint was lodged regarding concerns of favouritism.
The worker claimed that he was not well informed about the investigation into the perceived conflict and was never provided the opportunity to address the alleged conflict.
He also questioned the motivations behind raising the gift-giving issue, which occurred in late 2022 but was not addressed until late 2023.
Worker’s mental health concerns
A significant aspect of the case involved the worker's claims about his mental health and the employer's response. The worker provided a Letter of Support from his treating psychologist, though the employer questioned its relevance due to its brevity and recent issue date.
The worker testified that he had raised mental health issues on multiple occasions with management. However, the payroll manager claimed she was unaware of any formal raising of psychological injury prior to early 2024.
She did acknowledge that in January 2024, the worker informed her of a tragedy involving a close friend that had impacted him, and she suggested he take leave.
Conclusion and implications
The FWC's decision highlighted the complexities involved in determining whether a resignation can be considered a dismissal under the Fair Work Act.
The Commission had to weigh the evidence presented by both parties to determine if the worker was "forced to resign" due to the employer's conduct.
“It is clear that [the worker] had strained relationships with other coworkers (outside of the influence of [the employer]), frustrations with the overall structure of the business, and very limited room to advance,” the FWC said.
“[The worker] made the understandable decision to seek employment elsewhere, as his employment at [the employer] had turned stale and his job satisfaction had declined.”
“Over the course of his employment with [the employer], [the worker] had clearly formed close bonds with some of his coworkers and had contributed excellent work product to the payroll team.”
However, the FWC that it was not satisfied that “[the worker] had no option but to resign as a result of [the employer]'s conduct, but it is understandable that the employment relationship was one that he no longer had a desire to maintain.” Thus, the FWC dismissed the worker’s application.
The FWC further reminded employers to have robust procedures in place for addressing complaints and managing workplace relationships.