A recent decision has highlighted the importance of clarifying whether an employee has actually resigned. The employer had been told (by another employee) that she would resign, but the employee then continued to work for a few further weeks. When she was then deleted from a work chat group that handled work shift availability, the Fair Work Commission (FWC) determined that this action amounted to dismissing her. 

Facts of case 

When the employee’s manager resigned, she allegedly told the employer (via the Operations Manager) that the employee would also resign. The employee had already removed herself from a business chat group. The manager was the employee’s sister. The employee was present nearby during the conversation (which occurred inside the workplace, a shop), but claimed she had not heard all of it. 

The employer claimed that the manager had said that the employee would resign, but the manager denied saying it. The manager said she was resigning because she felt bullied and disrespected at work. 

The FWC found that the Operations Manager’s account of the conversation was more credible than the employee’s manager’s version. 

On the day of the conversation, the employee deleted herself from the chat group, but claimed she did so accidentally.  

Both the employee and her manager subsequently received shifts in which they worked together. The manager claimed that she had not discussed her sister’s “resignation” with her during that time, but the Full Bench refused to believe her.  

The FWC found that the employer had not attempted to talk either of the sisters out of resigning. For the following three weeks, there was no contact between the Operations Manager and the employee. This was claimed to be “normal” with casual employees.  

The end of the three weeks marked the manager’s date of resignation, so the employer assumed the employee was also resigning on the same day and deleted both employees from another chat group, which was set up to handle the availability of staff for work shifts. The employee received no work shifts after that.  

The employee sent a text message claiming she had been dismissed by being deleted from the chat group, but the Operations Manager did not reply to it, claiming it was abusive.  
 

Decision: resignation must be unambiguous 

The FWC found that the employee had been dismissed. The employer had not contacted her to clarify whether she really intended to resign, but instead relied on the word of her manager. The employee was also at fault by not attempting to contact the Operations Manager to clarify her position, but instead simply sent a text message claiming she was dismissed. 

Neither the employee nor her manager ever communicated the employee’s resignation in the clear, unambiguous terms that are required. Nor had the employee told the manager to communicate her resignation on her behalf. 

Deliberately removing herself from the business chat group did not amount to communicating a resignation because the employee then worked several shifts after that. However, the employer removing her from the staff chat group did prevent her from continuing to work and therefore amounted to dismissal. 
 

What this means for employers 

An employer should always obtain clear evidence that an employee has resigned. It should preferably be in writing, but in cases like this one the employer should have followed up directly with the employee to clarify whether she genuinely intended to resign – and if yes, asked for written confirmation. 

That said, the employee could have asked her direct manager to convey her resignation to the employer, or conveyed her resignation to her direct manager, provided in both cases she gave a clear statement to that effect. 
 

Read the judgment 

Mrs Romy Barrett v DJR and Rar Sports - [2025] FWC 3273 | Fair Work Commission