In a recent decision of Williams v Valley Healthcare Group Pty Ltd [2023] FWC 614, the Fair Work Commission found that there was no constructive dismissal on the part of the employer to bring the employment to an end in a case where the HR Manager claimed that she was forced to resign from her employment because her employer changed her reporting line.
The Fair Work Commission decision
Ms Belinda Williams (Ms Williams) worked for Valley Healthcare Group Pty Ltd (Valley Healthcare) for over one year before she decided to resign because Valley Healthcare changed her reporting line.
Following the termination of Ms Williams’ employment, Ms Williams commenced proceedings alleging that she was constructively dismissed (or “forced to resign”). The Fair Work Commission (FWC) held that Ms Williams’ employment with Valley Healthcare was not terminated at its initiative, ultimately finding that Ms Williams was not dismissed within the meaning of section 386 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (FW Act).
Background
Ms Williams was employed in the position of HR Manager for Valley Healthcare. In this role, she reported to the General Manager. However, due to the General Manager’s departure from the business, Ms Williams subsequently reported directly to the Managing Director and owner of Valley Healthcare.
In or around September 2022, Ms Williams was told that her position was being modified and that there was no longer a requirement for her to perform the role of HR Manager for the business’ South Coast Facility Services and that she would no longer be involved in any recruitment activity for the business.
Following this notification, Ms Williams made a formal complaint. In response, Valley Healthcare explained that due to its financial viability it made a decision to restructure its business to fit a new management structure in order to be able to move forward in a profitable way.
After a number of exchanges between Ms Williams and Valley Healthcare, Ms Williams emailed and expressed her desire to resign providing two weeks’ notice and adding that her resignation was due to the breach of contract on Valley Healthcare’s behalf.
Key Issue
Ms Williams argued (amongst other issues) that Valley Healthcare failed to establish how “any financial difficulties being suffered by the business at the time correlated with its decision to act without consultation in altering the duties of her position”.
In deciding whether Ms Williams was constructively dismissed, the FWC made the following comments:
- Ms Williams complained about her workload since it doubled when another employee had left the business and that her workload was “too big” for one employee. The FWC stated that the evidence suggested that Ms Williams could not meet the weekly reporting expectations of Valley Healthcare.
- Valley Healthcare would be failing in in its duty as an employer if it did not take steps to alleviate the workload of Ms Williams after she had made a complaint.
- Further, Ms Williams was not being demoted. Her title was not changing. There was no reduction in her hours of work or her salary. The FWC accepted that Ms Willaims was going to report to a new General Manager due to changes at the senior level, but a change in a reporting line does not constitute constructive dismissal.
- The FWC accepted that Ms Williams did not support the change to her responsibilities, even though she had complained about her workload. This said, the FWC also noted that Valley Healthcare could have dealt with the situation better by discussing the proposition directly with Ms Williams prior to a final decision being made.
The FWC found that the reduction in Ms Williams’ duties was undertaken due to the needs of the business and the complaint made by Ms Williams in relation to her excessive workload. For these reasons, the FWC determined that there was no actual dismissal, and that the dispute could not be considered further within the unfair dismissal system.
Key takeaways
While the employee was unsuccessful in this case, employers should consult with their employees before implementing changes that may affect their job. This case demonstrates that it is best practice to engage with employees and consider their views when making decisions. For more information on consultation requirements please see the Fair Work Ombudsman guide.
National Employment & Labour Lawyers have a dedicated team who can assist you with your employment queries. We offer a free and confidential initial consultation, where we can discuss your situation and provide you with tailored advice. Get in touch with us today!
Disclaimer: The information contained in this article is of a general nature and is not intended to be relied upon as, nor to be a substitute for, specific legal or professional advice.
