Resources: Blogs

Respect my authority

Blogs
|

Employee awarded compensation for dismissal over Facebook Messenger

Unfair dismissal application lodged by an employee who was summarily dismissed in a Facebook Messenger chat.

The Fair Work Commission (FWC) recently considered an unfair dismissal application lodged by an employee who was summarily dismissed in a Facebook Messenger chat.

In Morris v Alphaeus Hair Salon [2018] FWC 2642, Commissioner Riordan was provided with a Facebook Messenger chat transcript in which a salon owner accused an employee of participating in a conspiracy against him before advising her: “Good luck in your new job if you can find one”.

The employee was employed as a hairdresser at the salon and was promised that she would manage a new salon opening in another location. This good working relationship soured, however, on the evening of 6 December 2017 after the salon owner initially messaged the employee to enquire whether he had an appointment in the morning.

When the employee did not answer immediately, he sent a further message stating that the employee had to make a choice whether she was “with me or against me”. The employee replied that she did not know what he was talking about and the pair exchanged escalating messages in which the salon owner:

  • Told the employee that she had to “cut off” former employees as her friends or she would not have a job;
  • Accused the employee of planning abandon him and leave the salon;
  • Demanded to know whether he could trust the employee;
  • Accused the employee and a co-worker of contributing to his fear that they were second guessing him;
  • Claimed that the employee tried to have control over him;
  • Advised the employee that she had to “rid that attitude you have”; and
  • Questioned whether he should continue to employ the employee.

The employee tried to call the salon owner so that he could explain his messages and attempted to reassure him that she liked her job, that she was not leaving the salon and that other employees were not out to get him, but the salon owner did not answer.

After the employee advised that she was stressed out from his messages and was not going to come in the following day, the salon owner sent a series of messages including: “Good luck in your new job if you can find one”, “I will cut you from my fold Good luck girl as you will need it” and “Goodbye loser [sic]”. The salon owner then proceeded to rant and stated: “You r dead to me!...I will have justice and you will receive my wrath!...You are nothing and will be nothing” and threatening “Depart from me as I will destroy u!”

The employee lodged an unfair dismissal application. The employer did not lodge a response and did not participate in the Hearing.

The FWC noted that the salon owner and the employee had a good working relationship and that they regularly chatted on Facebook outside of work. However, the FWC characterised the final exchange as a chat which “spiralled out of control”.

The FWC held that there was no valid reason for the dismissal. It found that the employee was dismissed because the salon owner held a “conspiracy theory” about the employee talking to current and former colleagues, but there was no evidence before it that the employee had done this or had tried to undermine the employer.

The FWC ordered that the employer pay the employee a total of 4 weeks’ pay (being the loss of remuneration between her dismissal and her new employment).

Lessons for employers

While it is increasingly common for employers and employees to converse on social media, such platforms should not be used to have disciplinary discussions with employees, particularly outside of work hours. Such serious conversations are better handled in a formal manner with a proper process. In this matter the chat which “escalated from a simple enquiry to an unfortunate conclusion” may have resolved if the two parties had discussions over the phone or face-to-face.

Information provided in this blog is not legal advice and should not be relied upon as such. Workplace Law does not accept liability for any loss or damage arising from reliance on the content of this blog, or from links on this website to any external website. Where applicable, liability is limited by a scheme approved under Professional Standards Legislation.

Similar articles

Employer successfully rebuts presumption in adverse action claim

Return to sender

An employer has successfully defended an adverse action claim brought by a former employee as the court was satisfied that the employee was not dismissed for a prohibited reason.

Read more...

Commission finds inappropriate social media use formed valid reason for dismissal

Message delivered

A recent decision of the Fair Work Commission has confirmed that an employee’s inappropriate use of social media group chats may form a valid reason for dismissal, particularly when matters relating to work are discussed.

Read more...

Failure to warn employee renders dismissal unfair

Template lesson

Many businesses, and in particular small businesses employers subscribe to human resources information systems which offer access to template letters and policies to provide a ready-made solution or to manage human resources administration.

Read more...

First Intractable bargaining order made by the Full Bench

How did it end?

Enterprise agreement making under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) requires bargaining representatives to bargain in good faith. Under the Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Secure Jobs, Better Pay) Act 2022 (Cth), the Fair Work Commission was provided with new powers to arbitrate and issue a workplace determination to resolve intractable disputes about terms and conditions of proposed enterprise agreement in circumstances where there are no reasonable prospects of the parties reaching an agreement.

Read more...

Federal Court finds employee was not demoted due to his exercise of workplace rights

The final decision

Employees are protected from adverse action because they have exercised, or propose to exercise, the workplace right to make a “complaint” or “inquiry” in relation to their employment within the meaning of section 341(1)(c)(ii) of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth).

Read more...

Employer successfully rebuts presumption in adverse action claim

Return to sender

An employer has successfully defended an adverse action claim brought by a former employee as the court was satisfied that the employee was not dismissed for a prohibited reason.

Read more...

Let's talk

please contact our directors to discuss how ouR expertise can help your business.

We're here to help

Contact Us
Let Workplace Law become your partner in workplace law and sports law.

Sign up to receive the latest industry updates with commentary from the Workplace Law team direct to your inbox.