Skip to main content
FairWorkMate
FWCFair Work Commission · 30 December 2025

[2025] FWC 3667

Citation: [2025] FWC 3667

At a glance

Employees affected
1
Awards cited
MA000027

What happened

Karren Burns was employed part-time as a receptionist by M & R Clayton Pty Ltd since 2019. Following a misunderstanding regarding a reduction in her hours, Ms Burns stated she may quit. Mr Clayton interpreted this as a resignation and accepted it. Ms Burns attempted to clarify her position in subsequent emails, stating she did not intend to resign and seeking clarification on her employment status. Mr Clayton responded stating he accepted her resignation and asked her to return keys and leave the workplace. The matter proceeded to a Fair Work Commission hearing.

What was decided

The Fair Work Commission found that Ms Burns was dismissed, not that she resigned. Deputy President Dean considered the circumstances surrounding Ms Burns' statement and found it was made 'in the heat of the moment'. The Commission noted that Mr Clayton treated Ms Burns' statement as a termination rather than seeking clarification. The decision referenced previous cases highlighting that an employer's conduct can render a resignation legally ineffective. The dismissal was deemed unfair.

What it means for employers

Employers should exercise caution when accepting resignations, particularly when they appear to be given in a moment of emotional stress. It's crucial to clarify an employee's intentions rather than immediately treating a statement as a resignation. Failing to do so can be considered a dismissal initiated by the employer.

What it means for employees

Employees who feel pressured into making statements that could be interpreted as resignations should seek to clarify their position in writing. If an employer acts on such statements without seeking clarification, it may be considered an unfair dismissal.

unfair-dismissalgeneral-protectionsmisclassificationpenalty-rates

Every statement above is drawn from the published decision. Read the original here:

https://www.fwc.gov.au/documents/decisionssigned/pdf/2025fwc3667.pdf

Want more cases like this?

FairWork Mate tracks Fair Work Ombudsman, Fair Work Commission and Federal Court decisions across Australia. The full dataset, with structured fields for awards cited, industry, penalty amounts and affected employee counts, is available through the Business API. FairWork Mate AI answers plain-English questions grounded on the full corpus.

Individual case summaries on this site are free. API + AI access is a paid product. Contact us for pricing or a 50% off first month.

Get notified on new Fair Work cases

Free email alerts when we publish new underpayment decisions, penalty orders, and workplace law updates.

Free forever. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

This summary was drafted by AI from the published decision and reviewed before publishing. It is general information, not legal advice. For your specific situation, speak to the Fair Work Ombudsman (13 13 94) or a qualified lawyer. About these summaries & corrections →

← All cases