TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT – termination at initiative of employer – resignation – s.394 Fair Work Act 2009 – application for relief from unfair dismissal – applicant signed letter of resignation during meeting with respondent on 11 August 2016 – applicant submitted that conduct of respondent was designed to bring her employment to end – prior to meeting applicant claimed that she had been ostracised in the workplace; that she had been excluded from meetings and her usual work; that her duties had been reduced as a result of respondent appointing a Construction Manager; and that her integrity had been questioned by the respondent in relation to the taking of sick leave – applicant claimed that respondent had prepared resignation letter for the meeting of 11 August 2016, signalling the respondent’s intention of bringing the employment relationship to an end – respondent disputed this and submitted that meeting was called to discuss serious concerns about applicant’s performance – respondent submitted there was no prepared resignation letter at the meeting ready for the applicant – resignation letter was a HR template only produced when the applicant asked for it – respondent submitted that applicant was not forced to resign but chose to – issue of whether applicant was forced to resign because of course of conduct of respondent – O’Meara considered – Commission found that some of applicant’s complaints were legitimate and contributed to her decision to resign, however, none of the matters relied upon by the applicant could be found to have forced her resignation – Commission satisfied that actions of respondent were not intended to bring the employment relationship to an end – found that applicant went into meeting having foreshadowed to her partner about her intention to resign – satisfied that if applicant had not asked twice for a resignation letter, the meeting of 11 August would have continued – Commission not satisfied that applicant was forced to resign because of course of conduct by respondent – application dismissed. Coughlan v McLeod Rail
…
