Resources: Blogs

Call Me Maybe?

Blogs
|

Texting and the employment relationship

Last month, the Fair Work Commission handed down a decision criticising a manager for dismissing an employee by text message. This decision is far from the first condemning employers for dismissing employees via text message, but it does highlight the FWC’s ongoing frustration with employers who have no regard for procedural fairness.

Last month, the Fair Work Commission (FWC) handed down a decision criticising a manager for dismissing an employee by text message.

In the decision, Deputy President Sams said he was appalled by the text: “It was at best, inappropriate and, at worst, a gutless abrogation to act reasonably and decently when ending employment.” (at [34] Abdul Rahim v Murdoch University Child Care Association [2016] FWC 2191).

This decision is far from the first condemning employers for dismissing employees via text message, but it does highlight the FWC’s ongoing frustration with employers who have no regard for procedural fairness.

In Hain v Ace Recycling Pty Ltd [2016] FWC 1690, Deputy President Ashbury also raised the issue and noted that a text message might be understandable if it is used as a trigger for beginning the process of procedural fairness, but a text message is certainly not acceptable for effecting a dismissal.

This is an important point for employers – the position of the FWC is not that texting employees is entirely unacceptable, it’s that if you are going to communicate with employees using such means you need to accompany it with proper processes. For example, an employer should meet with their employee face to face to discuss the allegations against them and afford the employee the opportunity to respond before a final disciplinary decision is made. Employers also need to keep good, clear written records of their dealings with employees. Records are essential for demonstrating that a proper process has been followed and that employees have been dealt with reasonably and decently – text messages carried around on a manager’s phone are most unlikely to fit the bill of good record keeping.

And it’s not just dismissal that employers should be careful of when it comes to using texting or instant messaging platforms. Hiring should always be done in a formal manner. A text message saying, “Congratulations, you’ve got the job. Your pay will be $XYZ, start Monday” is hardly a substitute for a contract of employment. Congratulating someone on their new job via text is a great way to make them feel welcome but not matter how junior, senior, casual or permanent a job offer is, employers should follow up with a well drafted written offer of employment.

One of the risks associated with communicating via text or other similar mediums is the propensity for tone to get lost in translation. A few poorly spelt, thumb-typed words followed by a couple of emojis can be easily misinterpreted, and never more so than when tensions are already running high.

Also resignation from an employee via text can be a murky business for employers and sometimes deciphering whether an employee has actually resigned or not can be incredibly difficult.

This is where HR becomes so important. HR is there to support business owners and employers through these difficult moments and provide the follow-up that might be lacking in day to day communications between managers and employees. HR is there to bring to the human element into the equation – they aren’t called human resources for nothing!

HR can help to take the heat out a situation where miscommunications have occurred between managers and employees simply by being informed and involved in the situation at the earliest opportunity.

Developments in technology are increasing workplace connectivity and that is something to be encouraged. However, employers should always do the important things like hiring and firing in person and, as Deputy President Sams put it, act reasonably and decently when dealing with end of employment communication.

 

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

Employee’s exaggerated complaints created psychosocial risk

False alarm

Employers have work health and safety obligations to eliminate or minimise psychosocial risks in the workplace so far as is reasonably practicable. These risks arise from psychosocial hazards including conflict or poor workplace relationships.

Read more...

Commission finds swearing in workplace constituted sexual harassment and warranted summary dismissal

R-E-S-P-E-C-T

With the new Respect@Work amendments now in place, employers should be mindful of a recent decision handed down by the Fair Work Commission where it upheld the dismissal of an employee on the basis that swearing at a colleague constituted sexual harassment.

Read more...

Northern Territory Station Farm Manager validly dismissed for fighting with employee and using lewd language

Country and Western

In the first of a two-part blog series, we look at inappropriate conduct and behaviour in the workplace and the importance of dealing with problematic workplace behaviour.

Read more...

Commission finds employer’s unsubstantiated allegations rendered dismissal unfair

Not mushroom for error

Where there is a factual dispute about allegations made against an employee, employers must ensure that the allegations are properly tested before proceeding to a disciplinary process. This will ensure that the employee has been provided with procedural fairness and any reasons relied on by the employer as grounds for dismissal are valid.

Read more...

Commission finds role with additional 88km travel time was not suitable alternative employment

The road less travelled

An employer may apply to the Fair Work Commission to have an employee’s redundancy pay reduced to a specified amount (which may be nil) in circumstances where it has obtained “other acceptable employment” for the employee.

Read more...

FWC finds Philippine-based worker entitled to claim unfair dismissal

Objection overruled

When engaging overseas workers to perform work for an Australian entity, employers need to be mindful of the risks that such workers may be considered employees to whom the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) might apply.

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.