A Services Australia customer service officer who resigned while dealing with anxiety and depression was initially found to have been unfairly dismissed and awarded compensation, but a Full Bench of the Fair Work Commission has overturned that finding, ruling his resignation was genuine and could not be treated as a dismissal.
What the Commission decided
Luke Wilson worked for Services Australia and had been transferred between offices before a series of workplace conflicts and health issues emerged from mid-2024. He was assessed as having no capacity to work from February 2025 and resigned by email in March 2025, citing a list of grievances.
At first instance, Deputy President Slevin found Mr Wilson had effectively been dismissed rather than having truly resigned, because he was in a state of emotional distress when he sent his resignation and Services Australia had not given him enough time to confirm he genuinely meant to go. The Deputy President also found Services Australia's ongoing contact with Mr Wilson, plus the fact he had gone unpaid since February while his workers compensation claim was assessed, meant he had effectively been forced to resign. Compensation was ordered.imni]
The Full Bench disagreed on both counts. It found the failure to pay Mr Wilson during this period was the responsibility of Comcare, a separate statutory body, not conduct by his employer, so it could not support a finding that he was forced to resign.
On the question of whether Mr Wilson truly intended to resign, the Full Bench placed heavy weight on the fact that Services Australia had contacted his own doctor before accepting the resignation, and the doctor confirmed Mr Wilson had the capacity and competence to make decisions about his employment. The Full Bench also noted Mr Wilson never tried to withdraw his resignation and had insisted he was of sound mind.
Having found neither limb of the legal test for dismissal was satisfied, the Full Bench held Mr Wilson had not been dismissed at all, so no claim for unfair dismissal could succeed.
What was actually in dispute
The case turned on two separate questions under the provision that defines when a resignation counts as a dismissal. The first was whether Mr Wilson's distress meant Services Australia should not have simply accepted his resignation at face value. The second was whether the combination of ongoing workplace contact and unpaid leave amounted to conduct by the employer that left him no real choice but to quit.
The Full Bench accepted that unpaid leave and workplace stress likely contributed to Mr Wilson's decision, but stressed that the legal test requires the employer's own conduct to be the cause, not the actions of a separate body like Comcare handling a compensation claim.
On the resignation itself, the Full Bench found the Deputy President had wrongly treated the doctor's opinion as relevant only to whether Mr Wilson had recovered psychologically, when the real question was whether that opinion would have satisfied a reasonable employer that he genuinely intended to resign.
What this means
The decision illustrates how the Commission draws a line between an employee resigning under difficult circumstances and being forced out by an employer's conduct, an issue central to claims sometimes described as constructive dismissal. It also shows the Commission's approach to unfair dismissal appeals more broadly, including how a Full Bench can redetermine a case rather than send it back for rehearing, a process explained further at Fair Work Commission process. Readers considering whether a resignation might count as a dismissal can find general guidance at unfair dismissal.