Worker

Employer

Anonymised Parties

A Worker

An Employer

Representatives

Act

Dispute Reference No.

Date of Receipt

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969

IR - SC - 00006230

26/01/2026

The Worker stated that he commenced employment on 8 September 2025 as a security officer and was promoted to the position of security supervisor on 6 October 2025 and that he was summarily dismissed on 16 January 2026.

He outlined that a number of difficulties arose during the course of his employment. The Worker confirmed that he did not invoke the internal dispute resolution procedures and that the only issue for consideration by the WRC was his alleged dismissal.

The Worker accepted that he tendered his resignation by email on 14 January 2026 but stated that he gave an extended period of notice, indicating that he was willing to remain in employment until 1 July 2026, or sooner if he obtained his driver’s licence. He contends that this was done in good faith to facilitate an orderly transition.

The Worker submitted that, by correspondence dated 16 January 2026, the Employer indicated that it would not require him to work out this notice period and that his employment would conclude at that point. The Worker contends that this amounted, in substance, to a dismissal and that he was treated unfairly in that regard.

The Worker seeks compensation equivalent to a number of months’ pay.

The Employer confirmed that the Worker commenced employment on 8 September 2025 as a security officer and that following a recruitment process he was promoted to the position of security supervisor on 6 October 2025. The Employer denied that the Worker was summarily dismissed. The Employer submitted that the Worker resigned on 14 January 2026 and that this resignation was accepted. It maintains that the resignation was clear and unequivocal.

The Employer further submitted that the Worker remained within his probationary period at the time. In those circumstances, the Employer determined that it was neither appropriate nor practicable for the Worker to continue working for the duration of the lengthy notice period proposed.

The Employer submitted that it was entitled to bring the employment relationship to an end with immediate effect and that this did not amount to an unfair dismissal but rather constituted an acceptance of the Worker’s resignation, coupled with a decision not to require him to work out his proposed notice period.

In conducting my investigation, I have taken into account all relevant submissions presented to me by the parties.

It is common case that the Worker commenced employment with the Employer on 8 September 2025 and that he tendered his resignation on 14 January 2026. I am satisfied that this resignation was clear and unequivocal, having regard in particular to the terms of the Worker’s email of that date.

While the Worker indicated a willingness to remain in employment until 1 July 2026, I find that this was a proposed notice period only and not one that the Employer was obliged to accept. It was open to the Employer to determine that the employment would conclude earlier, including in circumstances where the Worker remained within his probationary period.

I am satisfied, on the evidence before me, including that of the Worker and the Employer’s Director, that the Employer’s correspondence of 16 January 2026 did not constitute a dismissal but rather amounted to an acceptance of the Worker’s resignation, with the Employer electing not to require him to work out the notice period proposed.

I note from the documentation submitted by both parties, and from the evidence adduced at the hearing, that issues arose during the course of the employment. However, it is apparent that internal dispute resolution procedures were not invoked or exhausted by the Worker. While I make no finding on the merits of those matters, I am satisfied that the employment relationship has now come to an end and that the Worker has secured alternative employment. In those circumstances, it is appropriate that the parties now regard the matter as concluded.

Having regard to all of the circumstances, including the fact that the termination flowed from the Worker’s resignation, I do not find any basis upon which to recommend compensation under the 1969 Act.