Employee resigned before exhausting reasonable internal workplace remedies and constructive dismissal claim was dismissed.

The Complainant stated that she had given almost ten years of service before workplace relations deteriorated. She alleged that a 2024 bullying complaint had not been investigated, causing significant stress, medical treatment and counselling. After returning, she had been transferred without a job description or training. In May 2025, she had been called without warning to a meeting concerning alleged performance issues and the possible return of the colleague she had accused of bullying. She regarded the subsequent ‘Letter of Concern’ as an unjustified disciplinary sanction imposed without fair procedures. She said management had failed to engage properly with her written grievance, had withheld relevant information through an incomplete data request response and had orchestrated intimidation. Having lost trust and confidence in the Respondent, and believing her health remained at risk, she had resigned because continued employment had become objectively intolerable and no reasonable alternative remained.

The Respondent denied constructive dismissal and maintained that the Complainant had resigned prematurely while alternatives remained available. It stated that her 2024 complaint had not been formally investigated because she had asked that no further action be taken and that management had separated the employees instead. The May 2025 meeting had addressed legitimate performance concerns, including leaving the office unattended, communication failures, booking errors and an incorrect scan. The resulting Letter of Concern had constituted informal counselling rather than formal discipline. HR had written repeatedly, acknowledged her illness, offered a return-to-work meeting, occupational health support and access to the grievance procedure. After her resignation, the Respondent had invited her twice to reconsider and discuss solutions. It argued that she had not exhausted internal procedures, had rejected efforts to resolve matters and had failed to prove any repudiatory contractual breach or conduct sufficiently unreasonable to justify resignation.

The Adjudicating Officer found that the Complainant had not established constructive dismissal under either the contractual or reasonableness test. The May 2025 meeting had concerned legitimate performance issues and had remained an informal intervention, so the protections applicable to formal disciplinary proceedings had not been required. No evidence had shown that the Complainant was instructed to work again with the colleague against whom she had complained. Her 2024 complaint had not been investigated because she had expressly requested that no further action be taken. The failure to attach the grievance procedure to the Letter of Concern had not amounted to a contractual breach. Viewed objectively, the Respondent’s conduct had not reached the threshold required to make resignation unavoidable. HR had continued engaging, offered meetings and supports, and invited her to reconsider resigning. The Complainant had therefore resigned voluntarily without exhausting internal remedies, and the complaint had been dismissed.

Employers should:

1. Distinguish clearly between informal performance management and formal disciplinary action. Meeting invitations, follow-up letters and policies should state the process being used, the concerns raised and the possible outcomes.
2. Address bullying complaints promptly and document the employee’s chosen course. Where an employee declines a formal investigation, the employer records that decision, explains available informal and formal options, reviews workplace risks and considers practical separation measures.
3. Ensure HR maintains regular, supportive contact without acting oppressively to absent employees. Offer grievance procedures, occupational health, support and a structured return-to-work meeting. 
   

The full case can be found here.