Forced Resignation Medical Condition: FWC Ruling Explained
The Fair Work Commission (FWC) recently decided a significant case involving a university employee. She claimed that her employer effectively caused a forced resignation medical condition dispute by refusing remote work. The case focused on workplace accommodations, remote work, and the legal line between voluntary resignation and dismissal under the Fair Work Act. This ruling highlights how employers must balance organizational needs with employee safety.
Employee History and Remote Work Requests
The employee started as an assistant HR administrator in September 2019. During the 2020 pandemic, she transitioned to working from home. While the university returned to on-campus operations in August 2020, she continued remote work due to a medical condition.
By April 2023, she followed a hybrid model and worked from home two days a week. However, her rheumatoid arthritis made commuting difficult. Consequently, her doctor recommended full-time remote work in July 2023. Despite this, the university required her to be on campus three days a week.
Medical Evidence and Accommodation Challenges
In January 2024, an independent medical examination confirmed that commuting caused her significant discomfort. Following this, she began a gradual return-to-work plan. By April 2024, she provided a medical certificate advising against all on-campus work for one month.
The university then requested more details from her doctor. Afterward, the employer stated they could not accommodate more remote work due to safety concerns. They required full medical clearance before she could return.
The FWC Verdict on Forced Resignation
On April 30, 2024, the employee resigned. She argued that the refusal to provide reasonable adjustments created a forced resignation medical condition scenario. She maintained that her successful remote work during the pandemic proved that an on-campus presence was unnecessary.
However, the university argued that they supported her through hybrid schedules and other assistance. Ultimately, the FWC ruled that her resignation was voluntary rather than coerced. The Commission noted that she chose to resign instead of using formal internal dispute procedures.
Key Takeaways for Employers
This case reminds us that managing medical accommodations is complex. Employers should maintain clear communication and thorough documentation. Similarly, employees should explore all dispute resolution avenues before they decide to resign.
Disclaimer: The information provided in this blog was accurate at the time of writing and is intended as general advice. For specific advice, please call AHR on 1800 577 515.
For more information click here
