The worker relied on three alleged circumstances involving conversations with the area manager that he claimed forced him to resign on 14 March 2025. The FWC noted that where there was conflict between the evidence of the worker and the area manager, it tended to prefer the area manager’s evidence, finding him to be a credible witness whose evidence was generally clear, while the worker was prone to exaggerate about his interactions with management.
FWC examines workplace tensions
The first alleged circumstance related to a complaint the worker made to the area manager about his store manager in early January 2025. The worker complained that the store manager had taken clients he had initially served and then claimed the sales under her name. The worker claimed the area manager immediately dismissed his complaints based on his trust in the store manager.
During oral evidence, the worker agreed that during this conversation, the area manager spoke to him in a calm manner and suggested that he should learn to more quickly operate the point of sale system so that other staff were not able to engage with new customers while he was delayed completing transactions.
The area manager’s evidence was that he told the worker that the store manager was experienced and capable of sorting the issues out, speaking in a normal tone and not dismissing the complaint outright.
The second alleged circumstance involved a complaint about a new casual salesperson employed sometime in January 2025. The worker believed the casual salesperson would immediately approach customers and reduce his opportunity to make sales.