Security guard sacked by text message awarded $12,500 compensation

A security guard who was sacked by text message has been awarded nearly $12,500 compensation, after the Fair Work Commission ruled his dismissal was unfair and ‘plainly unjust, unreasonable, harsh, and, unconscionably undignified’.

Commissioner Ian Cambridge was scathing of the way the company handled the dismissal, describing the decision to sack the guard via text message as “unnecessarily callous”.

The background

Kurt Wallace worked for more than two years as a casual security guard for AFS Security 24/7, which is based in Armidale in New South Wales.

He generally worked a roster of four days on and eight days off with a team of two other guards, which meant he averaged two and half shifts a week.

Earlier this year, Mr Wallace messaged AFS Security’s payroll manager about concerns with rostering arrangements, and another concern about not being paid for a shift he had worked the previous week.

In response, the company’s payroll manager said: “I had to do the pays yesterday as I’m in hospital today for a day surgery procedure so didn’t get to see your timesheet. I will fix it up next week”.

Mr Wallace responded that he wasn’t aware the manager was in hospital with the message: “Hope all is well then”.

‘We no longer require your services’

A few days later, Mr Wallace received a message from the payroll manager saying: “Effective immediately we no longer require your services as a casual patrol guard”.

He responded with another message asking the payroll manager to “please explain?”

When he got no response, he tried to call the manager, and then drove to the company’s office seeking an explanation.

The payroll manager told him that she didn’t need to give him an explanation for the dismissal because he was a casual employee.

Casual employees can be protected by unfair dismissal laws

Commissioner Ian Cambridge noted that in most cases, casual employees are not eligible to make unfair dismissal claims, unless they meet a number of conditions.

These include meeting a minimum period of employment (one year for small businesses), having a reasonable expectation of ongoing employment, and being employed on a regular and systemic basis.

Mr Wallace met all of these conditions.

He had been employed for more than two years on a regular roster, and at the time of dismissal, had another shift scheduled for the following week.

Mr Cambridge found that Mr Wallace had been dismissed, rather than being made redundant.

He also ruled that AFS Security 24/7 was not protected by the Small Business Fair Dismissal Code, as the employer did not have reasonable grounds to suspect the employee of serious misconduct.

No warning or explanation was provided to Mr Wallace and he wasn’t given the opportunity to respond.

Dismissal via text ‘callous and undignified’

Mr Cambridge criticised AFS Security 24/7 for its poor handling of the dismissal, saying the decision was “capricious and ill-founded”.

“In this instance, the summary dismissal of the applicant was not connected with any discernible reason other than the employer’s mistaken belief that it could dismiss the applicant as a casual employee with or without any articulated reason,” he said.

“The employer offered no other explanation for the reason for the dismissal of the applicant other than; ‘[their] services as a casual employee were no longer required’.

“The circumstances in this case have established that there was no sound, defensible or well-founded reason for the dismissal of the applicant.”

Mr Cambridge harshly criticised the use of a text message to dismiss the employee, saying a dismissal should be conveyed face-to-face unless there is a “genuine apprehension of physical violence or geographical impediment”.

“To do otherwise is unnecessarily callous,” he said.

“The procedure that the employer adopted whereby it advised the applicant of his dismissal by way of text message, and which was for undisclosed reason, was plainly unjust, unreasonable, harsh, and, unconscionably undignified.

“The dismissal of the applicant with such perfunctory disregard for basic human dignity reflects very poorly upon the character of the individual or individuals responsible.”

AFS Security 24/7 was ordered to pay Mr Wallace $12,465 compensation.

The lesson

Industrial relations expert Miles Heffernan said the case should serve as a warning to businesses who employ casual workers.

“As Commissioner Cambridge found, if a casual worker has been with a business for the minimum employment period, and is working on a regular and systemic basis, and has a reasonable expectation that their employment will be ongoing, then they are protected by unfair dismissal laws,” he said.

“That’s why it’s important for managers and business owners to seek expert advice from an industrial relations specialist before deciding to sack someone.

“And as for firing him with a text message – what a pathetic and cowardly thing to do.”

If you have been unfairly dismissed from employment, you may be entitled to compensation.

For specialist help and advice, please call our team at Fair Work Claims today on

1300 324 748

To connect with us, please follow us on:

Fair Work Claims is a private consultancy and advocacy firm with no affiliation to any government agency, commission or tribunal.