When “ghosting” your job gets tested in the Fair Work Commission

Last week the Fair Work Commission handed down its decision in Subedi v Crispy Bakehouse Pty Ltd.

And honestly? This one hit close to home.

Because if you run a retail, food or trade-based business with 10 to 50 staff, you’ve probably lived some version of this story.

An employee books a one-way ticket overseas.
They don’t have enough leave.
You don’t approve the leave.
They go anyway.
Then weeks later… they pop back up expecting their job to still be there.

Awkward.

Here’s what actually happened.

The Head Baker asked for six weeks off to travel to Nepal. He only had 27 hours of accrued leave. Management did not approve the request.

Despite that, he left Australia anyway on a one-way ticket.

The bakery advertised for his replacement the very next day.

Weeks later, he returned and tried to resume work. Communication stalled. Then he was removed from the workplace WhatsApp group.

He filed an unfair dismissal claim.

Now, this is the part everyone wants to know.

Did the employee win?

No. He lost.

The Fair Work Commission found:

• The absence was unauthorised
• The employer had a valid reason for dismissal
• There were procedural deficiencies, including no formal termination meeting and no proper opportunity to respond

But even with those gaps, the Commission held that the dismissal was not harsh, unjust or unreasonable.

And importantly, the Commission confirmed that being removed from a work messaging platform can legally amount to dismissal.

Let that sink in. A WhatsApp removal can be the moment of termination.

So what’s the takeaway?

First, let’s be real with our clients.

We know this is a common headache.

We’ve advised on this exact issue more times than I can count. Employees who assume leave will be approved. Managers who say “we’ll see” and it gets interpreted as a green light. Business owners who think silence equals consent.

It doesn’t.

Here’s what this case reinforces.

1. Leave approval must be crystal clear

A request is not an approval.

If it’s not approved in writing, it’s not approved. Period.

Your leave policy should clearly state:

• Leave must be approved in writing before booking travel
• Insufficient leave may result in unpaid leave being declined
• Failure to attend work without approval may result in disciplinary action

No grey areas. No “but I thought…”

2. Unauthorised leave can be a valid reason for dismissal

If someone disappears overseas after you’ve said no, that can be a lawful basis for termination.

The Commission backed that.

But…

3. Process still matters

The bakery had procedural deficiencies. No formal letter. No proper chance to respond. No structured process.

They were lucky the outcome still went their way.

Relying on luck is not a strategy.

Even in a small business, even when you’re furious, even when you feel disrespected, you must:

• Put concerns in writing
• Give the employee an opportunity to respond
• Document the decision
• Confirm termination clearly and formally

Removing someone from WhatsApp might feel symbolic, but it’s not a process.

And here’s the big one.

4. Abandonment of employment needs to be addressed in your policies

So many SMEs don’t have a clause dealing with long-term unauthorised absence.

You need one.

Your leave policy should include wording along the lines of:

“If an employee is absent from work for an extended period without approval or reasonable explanation, the Company may treat this as abandonment of employment and may proceed to terminate employment following appropriate process.”

Notice that last bit.

Following appropriate process.

Abandonment doesn’t mean instant, emotional decisions. It still requires contact attempts, written notices, and a fair opportunity to explain.

But having the clause gives you a defensible framework.

Without it, you’re winging it.

And that’s where most small businesses get caught.

They manage people on gut feel and goodwill. Until something blows up and they’re suddenly in front of the Commission.

The Commission even noted that the bakery’s lack of dedicated HR expertise contributed to the procedural gaps.

That’s not a dig. That’s reality for most growing businesses.

You’re busy running operations. You don’t have time to become a Fair Work nerd.

But this stuff matters.

Because one messy leave dispute can cost more than a year of proper HR support.

If your leave policy hasn’t been reviewed in the last 12 months, or if you don’t have clear clauses around unauthorised leave and abandonment, now is the time.

Don’t wait until someone books a one-way ticket.

We’ll help you tighten it up, keep it human, and protect your business properly.

Because managing people by WhatsApp removal is not the vibe.

And luck is not a compliance strategy.

Frequently Asked Questions

If I don’t approve an employee’s leave request and they go anyway, can I dismiss them when they get back?
Potentially yes, but it depends on how clear your approval process was. In this case, unauthorised leave was found to be a valid reason for dismissal because the request had genuinely been declined. The key is that the refusal needs to be clear and in writing beforehand. If leave approval in your business is vague or verbal, “no” can easily get misread as “maybe,” and that ambiguity works against you.

Can removing someone from a work WhatsApp group actually count as dismissing them?
Yes, and this is the part most employers do not expect. The Commission confirmed that removing an employee from a work messaging platform can legally amount to dismissal. If you are ending someone’s employment, do it through a proper, documented process, not through a symbolic gesture like a group removal. That is not a process, it is an accident waiting to be tested at the Commission.

What should our leave policy actually say to avoid this kind of dispute?
It needs to state clearly that leave must be approved in writing before travel is booked, that insufficient leave may mean unpaid leave is declined, and that unapproved absence may lead to disciplinary action. It should also include a clause dealing with abandonment of employment for extended unauthorised absences, so you have a defensible framework if someone disappears rather than managing it on the fly.

The employer in this case won even though their process had gaps. Does that mean process doesn’t really matter?
No, it means they were lucky. The Commission specifically noted procedural deficiencies, including no formal termination meeting and no proper opportunity to respond, and pointed out that the lack of dedicated HR expertise contributed to those gaps. The outcome still went the employer’s way, but relying on that outcome repeating itself is not a strategy. Put concerns in writing, give the employee a chance to respond, and document the decision every time.