Anne Barr v Community Vision Australia Limited [2026] FWC 1663

1 Fair Work Act 2009 s.365—General protections Anne Barr v Community Vision Australia Limited (C2025/12124) DEPUTY PRESIDENT WRIGHT SYDNEY, 11 MAY 2026 Application to deal with contraventions involving dismissal – jurisdictional objection – whether applicant dismissed – applicant not dismissed – objection upheld Introduction and outcome [1] Ms Anne Barr has made an application to the Fair Work Commission (Commission) under s.365 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (FW Act) for the Commission to deal with a dispute arising out of allegations that she has been dismissed from her employment with Community Vision Australia Limited (Community Vision) in contravention of Part 3-1 of the FW Act. [2] In the application, Ms Barr claims that the dismissal took effect on 21 November 2025. The application was filed on 25 November 2025, and as such is within the timeframe required by s.366(1)(a) of the FW Act. [3] Community Vision has objected to the application on the ground that Ms Barr resigned and therefore was not dismissed from her employment. [4] Before dealing with the dispute under s.368, I must be satisfied that Ms Barr was dismissed. [5] In summary, I have found Ms Barr was not dismissed by Community Vision and I have dismissed the application. Directions and submissions [6] The matter was listed for a case management conference on 9 February 2026. Directions were made for the filing and serving of evidence and submissions which the parties complied with. [7] The matter was listed for hearing on 9 March 2026. I granted Community Vision permission to be legally represented at the hearing pursuant to s.596 of the FW Act, on the [2026] FWC 1663 DECISION -- 1 of 14 -- [2026] FWC 1663 2 grounds that it would enable the matter to be dealt with more efficiently having regard to the complexity of the matter. [8] At the hearing, Ms Barr gave evidence on her own behalf and was cross-examined by Community Vision’s legal representative. Ms Yvonne Timson, Chief Executive Officer of Community Vision provided a witness statement dated 4 March 2026 which was admitted into evidence without objection. Ms Timson was not required for cross-examination. Background facts [9] Ms Barr commenced employment with Community Vision on 28 July 2025 in a Customer Service Officer role which involved scheduling, call-taking, and customer support.1 Ms Barr was employed pursuant to a contract of employment dated 2 July 2025 which provided that she worked 32 hours per week (although her payslips appear to indicate that she was paid for 33 hours per week), that her employment was subject to a probationary period and that during the probationary period, the employment could be terminated by either party for any reason by giving the other party one weeks’ notice.2 [10] Community Vision is a not-for-profit community services organisation providing home care, family day care, and disability services. Its head office is located in Joondalup, Western Australia (WA). Community Vision provides services across the aged care sector, to people with disabilities and to veterans. Community Vision also looks after around 60 educators across WA that operate their own business under a registration with Community Vision.3 [11] Ms Barr said that she is a single parent with 100% care responsibilities, and that throughout her employment, she experienced significant stress and lack of workplace support.4 [12] Ms Barr said that her dismissal occurred following a very short performance review period, lack of procedural fairness, contradictory feedback from senior leadership, and discriminatory treatment relating to her parental responsibilities. [13] On 29 October 2025, Ms Barr received a performance review letter from Mr Neil Harrison, Manager Customer Experience. The letter referred to a meeting which had taken place between Ms Barr, Mr Harrison and Mr Connor Gillespie, Customer Service Officer on 21 October 2025 where various concerns were raised with Ms Barr about customer service. Specific examples were provided in relation to customer interaction, service scheduling and communication style. The letter stated Community Vision’s expectations of Ms Barr, that her role was subject to a six month probation period and that failure to demonstrate significant and sustained improvement may result in unsuccessful completion of Ms Barr’s probation.5 [14] On 5 November 2025, Ms Barr again met with Mr Gillespie and Mr Harrison. During the meeting Mr Harrison advised Ms Barr that as she had not shown the necessary improvements, she had been unsuccessful in completing the probationary period, and her employment would end that day. [15] Ms Yvonne Timson has been employed by Community Vision since 2017 and has held the role of Chief Executive Officer of Community Vision since 2023.6 Ms Timson said that she was not involved in any performance management related matters regarding Ms Barr, as these -- 2 of 14 -- [2026] FWC 1663 3 matters are handled and managed by her direct supervisor, Mr Harrison.7 Ms Timson said that she was not involved in the decision to end Ms Barr's employment during her probationary period and that this decision was made by Mr Harrison.8 [16] On 5 November 2025, Ms Barr sent Ms Timson and Ms Michelle Fernandes, General Manager, Care and Service Delivery, an email at 6:52pm. In that email, Ms Barr stated: Just wanted to say i loved working at community vision but the cso area is so so toxic.9 [17] Ms Barr attached a document to the email setting out grievances about her treatment.10 [18] Ms Timson responded to Ms Barr's email at 7:17pm on the same day in the following terms: Dear Anne I am so sorry you feel like this and I am sure Michelle feels the same we had no idea you felt like this. Would you be open to meeting and discussing further with me and Michelle? Please call me on [redacted] or email me. I hope I get the chance to speak to you soon. Kind regards Yvonne11 [19] At 7:02am on 6 November 2025, Ms Barr responded to Ms Timson and they made arrangements to speak that morning.12 [20] Ms Timson gave evidence that she had a discussion with Ms Barr on 6 November 2025 which lasted around 26 minutes. According to Ms Timson: (a) Ms Timson explained to Ms Barr that she could not comment on Ms Barr’s specific performance issues as Ms Timson had no knowledge of them. However, Ms Timson acknowledged that there was scope for Community Vision to improve the training associated with the Customer Support Officer role. (b) Ms Timson told Ms Barr that she was welcome to resume her employment as a Customer Support Officer, and that Community Vision would support Ms Barr to undergo further and more comprehensive training so that she would be better equipped to perform the role. (c) Ms Timson also agreed that Ms Barr could report through to a different supervisor if that would better facilitate her return to, and success in, the role. (d) Ms Timson then said that if Ms Barr did not want to return to her employment, that Community Vision would pay her four weeks’ pay, being her contractual notice and additional pay as a gesture of goodwill. (e) Ms Barr responded that she did not want to leave Community Vision and loved working there. (f) The conversation ended with Ms Timson giving Ms Barr some time to think about both options that she had proposed.13 [21] Ms Barr then sent Ms Timson and Ms Fernandes the following email at 8:41pm on 6 November 2025: -- 3 of 14 -- [2026] FWC 1663 4 Subject: Request for Role Adjustment and Reinstatement Conditions Attention: Yvonne Timson (CEO) and Michelle Fernandes (General Manager) Dear Yvonne and Michelle, Firstly, I would like to sincerely thank Yvonne for offering me the opportunity to return to Community Vision. I truly appreciate your consideration and the support shown. I would very much like to come back; however, I would like to request a few changes to ensure a positive and productive working environment. I kindly request to work under a different manager, as I do not wish to report to Neil Harrison. I would also prefer not to be placed with team members Jennifer or Connor, as I do not feel comfortable working alongside them. I would appreciate being part of a positive, supportive team—one where people enjoy their work, contribute collaboratively, and maintain a friendly atmosphere. I would love the opportunity to work under the CLM team, as I find them to be very positive people. I also want to give a big shout out to Jessica and Ed, who were especially kind and supportive when I was going through a difficult time — it really meant a lot. I want to reiterate that I would love to return to Community Vision, but not under the CSO umbrella, as I would feel genuinely uncomfortable in that environment. I would love the opportunity to become a CLM Manager or work towards that position, as I need a decent wage to support my circumstances, as mentioned in our previous conversation. I am eager to learn new skills, explore different areas within the organisation, and grow my income. As a single mum managing a mortgage and household expenses, financial stability is extremely important in these challenging economic times. If these changes can be accommodated, I would be very happy to return to Community Vision and continue contributing positively to the organisation’s success. Kind regards, Anne Barr P.s Hi Yvonne , What time is suitable tomorrow to chat again.? Have a good night :)14 [22] At 9:50am, on 7 November 2025, Ms Timson sent the following email to Ms Barr: Hi Anne Unfortunately I’ve had a family emergency and am not in today. We can talk Monday or please feel free to call Michelle. Yvonne15 -- 4 of 14 -- [2026] FWC 1663 5 [23] At 12:15pm, on 7 November 2025, Ms Fernandes sent the following email to Ms Barr: Good Afternoon Anne Thankyou for calling back and speaking with me on the phone. During the conversation I acknowledge you do not want to return to the CSO team, and do not wish to take up any support worker role within the organisation, but you do wish to remain in an administrative role, as discussed, we do not have any vacancies for administrative roles at this time. You have expressed interest at stepping into the Community Life Manager team, as advised the Community Life Manager (CLM) role is a managerial position incorporating financial oversight, and complex case management under several funding types which takes a long time to work towards. We do not currently have any CLM roles available or any areas within the CLM team for administrative tasks. You advised you are speaking with Yvonne on Monday 10th November; hence, I have CC’d Yvonne into this email to keep her updated with our current conversation. Kind regards Michelle16 [24] Ms Timson said that she was due to speak with Ms Barr by telephone on 10 November 2025, however she was unwell and had lost her voice, so she emailed Ms Barr to ask if she would be agreeable to pushing back their call to the following day, or alternatively to speak with Ms Fernandes. Ms Barr waited to speak with Ms Timson the following day.17 [25] Ms Timson said that on 12 November 2025, she had a further discussion with Ms Barr that lasted around 23 minutes. Ms Timson said that during that conversation she explained the changes that Community Vision would be prepared to make to accommodate Ms Barr in the Customer Support Officer role. Ms Timson’s witness statement recorded the following details of the conversation: (a) Ms Timson agreed that Ms Barr could repeat and reengage in her training, as though she were a new starter. (b) Ms Timson arranged for adjustments including moving seats so that Ms Barr would not be seated near the team members she had raised concerns about. (c) Ms Timson confirmed that Ms Fernandes would oversee Ms Barr's work, rather than Mr Harrison. (d) Ms Timson explained to Ms Barr that she would need to perform well in the Customer Service Officer role before Community Vision could assess her suitability and competency for the Community Life Manager position, so efforts would be directed to supporting her in the Customer Service Officer role. (e) Ms Timson confirmed that she had set everything up to ensure Ms Barr's return was positive, and reiterated Community Vision’s offer that Ms Barr continue in her employment as a Customer Service Officer. (f) Ms Barr told Ms Timson that she wanted to continue with her employment with Community Vision and that she appreciated the accommodations. Ms Barr asked if she could have some further time off before her return. -- 5 of 14 -- [2026] FWC 1663 6 (g) Ms Timson expressed that she was pleased Ms Barr would be coming back and agreed she could take time off before resuming the role. (h) Ms Timson and Ms Barr agreed Ms Barr would return to work on Monday, 24 November 2025.18 [26] During the hearing, Ms Barr said that she agreed that she had a discussion with Ms Timson on 12 November 2025, but she was never told that Ms Fernandes was going to be her manager. Ms Barr said that she was told that she was still going to be a Customer Service Officer. [27] At 9:47am, on 13 November 2025, Ms Barr sent the following email to Ms Timson: Good morning Yvonne , I hope you don't mind me being forward and asking this question- will i be paid while i'm off due to all the unwanted stress i have had with the situation that occurred ? Again, thank you for letting me have until the 24/11 . Have a great day . Cheers Anne19 [28] At 10:03am, on 13 November 2025, Ms Timson sent the following email to Ms Barr: Hi Anne, As discussed yesterday you will receive the formal notification of our agreed actions following our telephone conversations. As you requested more time before commencing back at work this will need to be a period of annual leave or unpaid leave, depending on your accruals. Your recommencement will show as continuous service, not a break in service, and as you could commence sooner, this is from your decision. I will send the formal communication soon. Kind regards Yvonne20 [29] At 10:33am, on 13 November 2025, Ms Barr sent the following email to Ms Timson: No worries, Yvonne. May i also have the original termination document just so i can put onto my gov as i may be able to get some extra money with my single parent pension. By the way i can not access subscribe hr since i am blocked out. Cheers Anne21 [30] At 10:03am, on 13 November 2025, Ms Timson sent the following email to Ms Barr: Hi Anne, I’m not sure you understand. -- 6 of 14 -- [2026] FWC 1663 7 By agreeing to coming back you have not been terminated and your employment continues, so you are unable to claim from My Gov as you are still employed. That is, you are paid until Friday 7th in full but as you decided you wanted extra time these two weeks will be as some type of leave until Monday 24th. This way you have continuity of service, personal and other leave accruals and superannuation. Your access is back from Monday morning. If you want to commence this Monday as you have indicated regarding money, I am more than happy for you to do this, as it is your decision. Let me know how you want to proceed. Kind regards Yvonne22 [31] At 11:31am, on 13 November 2025, Ms Barr sent the following email to Ms Timson: All good with the 24th November. I will pop to reception on thursday next week if ok and collect remote for gate if that is ok.23 [32] Ms Timson said that Ms Barr continued to receive payslips and to accrue annual leave entitlements until 21 November.24 Ms Timson provided the Commission with payslips in relation to Ms Barr covering the following periods: • 6 to 19 October 2025; • 20 October to 2 November 2025; and • 3 to 16 November 202525 [33] Ms Timson gave evidence that on the morning of 21 November 2025, Ms Barr telephoned her three days before her agreed return date of 24 November 2025 and advised that she would not return to Community Vision.26 [34] At 11:45am, on 21 November 2025, Ms Timson sent the following email to Ms Barr: Dear Anne, Thanks for calling me this morning and discussing how you’re feeling and your plans not to return to Community Vision. As discussed, I understand how you feel but reassured you, we have put everything inn [sic] place to ensure your return was positive. However, you have decided not to return, and we agreed your final date of employment would be today and I would pay you 4 weeks in lieu of your notice period (which is over and above your contracted weeks’ notice period). This will be processed next pay period. I have also agreed to give you a formal reference from myself and as I am out of the office today, I hope its ok, but I will complete this early next week and send it on email and will also post a hard copy to you. -- 7 of 14 -- [2026] FWC 1663 8 We both agreed to store our phone numbers for any future contact. I really wish you well in your next role and hope you find a good connection there. Kindest regards Yvonne27 [35] At 11:53am, on 21 November 2025, Ms Barr sent the following email to Ms Timson: Thank you Yvonne . Again appreciate everything you have done for me. Is there any chance my pay could be done earlier if possible please? Cheers Anne.28 [36] Ms Timson sent an email to Ms Barr a few minutes later advising that she had spoken to payroll and that Ms Barr’s final pay would be processed later that week.29 [37] On 25 November 2025, Mr Neil Wood, Chief Financial Officer, sent an email to Ms Barr as follows: Good afternoon Anne, Please find attached your termination payslip including the 4 weeks in lieu of notice as agreed with Yvonne Timson. This amount was paid yesterday. Regards, Neil Wood30 [38] Ms Timson provided a reference to Ms Barr by email at 1:20pm on 25 November 2025.31 [39] Later that day, Ms Barr lodged the application with the Commission. [40] During the hearing. I asked Ms Barr whether she wanted to add anything to her evidence which was not in her witness statement. Ms Barr indicated that she had covered everything in her witness statement. Legislation [41] The application has been brought under s.365 of the FW Act which provides: 365 Application for the FWC to deal with a dismissal dispute If: (a) a person has been dismissed; and (b) the person, or an industrial association that is entitled to represent the industrial interests of the person, alleges that the person was dismissed in contravention of this Part; the person, or the industrial association, may apply to the FWC for the FWC to deal with the dispute. -- 8 of 14 -- [2026] FWC 1663 9 [42] The issue between the parties which the Commission has been asked to determine is whether Ms Barr was dismissed by Community Vision. The dictionary at clause 12 of the FW Act refers to section 386 for the definition of ‘dismissed’. [43] Section 386 of the FW Act provides: 386 Meaning of dismissed (1) A person has been dismissed if: (a) the person’s employment with his or her employer has been terminated on the employer’s initiative; or (b) the person has resigned from his or her employment, but was forced to do so because of conduct, or a course of conduct, engaged in by his or her employer. (2) However, a person has not been dismissed if: (a) the person was employed under a contract of employment for a specified period of time, for a specified task, or for the duration of a specified season, and the employment has terminated at the end of the period, on completion of the task, or at the end of the season; or (b) the person was an employee: (i) to whom a training arrangement applied; and (ii) whose employment was for a specified period of time or was, for any reason, limited to the duration of the training arrangement; and the employment has terminated at the end of the training arrangement; or (c) the person was demoted in employment but: (i) the demotion does not involve a significant reduction in his or her remuneration or duties; and (ii) he or she remains employed with the employer that effected the demotion. (3) Subsection (2) does not apply to a person employed under a contract of a kind referred to in paragraph (2)(a) if a substantial purpose of the employment of the person under a contract of that kind is, or was at the time of the person’s employment, to avoid the employer’s obligations under this Part. Consideration [44] Ms Barr alleged that she was terminated by Community Vision in breach of ss. 340, 341 and 342 of the FW Act. However, these claims cannot be determined until the Commission deals with the matter under s.368, and only if the Commission issues a certificate of attempted conciliation under s.368(3). Under s.368, the Commission may deal with the matter in numerous ways including by mediation or conciliation, or by making a recommendation or expressing an opinion. [45] If there is a dispute as to whether the alleged dismissal the subject of the application has occurred, this is a preliminary issue which, according to the Federal Court Full Court decision in Coles Supply Chain Pty Ltd v Milford,32 ‘must be resolved before the powers conferred by s.368 can be exercised at all’.33 [46] In this regard, the Full Bench in Lipa Pharmaceuticals Ltd v Mariam Jarouche34 stated: -- 9 of 14 -- [2026] FWC 1663 10 Where the respondent to a s 365 application contends, in its response to the application or otherwise, that the application was not validly made because the applicant was not dismissed, this must be determined prior to the Commission ‘dealing’ with the dispute under s 368 including by conducting a conciliation conference.35 [47] As Community Vision has claimed that Ms Barr was not dismissed, I must find that a dismissal occurred before conducting a conciliation conference or otherwise dealing with this matter under s.368. [48] The expression ‘termination at the initiative of the employer’ is well understood to be a reference to a termination that is brought about by an employer, and which is not agreed to by the employee. In circumstances where the employment relationship is not left voluntarily by the employee, the focus of the inquiry is whether an action on the part of the employer was the principal contributing factor which results, directly or consequentially, in the termination of the employment.36 Did Community Vision take any steps to implement the dismissal? [49] Although Ms Barr was advised by Mr Harrison on 5 November 2025 that her employment would end that day, I find that Community Vision did not take any steps to implement the dismissal. Ms Barr had been paid that day in accordance with the usual pay cycle and her next pay was due on 19 November 2025. Community Vision did not provide Ms Barr with payment in lieu of notice as required by s.117(2) and did not pay out her outstanding annual leave on 5 November 2025. [50] At the hearing, Community Vision relied upon payslips issued to Ms Barr to establish that the employment relationship continued beyond 5 November 2025. [51] The payslips showed that Ms Barr was paid fortnightly in arrears on a Wednesday. For example: • for the period from Monday 6 October to Sunday 19 October 2025, Ms Barr was paid on Wednesday 22 October 2025; • for the period from Monday 20 October to Sunday 2 November 2025, Ms Barr was paid on Wednesday 5 November 2025; and • for the period from Monday 3 November to Sunday 16 November 2025, Ms Barr was paid on Wednesday 19 November 2025. [52] As noted above, the pay which Ms Barr received on 5 November 2025 was for the period from Monday 20 October to Sunday 2 November 2025. The payslip dated 19 November 2025 shows that for the period from Monday 3 November to Sunday 16 November 2025, Ms Barr received: • 33 hours normal time • 6.6 hours annual leave • 30.4 hours unpaid leave -- 10 of 14 -- [2026] FWC 1663 11 [53] This suggests that Ms Barr was paid her usual pay from Monday 3 November to 7 November 2025, that she received one day annual leave on Monday 10 November and that she was on unpaid leave from 11-14 November 2025. [54] The payslip shows that on 19 November 2025, Ms Barr was paid a gross sum of $1,202.42 comprising: • $1,101.87 salary sacrifice payment; • $84.55 to a bank account; and • $16.00 taxation [55] Ms Barr said during the hearing that she did not receive any pay on 19 November 2025. Following the hearing, on 8 May 2026, my Chambers wrote to the parties and requested that Ms Barr check her salary sacrifice and bank accounts and confirm whether she received the amounts referred to in the payslip dated 19 November 2025. On the same day, Ms Barr provided screen shots of her accounts which showed that she had received $84.55 in her bank account and a salary sacrifice payment of $935.29 on 19 November 2025. Although the salary sacrifice payment was $166.58 less than the amount specified in Ms Barr’s payslip, these payments show that it is not correct that Ms Barr did not receive any pay on 19 November 2025. Further, Ms Barr was paid an amount which exceeded what she would have received if she was paid only up to 5 November 2025. [56] Based upon the payslips and bank account records provided by Ms Barr, I find that Community Vision continued to pay Ms Barr for a short period after 5 November 2025 which is inconsistent with her employment terminating on 5 November 2025. Agreement between Mr Barr and Community Vision to maintain the employment relationship [57] Within 24 hours of being advised that her employment would end, Mr Barr held discussions with Ms Timson about either remaining employed as a Customer Support Officer or ending her employment with four weeks’ pay, being one weeks pay in lieu of notice and additional pay as a gesture of goodwill. [58] For the remainder of that week, during which Ms Barr continued to be paid, Ms Barr Ms Timson and Ms Fernandes negotiated Ms Barr’s return to the workplace. The finalisation of these negotiations was delayed because Ms Timson was unwell and Ms Barr preferred to wait until Ms Timson was available rather than speaking to Ms Fernandes. [59] On 12 November 2025, Ms Barr and Ms Timson had a telephone conversation where they agreed that Ms Barr would return to the workplace. Ms Barr requested that her return be delayed until 24 November 2025 which Ms Timson agreed to. [60] Although Ms Barr disagreed with some aspects of Ms Timson’s version of that conversation and now appears to be dissatisfied with the proposed arrangements, I find that her subsequent conduct is consistent with Community Vision and Ms Barr agreeing to maintain the employment relationship. That conduct includes Ms Barr thanking Ms Timson for ‘letting [her] have until the 24/11 [to resume work]’ by email dated 13 November 2025. In a subsequent -- 11 of 14 -- [2026] FWC 1663 12 email exchange that day, Ms Timson advised that by agreeing to come back Ms Barr had not been terminated and her employment continues. In response to this advice, Ms Barr sent an email in the following terms: All good with the 24th November. I will pop to reception on thursday next week if ok and collect remote for gate if that is ok [61] On the basis of this email exchange, and the other evidence before me, I find that Ms Barr and Community Vision agreed that: • Community Vision would not proceed with terminating Ms Barr’s employment; • Community Vision would continue to pay Ms Barr until 7 November 2025; • Ms Barr would resume work with Community Vision; • Ms Barr would have continuity of service; • Community Vision would accommodate Ms Barr’s request to delay resuming work until 24 November 2025 although it was open to Ms Barr resuming on 17 November 2025; • Ms Barr would take leave until 24 November 2025. Conclusion – was Ms Barr dismissed? [62] Based upon my findings, I conclude that Ms Barr was not dismissed on 5 November 2025 and that her employment continued until 21 November 2025 when Ms Barr advised Ms Timson that she would not return to Community Vision. There is no evidence to support a finding that any action on the part of Community Vision was the principal contributing factor which resulted, directly or consequentially, in the termination of the employment on 21 November 2025. Ms Barr claimed during the hearing that she had no choice but to resign because she was concerned about returning to a toxic workplace and working under the supervision of Mr Harrison. There is no contemporaneous evidence which establishes that this is the reason that Ms Barr resigned. Further, Ms Barr’s email correspondence to Ms Timson dated 21 November 2025 expressing ‘appreciat[ion for] everything you have done for me’ indicates that she felt supported by Community Vision at that time. [63] Ms Barr’s application proceeded on the basis that she could rely upon the advice of Mr Harrison of 5 November 2025 as the act of dismissal without regard for any of the events which followed. If the conversation between Ms Barr and Ms Timson on 12 November 2025 had resulted in Ms Barr ceasing employment with Community Vision rather than resuming work, it would have been open for the Commission to find that the dismissal conveyed to Ms Barr on 5 November 2025 took effect on 12 November 2025. However, this did not occur, and Ms Barr agreed to resume working for Community Vision. Ms Barr’s employment ceased on 21 November 2025 because she changed her mind about working for Community Vision, not because Community Vision dismissed her. [64] Ms Barr relied upon the payment of termination monies on 25 November 2025 and that she could not access Community Vision’s systems as establishing that she was terminated at Community Vision’s initiative. When all of the other evidence is considered, these matters do not establish that Ms Barr was dismissed. There was no reason for Ms Barr’s access to be restored prior to resuming work on 24 November 2025. Community Vision was under no -- 12 of 14 -- [2026] FWC 1663 13 obligation to provide a termination payment to Ms Barr given that she changed her mind about resuming work and was not dismissed. I accept Ms Timson’s evidence that the payment of termination monies was a gesture of good will.37 Conclusion [65] I have found that Community Vision did not proceed with its decision to dismiss Ms Barr on 5 November 2025, that Community Vision and Ms Barr agreed on 12 November 2025 that the employment relationship would be maintained and that Ms Barr would resume working with Community Vision on 24 November 2025 following a period of leave. I have found that the employment relationship came to an end on 21 November 2025 because Ms Barr changed her mind about resuming work. I have found that Community Vision was not required to provide notice of termination to Ms Barr but provided her with a four week payment as a good will gesture. [66] For these reasons, I determine that Ms Barr has not been dismissed by Community Vision within the meaning of ss.365 and 386 of the FW Act. I dismiss the application. DEPUTY PRESIDENT Appearances: Ms A. Barr, Applicant for herself Mr M. Stutley, Solicitor for the Respondent Hearing details: 2026 9 March Online Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer <PR799845> 1 Digital Hearing Book (DHB) 26 -- 13 of 14 -- [2026] FWC 1663 14 2 Witness Statement of Yvonne Timson dated 4 March 2026 (Timson Statement) YT-1, Digital Hearing Book (DHB) 96-115 3 Timson Statement [7];[10], DHB 88 4 DHB 26 5 DHB 39 6 Timson Statement [4]-[5], DHB 87 7 Ibid [16], DHB 88 8 Ibid [17], DHB 89 9 Ibid, YT-2, DHB 116 10 Ibid, YT-2, DHB 117 11 Ibid, YT-3, DHB 118 12 Ibid, YT-4, DHB 119 13 Ibid [22], DHB 89-90 14 Ibid, YT-5, DHB 122-123 15 Ibid, YT-5, DHB 122 16 Ibid, YT-6, DHB 124 17 Ibid [28], DHB 90 18 Ibid [30], DHB 91 19 Ibid, YT-8, DHB 127 20 Ibid 21 Ibid, YT-9, DHB 128 22 Ibid 23 Ibid, YT-10, DHB 131 24 Ibid [37]-[38], DHB 92 25 Ibid, YT-11, DHB 134-143 26 Ibid [42]-[43], DHB 93 27 Ibid, YT-14, DHB 144 28 Ibid, YT-15, DHB 145 29 Ibid, YT-16, DHB 147 30 DHB 38 31 Timson Statement, YT-17, DHB 149-150 32 [2020] FCAFC 152 33 Ibid, [67] 34 [2023] FWCFB 101 35 Ibid, [23] 36 Mohazab v Dick Smith Electronics Pty Ltd [1995] IRCA 625; 62 IR 200 37 Timson Statement [49], DHB 94 -- 14 of 14 --