When performance issues arise or employment relationships break down, how you manage the situation can be the difference between a clean exit and a costly claim.
In the latest episode of Explain That, Jess Hill and Katherine Stewart from Velocity Legal join Andrew Henshaw to discuss how to manage dismissals correctly, minimise legal risk and maintain professionalism throughout the process.
Not all dismissals are the same. The first step is identifying why an employee isn’t the right fit. Is it a performance issue or a conduct issue?
Performance-based dismissals are often “slow burn” matters that require structured feedback, documentation and an opportunity for improvement. Conduct-based dismissals, for example involving serious misconduct or harassment, often require immediate action to protect the business and other employees.
A common misconception is that employers must issue three warnings before dismissing an employee. Jess clarifies that this is not a legal requirement. What matters is clear communication and documentation.
Employers should record performance conversations and, where necessary, tell the employee explicitly that their employment is at risk if performance does not improve. This helps establish a fair process and reduces exposure to unfair dismissal claims.
Most business owners are familiar with unfair dismissal claims. But Katherine notes that general protections claims can be even more dangerous.
Under the Fair Work Act, employers must not take adverse action, including dismissal, against an employee for a protected reason such as exercising workplace rights, making a complaint or taking sick leave. Timing matters, as dismissing someone soon after a protected action can turn a routine termination into a high-risk legal dispute.
Sometimes a drawn-out performance management process is not practical. Jess explains that smaller businesses, in particular, may need to act quickly to protect productivity and culture.
In those cases, employers might consider offering a transition package or settlement deed to achieve a commercial resolution. While this does not remove all risk, it can often be more cost-effective than months of underperformance and uncertainty.
It is not uncommon for an employee under review to respond with a bullying complaint or counter-allegation. Katherine advises employers to separate the two processes, one dealing with the performance issue and the other with the complaint, and where appropriate, assign different people to manage each.
This approach maintains procedural fairness while keeping legitimate performance concerns on track.
Senior employees often sit above the unfair dismissal income threshold but may still pursue general protections or contractual claims. These can include disputes about bonuses, share schemes or even reasonable notice where no written contract exists.
Jess and Katherine emphasise that careful contract drafting and clear documentation at the outset can prevent these disputes later.
Good policies and training do not just prevent problems, they strengthen your position if issues arise. For example, show cause processes supported by clear misconduct or harassment policies can make termination defensible.
However, Katherine cautions that a lack of policies should never stop an employer from acting where behaviour is clearly unacceptable. Immediate suspension and prompt investigation may be essential to protect the business and its people.
One of the biggest mistakes employers make is waiting too long to address serious issues. Delay can complicate the process, especially if the employee later takes leave or raises unrelated complaints.
As Jess notes, the best approach is to seek advice early, develop a clear strategy, and act decisively once the risks are understood.
Dismissals are rarely easy, but with preparation, documentation and the right advice, they do not have to be messy.
For business owners and advisers, the key is balancing legal compliance with commercial reality. Engage your employment lawyer early, document every step, and act with fairness and consistency.
Jess and Katherine highlight that proactive management not only reduces risk but helps maintain trust and integrity across your team.
🎧 Listen to the full episode below:
This podcast in no way constitutes legal advice. It is general in nature and is the opinion of the author only. You should seek legal advice tailored to your individual circumstances before acting on anything related to this podcast.
If you enjoyed this episode and have a question or suggestion for future episodes, we’d love to hear from you. Email us here.
Move your business forward with Explain That. Reduce your risk, and seize opportunity.
Join 'Explain That', where Australian professionals get monthly insights from Velocity Legal.
Popular Searches
Hide Popular Searches