BDO legal secretary claims she was forced to resign

BDO Australia was accused of forcing a legal secretary to quit to escape a “hostile work environment that was procedurally unjust”.

In a general protections dismissal application filed with the Fair Work Commission, a legal secretary alleged a termination letter sent to BDO Australia in May was not voluntary and constituted a "constructive dismissal compelled by a hostile work environment”.

The letter alleged the decision was “compelled by sustained conduct on the part of the firm which has materially breached the fundamental obligations of trust, procedural fairness and psychological safety, and has rendered the continuation of my employment untenable”.

“I am left with no reasonable alternative but to resign,” she said.

BDO Australia made a jurisdictional objection on the basis that the Fair Work Commission had no jurisdiction to deal with the secretary’s application because she was not dismissed.

Deputy president Kamal Farouque upheld this objection.

A meeting was first held between the legal secretary, the principal lawyer and a senior people and culture manager in early April to discuss concerns with the secretary’s performance.

In a subsequent meeting later that month, the secretary was advised of areas of concern, including her performance on two separate days, a client issue, and a potential breach of BDO’s professional code.

She was told to work from the office five days a week, placed on a first and final warning, and given a performance improvement plan.

In the weeks between meetings, the secretary accessed her work laptop outside of hours, used a webmail application to search the principal lawyer’s inbox, and took screenshots with her phone.

Then, on the day they were due to meet for her next performance meeting and to reflect on her conduct since, the secretary invited the principal lawyer, the people and culture manager, and another HR business partner into a meeting to discuss a “sensitive matter”.

At this meeting, the secretary claimed she was “aware that the firm intends to terminate my employment effective on 3 June 2025”, being the date the plan was due to expire. The meeting then progressed to performance, with the principal lawyer giving negative feedback.

In an “offline” and without prejudice discussion, the legal secretary and another senior people and culture manager discussed options for an amicable resolution. BDO’s offer was not accepted.

The secretary resigned the same day.

Farouque said it was “abundantly clear” the secretary was not forced to resign due to conduct engaged in by BDO Australia.

“It is apparent that in late March 2025, the respondent had a concern about the applicant’s performance. The respondent took steps to address those performance concerns. There was nothing untoward or improper about this,” Farouque said in his written reasons.

“The applicant is evidently of the view that her performance was at an acceptable standard. But there is no basis for me to conclude that the respondent’s concerns were capricious, irrational or generated for an ulterior, improper or unlawful purpose.”

Referring to the screenshots of the principal lawyer’s inbox, Farouque said they do not demonstrate there was “predetermination” of any outcome in relation to the performance review process.

He said it was clear the secretary “had no proper cause arising from her ordinary duties to inspect and take screenshots” of the emails.

Farouque also observed that while the legal secretary’s use of the expression “constructive dismissal” in her termination letter may be a “superficially attractive concept”, it is not an expression used in the Fair Work Act and the terminology is of “little actual utility”.

The case: Bailey Richens v BDO Administration.