In a recent decision by the Fair Work Commission, Commissioner Redford has found that an employer who used ChatGPT to draft his redundancy correspondence failed to meet the standard of “basic decency”. Significantly, Commissioner Redford distinguished the employer’s conduct from ‘ignorance which may result from a small business not having access to human resources expertise’.
Hayley Lord v Millet Hospitality Geelong Pty Ltd [2025] FWC 2740
In this case, the modern Award that covered the employee’s employment stipulated that she was entitled to be consulted about the effect of any decision to make her position redundant, prior to any final decision about her redundancy being made. Despite the employer asserting that consultation was offered, the Commission found that the employer did not do so.
The employer tried to argue that no final decision had been made about the redundancy decision, as a result of the following wording being sent in an email to the employee:
“As part of our current operational restructure, we have made the difficult decision to remove the Housekeeping Supervisor position effective 26 June 2025 …”
“Before any final steps are taken, we would like to offer you the opportunity to discuss potential alternative roles – such as part-time or casual housekeeping role …”
“Please let me know by Monday 3 June if you would be interested in a conversation. Otherwise we will proceed with the removal of the current position as planned.”
However, based on the above wording, the Commissioner concluded that a decision about the employee’s employment had already been made before the employee had any opportunity to consult with the employer about the redundancy.
Mr Wu (the owner of the business) contended that English is not his first language and, as such, he employed the services of ChatGPT to write the above email. He then tried to claim that he did not intend to represent that a final decision had been made and that the email did not necessarily convey his ‘true meaning’ on this point.
The Outcome
Commissioner Redford did not accept the employer’s argument, stating that he did not “consider the size of the business, or the absence of human resources expertise excuses Mr Wu’s [the employer’s] failure to speak to Ms Lord [the employee] face to face about something as significant as the redundancy of her role.
Accordingly, because of the failure to engage in the required consultation before implementing the redundancy decision, the dismissal did not satisfy the meaning of ‘genuine redundancy’ within the meaning of the Fair Work Act.
The dismissal was ruled unfair, and the employee was awarded compensation for her loss of income. This took the form of both pay and superannuation equivalent to what she would have received prior to her termination if the proper procedure had been followed.
Summary
When adopting the use of AI software, employers must be vigilant in reviewing all content of any AI-drafted correspondence to ensure that an alternative meaning is not inadvertently conveyed.
As seen in the above case example, a failure to properly vet AI-generated documents or correspondence may lead to undesired consequences in a court or commission finding against employers.
Importantly, these standards are not relaxed for small businesses without a dedicated HR department.
If you require any advice or assistance in the drafting of any legal correspondences to your employees, or if you are seeking guidance on how best to approach a termination or redundancy issue, please don’t hesitate to contact one of our friendly Workplace Lawyers.
Also, if you are interested in hearing more on practical tips and the latest updates in workplace law, we invite you to sign up for one of our upcoming breakfast seminars:
- Toowoomba Workplace Breakfast Seminar – Wednesday, 12 November 2025, 7:30 am to 8:30 am, at 259 Ruthven Street, Toowoomba;
- Toowoomba Workplace Breakfast Seminar – Friday, 21 November 2025, 7:30 am to 8:30 am, at 259 Ruthven Street, Toowoomba.
For further information on this alert, contact Director Danny Clifford.
The assistance of Legal Assistant, Eve Gellatly, & Lawyer, Monique Chow, in the research for this article is gratefully acknowledged.
For further information on events, email events@cglaw.com.au.
Harassment Prevention: Are You Doing Enough?