A resignation given in the heat of the moment may not be considered a valid resignation. This typically occurs when an employee resigns during an argument or a particularly stressful situation. In such cases, employers should provide the employee with a reasonable period to retract their resignation. The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) in Omar v Epping Forest District Citizens Advice emphasised that the resignation must be "seriously meant" or "really intended" and should be judged from the perspective of a reasonable bystander.
Mental health considerations
Resignations influenced by mental health issues may also not be considered valid. In Bradley v The Royal Mint Ltd, the Employment Tribunal found that the employer should have reassessed its position once it became aware that the employee's mental health influenced her decision to resign. The Tribunal concluded that the employer should have paused and taken proper informed medical advice concerning the employee’s disabilities and the impact these had on her decision to resign.
Objective analysis
The resignation must be judged from an objective perspective. The EAT in Omar v Epping Forest District Citizens Advice stated that the words of resignation should be examined objectively, considering all the circumstances of the case. The reasonable bystander must understand from the words used that the speaker is actually resigning and that the resignation was "seriously meant" or "really intended".
Unambiguous words
For a resignation to be valid, the words used must be clear and unambiguous. In the case of Cope v Razzle Dazzle Costumes Limited, the Employment Tribunal found that the words "I’m done" did not amount to a clear and unambiguous resignation. The Tribunal noted that the employee's actions following the statement were inconsistent with an intention to resign, and therefore, the resignation was not valid. The Claimant was successful in both her unfair and wrongful dismissal claims.
Employer's duty to clarify
Employers have a duty to clarify the employee's intention if the resignation is given in ambiguous terms or in the heat of the moment. The EAT in Omar v Epping Forest District Citizens Advice highlighted that employers should make reasonable inquiries to determine whether the resignation was genuinely intended. This includes considering any subsequent actions or statements made by the employee that may indicate a change of mind.
Additional considerations
Cooling-off period: Employers should allow a cooling-off period for employees who resign in the heat of the moment to reconsider their decision.
Written confirmation: It is advisable for employers to request written confirmation of the resignation to avoid disputes.
Legal precedents: The cases outlined above have established that resignations given in the heat of the moment should be treated with caution and that employees should be given an opportunity to retract their resignation.
Employers should approach resignations with caution, especially when they are given in the heat of the moment or influenced by mental health issues. Objective analysis, clear communication, and allowing a cooling-off period are essential steps to ensure that the resignation is genuinely intended.
This article was generated using HR Advisor, an AI tool designed to assist HR professionals with employment law. If you find the content helpful, please explore HR Advisor and sign up for a free trial to see how it can benefit your HR practices.
