When a redeployment offer makes things worse, not better, for an employer
A casual job offer after redundancy seemed like a clean solution. The Fair Work Commission, and then its Full Bench, saw it differently.
Recording Oasis Pty Ltd, a business trading as Gold Coast Plastic Surgery, made its Digital Marketing Manager redundant in August 2025. Believing it had softened the blow by offering the employee a casual replacement role she had accepted and then backed out of, the company argued she had never been dismissed at all. On 4 March 2026, the Full Bench of the Fair Work Commission handed down its decision, refusing permission to appeal and leaving that argument where it fell.
Kirsten Kae Beck had worked at the company from 26 February 2024. When her full-time role ended on 1 August 2025, she was offered a position as a casual Social Media Coordinator, eight hours per week, remote, with no guaranteed minimum hours. She signed the contract, then changed her mind before her start date of 6 August 2025.
The company, along with Barbara Sotiriadis, contended that the employment relationship had never truly ended and that Beck's decision not to start the casual role was, in effect, a resignation. Commissioner McKinnon rejected that argument in December 2025. On 4 March 2026, the Full Bench found no arguable case of appealable error and refused permission to appeal.
"The separate offer of casual employment, which was accepted by Ms Beck before she decided not to proceed with...
By Ivan Kesic A drone strike on an electrical generator just outside the inner perimeter of the Barakah Nuclear Power Plant in the United Arab Emirates on May 17, 2026, suddenly brought the Persia...