“I Wasn’t Made Redundant Like Everyone Else In The Company, So I Kept Showing Up To Work Until The End To Do Nothing”

Encountering professional negligence is always unpleasant – moreover, workplace wrongdoings can seriously affect not only the employer’s but the team’s well-being.

Regardless of whether it’s something significant or not, the chances are that it’ll take years to uncover, leaving employees stuck in toxic environments, as most workers aren’t willing to raise the issue because they fear that the confrontation will get them canned.

Folks lose interest in their once beloved professions and begin to live that paycheck-to-paycheck lifestyle while their management partakes in unethical behavior. However, sometimes, karma does come back around, and those who decided to cheap out on redundancy entitlements are forced to give their former contractor an extra month’s pay.

“Wasn’t made redundant like everyone else in the company so kept showing up to work until the end to do nothing” – this online user took it to r/MaliciousCompliance to share how his former company tried to save a couple of bucks in redundancy payout but ended up providing him with an extra month’s pay instead. The post has managed to receive nearly 20K upvotes and 399 comments discussing this sweet revenge.

The OP began his post by sharing that this story took place in Australia, where they have incredibly stringent laws concerning employment.

Nearly a decade ago, the man was hired on the spot and had been given a very specific contract, but two months after he started, the general manager was let go and poorly replaced by a consultant. The guy also mentioned that although the majority of operations were running in Australia, the CEO was based in the UK and was also replaced by a new candidate.

After a busy year, upper management couldn’t stay on top of everything and they decided to bring in the COO of the parent company to help out with things in Australia. Not long before the arrival, the employees had a group meeting where they learned that operations in Australia would soon cease.

Higher-ups explained that everyone except a handful of people would be made redundant with payouts, so, naturally, the author started searching for another job. He got a couple of interviews lined up, and one of them was a dream job in Europe, though he kept this quiet, telling only a couple of people.

The recruitment process was complicated and took a few weeks, so by the end of the month, pretty much everyone knew.

At the start of June, a month before the branch would finally close, workers began to receive redundancy letters that gave them an official 28-day notice; it outlined their pay schedules alongside other legal rights, but the catch is that the author didn’t get the letter. The man found it to be quite odd – however, he quickly realized that it was because if he handed in his notice, he wouldn’t be entitled to a payout, leaving the company with extra cash in their pockets.

Here’s where the malicious compliance kicked in: the OP decided to stay quiet, though by the second week of June, he found out that he didn’t get his dream job.

Fast forward to the last week of June; there were 7 employees left, everyone’s desks were packed up and folks showed up simply to reminisce and be social. On the very last day, the man ran into the COO, and after some small talk, the higher-up realized that things hadn’t gone according to their sneaky plan, so he invited the author into his office.

Upon arrival, the OP saw a few papers on the COO’s desk and as might be expected, both he and the CFO started apologizing for “not doing this properly at an earlier point”. The man then noticed that the document’s date was backdated to 27 days earlier, so he refused to sign it, demanding one with the correct date.

The management started arguing that they were legally required to wrap up the operations before the end of the month, meaning that they couldn’t do so, to which the OP suggested they try and fire him – however, he wasn’t so sure whether Fair Work Commission would be satisfied with their reason.

Finally, the man came back with a proper document, yet the author refused to sign it once again. He explained that he now had 28 more days of legal employment, which meant that the company owed him an extra day. The COO and the CFO exchanged looks, changed the man’s payout schedule and added another day to his annual leave.

When the paperwork was signed, the COO wondered what the man was going to be doing for the next 28 days, since the company was about to close. The author said “nothing” and revealed that he wouldn’t be coming back after that day. The management tried to get him to help the IT guys and perhaps pack up some boxes, but the OP clearly stated that there was nothing about boxes in his contract.

Eventually, the guy got back to his desk, packed up and just sat around doing nothing. One of his colleagues who was still in the office came around asking for the details; the OP explained everything and the co-worker let out the biggest laugh.

A couple of minutes later, the CFO came over and revealed that he didn’t have to stay until the end of the day, giving him permission to take off whenever he wanted.