Subscribe to our newsletters
Resignation or Termination? Lessons from Glow Hair Studio Inc. v. Payne
When an employee gives notice and the situation quickly unravels, employers face a deceptively important question: was this a resignation, or a termination? The answer can decide whether termination pay is owed. In Glow Hair Studio Inc. v. Payne (2026 CanLII 21083), the Ontario Labour Relations Board found that a salon employee had resigned rather than been terminated and rescinded an order requiring the employer to pay termination pay. The employer won, but the reasoning is a careful lesson in how close it came, what actually saved it, and the rule employers cannot afford to forget about cutting a notice period short.
The critical caveat runs the other way. The Board reaffirmed that if the employer ends the employment during the notice period, before the resignation takes effect, the ESA's termination pay provisions apply. Glow did not win because an employer can shorten a notice period for free. It won because the Board found the employee had ended the employment himself. The distinction is everything.
An employee gives notice, and then things get tense?
How you respond decides whether you have a clean resignation or a termination you have to pay for. Acting too quickly, restricting access the wrong way, or saying the wrong thing at the exit can flip the outcome. Get advice before you respond to a resignation that is going sideways.
Call: 1-800-771-7882 Review a Resignation IssueBackground: a notice that turned into a dispute
Kearn Payne worked at Glow Hair Studio, an Ottawa salon, from October 2022 to August 2024. On August 1, 2024, he gave notice that he intended to resign effective the end of the month, and confirmed it in writing that evening as effective August 31. One of the owners reacted negatively, given the salon's investment in his training.
With the salon closed for vacation until Tuesday, August 6, the employer asked Payne to return his key and cut off his access to the client booking system from outside the workplace, describing both as standard practice in a competitive industry. Tension followed, centred on Payne wanting to retrieve his work tools while the employer wanted the key returned. On August 2, after Payne raised a concern that a cancelled client meant he was being pushed out, the owner texted that he was expected at the salon at 10 a.m. on August 6, and Payne replied, "See you Tuesday at 10."
On the morning of August 6, the employer learned of a social media video and post by Payne announcing that he was joining a new salon and would be "starting there this week," inviting clients to book with him. The employer packed his belongings. Payne arrived, collected his things, did not work his scheduled shift, and was overheard telling a coworker he was "done." That evening the employer emailed treating the departure as a resignation. Payne then claimed he had been terminated early. An Employment Standards Officer agreed and ordered the employer to pay $1,130.33 in termination pay. The employer applied to the Board for review.
What the Board decided
Resignation needs intent and conduct
A valid resignation requires an unequivocal intention to resign and unequivocal conduct carrying it out. Payne had clearly given notice; the only question was whether he acted on that intention early, before August 31, or whether the employer terminated him first.
His August 6 conduct carried it out
The Board found Payne's actions ended the employment. His post announced a new job "this week," not after August 31, he came to the salon to collect his tools and belongings rather than to work, he did not work his scheduled shift, and he said nothing to correct the employer's understanding that he was leaving.
Access restrictions were not a termination
Asking for the key back and cutting off external system access were accepted as standard industry practice, not signs of termination, especially since the employer had told Payne he was still expected at work on August 6. Protective business steps did not, on these facts, amount to ending the employment.
Credibility decided it
The evidence was directly opposed, so the Board made credibility findings, preferring the account more in harmony with the probabilities. The employer's version was supported by uncontradicted evidence on the timing of the social media post and by the fact that work remained scheduled for Payne that day.
Key lessons for Ontario employers
You cannot end a notice period for free
If you cut a resigning employee's notice period short, the ESA's termination pay provisions apply. Either let the employee work out the notice or pay it out. Glow avoided this only because the Board found the employee, not the employer, brought the employment to an early end.
Assess intent from the whole picture
A resignation is not just the written notice. It is the words and the conduct together. An employee can carry out a resignation early through actions, and an employer can read those actions, but only where they are genuinely unequivocal.
Handle the exit carefully
Handing someone their belongings and wishing them luck can read as a termination. The employer here was rescued by the employee's own post, not by its conduct at the door. When an employee is leaving under tension, be deliberate about what you say and do at the exit.
Frame access restrictions as routine
Retrieving keys or cutting off system access may be necessary, but it can look like termination. Explain that these steps are standard practice, and confirm in writing that the employee is still expected to work through the notice period.
Document everything as it happens
This case was won on records: the texts, the email confirming the employer's understanding, the timing evidence, and the employee's own public post. Keep contemporaneous records of communications and instructions, because credibility contests are decided on what can be proven.
Clarify conflicting signals immediately
If an employee seems to be leaving earlier than their notice states, do not simply assume one way or the other. Ask, in writing, whether they intend to complete the notice period, and resolve mixed signals before you act on them.
Dealing with a resignation that is turning into a dispute?
The line between a resignation and a termination is thin, and getting it wrong can mean paying termination pay you did not expect. A quick review of how you respond can keep a departure clean and defensible.
Book a Compliance Review Or call us: 1-800-771-7882How Achkar Law helps employers
Achkar Law advises Ontario employers on managing resignations and notice periods, ESA compliance and termination pay obligations, Employment Standards claims, and risk during employee transitions. We help employers respond to departures in a way that reduces liability and prevents costly disputes.
Related resources
For another Ontario Labour Relations Board decision on ESA entitlements and the cost of getting it wrong, see our summary of 614128 Ontario Ltd. v. Kinzett (2026 CanLII 3771).
For support with resignations, terminations, and Employment Standards compliance, see our labour and employment compliance services.
Call us at 1-800-771-7882 for a confidential consultation.