Employment & Labor Insider

You are Dilbert, the head of Human Resources for a fictional company that is not perfect but still a pretty decent place to work.

You have an employee, Dolores, who is more trouble than she’s worth, but your company lawyers will not approve a termination. For a number of reasons. She’s a member of a legally protected group. (In other words, she has a sex, an age, and a race. Like everybody else.) And she's a chronic complainer, which means that one of the 50 zillion things she has complained about is bound to be legally protected. Surely at least one has some connection with workplace safety, discrimination, the right to join or not join a union, the Fair Labor Standards Act, or something.

And because she’s such a pain, the supervisor has used avoidance as a coping mechanism – which means you have no progressive discipline or other documentation to support a termination.

And, although Dolores is more trouble than she’s worth, she isn’t dishonest, or violent, or a sexual harasser, or any of those things that would give you a valid reason to terminate without prior counseling or warning.

In other words, it looks like you and Dolores will be together for the foreseeable future. But then, one glorious Friday as you return from lunch, you check your email, and there is a message from Dolores’s supervisor. The supervisor is forwarding you an email from Dolores:

Hi, Marlene. I am unable to take it anymore. I love my job, but I cannot continue working under these intolerable conditions. Stan refused to smile at me today, and when I told you about it, you minimized it, saying that he probably just had something else on his mind. This is typical of the insensitivity I experience from you and other members of management on a daily basis. I hereby tender my resignation, effective two weeks from today. Have a nice day. Dolores

After you catch your breath and do a quick check with the lawyers, you email Dolores, with a copy to Marlene:

Hi, Dolores. Marlene has forwarded your email to me. We accept your resignation effective [two weeks from today], and we wish you all the best. Dilbert

You don’t say you’re sorry she’s leaving because that would be a lie. You leave off the “in your future endeavors” part because you say that only to people who are being fired. And you and Marlene decide to let her work the two-week notice period because – what harm can it do? It might give you a little time to find a replacement. A replacement who isn’t more trouble than they’re worth.

Then you celebrate all weekend, and you're still on a cloud when you dance into your office the following Monday morning. When you log on to your computer, you see an email that Dolores sent you on Sunday night. With a cc to Marlene. The email says,

Hi, Dilbert. I reflected over the weekend, and although there is much room for improvement at this company, I love my job and have decided to stay. Thank you for your understanding. When you have a few free hours this week, I would like to go over with you in detail everything that you and Marlene are doing wrong, so that this company can be all that it can be. Have a great day! Dolores

Noooooooooooo . . . 

You call Marlene and find out that Marlene didn’t even come to work that day because she was suffering from severe emotional distress. (Marlene had checked her email Sunday night.)

You go back to the lawyers in tears. “We have to let Dolores stay, don’t we? Since she took it back before her notice period was up? Why, oh why, did I ever let her work the notice period? We could have released her immediately and paid her for the two weeks. Oh, woe is me! Alas and alack!”

But you are surprised to see through your tears that your lawyers are smiling.

“Why are you laughing at me? That isn’t very nice!”

The following is an attorney-client privileged communication:

“We aren’t laughing at you, Dilbert. We are laughing because you – well, you didn’t tell Dolores that she could rescind her resignation, did you?”

“No, I was too upset to respond. I came straight to you. Well, I did call Marlene first, but she wasn’t even in today.”

The lawyers started laughing again.

“Dilbert, we have some very good news for you and Marlene. Send this email back to Dolores:

Hi, Dolores. Thank you for your email, but we accepted your resignation on Friday, and we are going to let that stand. We will go ahead and release you today, but we’ll pay you in full for the two-week notice period. Again, we wish you all the best.

“I can do that?”

“You sure can. Once she's resigned, you can refuse to take her back if she changes her mind. In most jurisdictions, anyway, including ours.”

End of attorney-client privileged communication.

Dilbert happily sent the email with the text that the attorneys gave him. Dolores sued, claiming that the company fired her in retaliation for that complaint she made six months ago when a housefly got inside in the women’s restroom, which was protected by OSHA (the complaint, not the fly) because flies have a lot of germs and their babies are maggots. She added a claim for wrongful discharge in violation of her state’s public policy favoring no-fly workplaces.

The attorneys just laughed again, and filed their motion for summary judgment, which included a copy of Dolores’s resignation email, Dilbert’s original response, Dolores’s “rescission” email, and Dilbert’s response to that.

IT WAS HEREBY ORDERED:

The Plaintiff voluntarily resigned from her employment with the Defendant. Therefore, the company’s Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED, and the Plaintiff's claims for retaliatory discharge are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.

This the 5th day of September, 2025.

The Honorable Mike Aaron Judge Judy

And they all lived happily ever after. All except Dolores's next employer.

NOTE FROM ROBIN: Like Dilbert, be sure to consult with your employment counsel before you act, in case a different standard applies in your jurisdiction.