Share this @internewscast.com
An established hairdresser at a renowned salon chain was dismissed after a one-star Google review and reported aggressive behavior; her unfair dismissal claim was later rejected by the Fair Work Commission.
In December 2023, Xiaofeng Lu started working casually as a senior stylist at two Just Cuts salons in Fyshwick and Manuka, both near Parliament House in Canberra.
Operations manager Kelly Chea terminated her via text in April 2025, following a discussion about a one-star Google review by a client mentioning a ‘Chinese-speaking staff member.’
The salon stated Ms. Lu was dismissed due to severe misconduct, which included aggressive, disrespectful, and disruptive actions after discussing the negative review.
Ms Lu denied the allegations, claiming her dismissal was motivated by complaints she had made about unpaid superannuation and racial discrimination.
On her dismissal day, Ms. Lu emailed the company to inquire about her superannuation payments mistakenly directed to the wrong fund.
Ms. Lu informed the Commission of her over 20 years of hairdressing experience and numerous customer service awards from the franchisor’s head office.
Ms Chea said Ms Lu became defensive when she tried to discuss the negative review.
An experienced hairdresser at a well-known salon chain who was sacked after rceiving a one-star Google review and allegedly acting aggressively has had her unfair dismissal claim rejected by the Fair Work Commission
She said when she attempted to discuss the review with Ms Lu she was dismissive, and continued scrolling on her phone despite being on shift.
‘She refused to consider the feedback, take responsibility, or engage in a professional dialogue. At one point, she put her finger to her mouth and told me to shush,’ she said.
‘She also verbally disparaged me, stating that I didn’t understand how hard she worked and that I only come in to ‘la la’,’ a phrase she explained was a Chinese expression meaning ‘bullsh*t’ and incompetence.’
She said when she asked Ms Lu to finish her shift early to de-escalate the situation, Ms Lu responded with hostility, abruptly gathered her belongings, slammed cabinet doors, forcefully discarded a used towel into a bin near clients, and created a visibly tense atmosphere in front of customers.
Her account was supported by CCTV footage and a colleague in the store at the time.
Ms Chea said she believed Ms Lu’s conduct amounted to serious misconduct and her continued presence in the salon was untenable.
However Ms Lu alleged Ms Chea became angry, raised her voice in the public shopping area, and made the following discriminatory remark which left her socked and humiliated.
‘You are the only Chinese staff with a Chinese accent, and you work with the white people. If anything is wrong, it must be you.’
The sacked hairdresser was employed casually at Just Cuts hair salon in Fyshwick (pictured) and Manuka in Canberra
Ms Lu said her sudden public dismissal caused emotional distress, reputational damage within Canberra’s small hairdressing community, and financial hardship.
On the day she was dismissed, Ms Lu had sent an email requesting an update on her superannuation payments.
She believed this triggered the meeting that led to her termination.
The company told the Commission the accounting software Xero had incorrectly listed Ms Lu’s super fund as Australian Retirement Fund instead of Australian Retirement Trust, resulting in quarterly contributions being deposited into the wrong account.
FWC deputy president Lyndall Dean said she was satisfied Ms Lu’s conduct justified immediate dismissal.
‘I accept Ms Chea’s evidence that she found Ms Lu’s comments to the effect that she engaged in ‘bullshit’ and was incompetent as deeply disrespectful, and that she found Ms Lu’s behaviour to be intimidating and bullying,’ she said.
‘In such a small salon where the few employees need to work closely together, I also accept that Ms Lu’s behaviour caused other staff to feel uncomfortable and created an unsafe and intimidating atmosphere.’
She rejected Ms Lu’s submission her dismissal was motivated by her raising issues about the superannuation payment.
‘I am satisfied and find that the superannuation payments were paid inadvertently to the incorrect fund, caused by a simple error of mistaking the Australian Retirement Trust with the Australian Retirement Fund.’ she said.
‘The evidence is also clear that as soon as the error was raised with the (salon) steps were taken to rectify the error.’
