How a Dress Code Dispute Became a Workplace Nightmare with Toyota Dealership

A Toyota employee in Townsville says she was left “mortified” after a complaint about a so-called “short skirt club” at the dealership led to her being asked to “try on a larger skirt size” and receiving an internal memo discussing her “body proportions”.

Amy Tonkin, who worked as a salesperson at Mike Carney Toyota from July 2023, lodged an application with the Fair Work Commission in February. She alleged that the company’s actions effectively forced her to resign from her position.

While the Fair Work Commission ultimately found that Ms Tonkin had resigned of her own volition and dismissed her claim, the tribunal member presiding over the case agreed the incident was “poorly handled from start to finish,” offering a stark example of how employers should not manage sensitive staff issues.

The situation began in October of last year when the dealership received a customer complaint about a “short skirt club.” This prompted management to review its uniform policy and remind staff of the dress code. On January 2, a Human Resources representative met with Ms Tonkin, advising her that her skirt had been identified as being above the knee and suggested she “try on a larger skirt size.”

The following Monday, the situation escalated when the HR representative sent a memo to Ms Tonkin, copying in her line managers. The memo shockingly noted that her “body proportions have made it challenging to find a skirt that fits properly.”

Feeling humiliated, Ms Tonkin wrote back the next day. “I was quite upset by the comments about my body shape, and remind the business how much embarrassment I have suffered as a result,” she stated, asking why her managers had been included in the correspondence.

At a follow-up meeting on January 10, her request to know if other female employees had been subjected to similar scrutiny was dismissed as “inappropriate.” Later that day, she experienced what she described as a “mental breakdown” during a medical appointment, telling her doctor she felt her body was being blamed for not fitting the uniform. She was subsequently placed on stress leave.

A former general manager reportedly conceded to her on January 14, “it just never should have happened.” However, when Ms Tonkin requested a formal apology, she was informed it would be conditional, accompanied by an acknowledgment that “this cannot be used further against the company in any way.” Ms Tonkin rightfully refused to sign anything that would “silence her.”

Upon returning from leave on January 20, she continued to wear the skirt in question while waiting for a new uniform to arrive. At another meeting on January 24, the general manager reportedly asked “if she could go to the shops now and buy some trousers that conform.” Ms Tonkin initially agreed to do so and move on, but resigned via email on January 28. In her exit form, she cited that her treatment had “resulted in myself being sexually harassed, discriminated and bullied.”

The company rejected her claims, with the general manager writing, “We do not believe that there can be any suggestion that you have been sexually harassed, discriminated against, or bullied… All matters relating to your compliance with the dress code have been appropriately and reasonably attended to by us.”

Read More: Fair Work rules unfair dismissal of employee with mental health issues

Why This is Unacceptable in Any Workplace

While the Fair Work Commission found that a discussion about uniform policy is within an employer’s rights, it condemned the manner in which it was handled. This case is a textbook example of poor management and a failure of basic respect and professionalism.

1. Public Shaming is Not HR: The decision to discuss an employee’s body in a written memo—and then copy in her managers—is a staggering breach of privacy and professional conduct. Such conversations must be handled with the utmost sensitivity, in private, and should focus on the uniform policy itself, never on an individual’s physical attributes. Referencing an employee’s “body proportions” is not only humiliating but can easily stray into discriminatory territory.
2. Accountability Requires a Genuine Apology: Offering an apology only on the condition that it legally protects the company is not a sincere apology. It is a legal manoeuvre designed to silence the aggrieved party. A genuine apology acknowledges wrongdoing and is a critical step in repairing trust and fostering a positive workplace culture. Refusing to do so, and instead doubling down, only deepens the harm.
3. Blaming the Victim: The company’s final letter, which described Ms Tonkin as “argumentative and confrontational,” is a classic case of shifting blame. Instead of reflecting on how their unprofessional actions caused distress, they criticised her reaction to being mistreated. A responsible employer seeks to understand why an employee is upset, rather than punishing them for their response.
4. Legal Victory vs. Ethical Failure: While the employer may have avoided a legal finding of forced dismissal, their actions represent a profound ethical and managerial failure. This approach demolishes employee morale, damages the company’s reputation, and demonstrates a toxic culture where employees are not treated with dignity. Just because an action isn’t deemed illegal in a specific context does not make it right or acceptable.

We Can Help

If you have been treated unfairly at work, you have rights. We can help you make a general protections or unfair dismissal claim today. Australian Workplace Discrimination Representatives (AWDR) has spent over 30 years helping Australian workers challenge unfair treatment in the workplace. Whether you were forced to resign, unfairly dismissed or subjected to bullying or harassment, our expert team is here to support you.

We’ve handled more than 16,000 employee claims and are known for achieving fast outcomes and maximum payouts. Act quickly, because Fair Work claims must be filed within 21 days. Call 1800 333 666 for a free, confidential consultation and get the advice you need today.