The ruling on one who swore by divorce that he would file a complaint against his boss but did not do so

Question:
This is a letter we received from a very confused person; Rubayy' al-Jazzar, from the sons of Arab Egypt, residing in Iraq, says: I hope you will present this letter to the one who handles the answers in the program (Nur 'ala al-Darb). He says in his letter:
I had a dispute with my boss at work for some reasons; he deducted five days from my salary as a punishment for me, so I swore that if I received the salary short, I would send a telegram to his boss complaining about him. But I did not send a telegram, and I received the salary short. The oath was: "My divorce is upon me, three times, from my wife, if I receive the salary short, I will send a telegram to his boss." This oath was made in front of four of my colleagues at work. I inform your eminence that I contracted my marriage eight months ago, and I have not entered upon my wife until now. What is the ruling of the religion?
May Allah reward you with the best reward.

Answer:
It is not befitting for a believer to swear by divorce, nor by what is forbidden. If it is absolutely necessary, let him say: "By Allah, I will certainly do such and such," or "By Allah, I will certainly do such and such." As for swearing by divorce and prohibition, it is not befitting, and the least of its states is that it is disliked. But this person who swore by divorce that he would escalate the matter to the boss of an opponent who deducted part of his salary: if he intended to urge himself to escalate it and to bind himself to do so, then its ruling is that of an oath, and upon him is the expiation of the oath. It is: feeding ten poor people, or clothing them, or feeding them breakfast or dinner, or giving them half a sa' of dates or rice from the staple food of the country, the amount of which is one and a half kilograms, or clothing them with a garment that suffices for prayer, such as a shirt or a lower garment and a cloak, and that is sufficient.
As for if this person who swore by divorce intended to effect the divorce, meaning that if he did not escalate it, his wife would be divorced from him; he intended to effect the divorce upon her if he did not escalate it to the boss of this employee: if he intended divorce, meaning: intended to effect the divorce if he did not do it, then one divorce takes place, and this is the stronger position. If he said: "His divorce is upon me, three times," the correct of the scholars' opinions is that one divorce takes place. And he takes her back during the waiting period if there were not two divorces before this; if he had not divorced her twice before this, then one divorce takes place with this, and he has the right to take her back as long as she is in the waiting period. He testifies two witnesses, saying to them: "I testify to you that I have taken back my wife so-and-so," and that is sufficient.
As for if he did not intend to effect the divorce upon his wife, but rather intended to urge himself and bind himself to the complaint, and did not intend to effect the divorce upon his wife at all, then in this there is only the expiation of the oath. Yes.