General Protections and Adverse Action: Employer Guide

General protections claims are the part of the Fair Work system that employers most often underestimate. They are not confined to dismissal, they are not limited to employees who have completed a minimum employment period, the compensation cap that disciplines unfair dismissal outcomes does not apply, and the Act presumes that the decision was made for the reason the applicant alleges unless the employer proves otherwise.

This guide is written for employers, boards and HR teams. It sets out what Part 3-1 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) prohibits, how the causation provisions work, how a claim moves through the Fair Work Commission and the courts, what remedies and penalties are available, and what the evidence needs to look like before a decision is made rather than after a claim arrives. It is general information, not advice on any particular decision.

What Part 3-1 actually covers

Part 3-1 is usually described as prohibiting adverse action for three groups of reasons — workplace rights, industrial activity and protected attributes. That is the core of it, but the Part is broader than those three headings, and the additional provisions catch conduct that never reaches a dismissal:

• Workplace rights — section 340 prohibits adverse action because a person has, has or has not exercised, or proposes or proposes not to exercise a workplace right, and separately prohibits adverse action taken to prevent the exercise of a workplace right. Section 340(2) extends the protection to action taken because a third person exercised a workplace right for the affected person's benefit.
• Coercion, undue pressure and misrepresentation — sections 343, 344 and 345 prohibit coercion in relation to workplace rights, undue influence or undue pressure on an employee about specified agreements and arrangements, and knowingly or recklessly making false or misleading representations about workplace rights.
• Industrial activities — sections 346 to 350 deal with membership and non-membership of industrial associations, participation in industrial activities, coercion and misrepresentations in that field, and discriminatory terms in awards and agreements.
• Other protections — section 351 (discrimination), section 352 (temporary absence for illness or injury), section 354 (coverage discrimination against an employer), section 355 (coercion about individual flexibility arrangements) and sections 357 to 359 (sham contracting).

Two structural features drive the litigation risk. The first is the definition of adverse action, which is much wider than dismissal. The second is section 361, which reverses the onus on the question of reason once the applicant proves the objective elements. Together they mean a claim can be commenced over a performance conversation, a roster change or a failed internal recruitment, and the employer will carry the burden of proving why the decision was made.

Adverse action (s 342)

Section 342(1) sets out a table of relationships and the conduct that constitutes adverse action within each. For an employer against an employee, adverse action is:

• dismissing the employee;
• injuring the employee in his or her employment;
• altering the position of the employee to the employee's prejudice; or
• discriminating between the employee and other employees of the employer.

The table also covers a prospective employer refusing to employ a prospective employee or discriminating in the terms on which employment is offered; a principal terminating, injuring or prejudicially altering an independent contractor's position or refusing to use the contractor's services; a digital labour platform operator dealing with an employee-like worker; employees and contractors taking industrial action against a business; and industrial associations and their officers or members prejudicing a person in employment or imposing penalties on members.

Two extensions matter in practice. Section 342(2) makes threatening to take action covered by the table, and organising such action, adverse action in itself — so a warning that a role "may not survive" a restructure can be actionable before anything happens. Section 342(3) excludes action authorised by or under the Fair Work Act, another Commonwealth law, or a prescribed State or Territory law.

Whether a management decision is adverse action is a question of practical effect, not label. Removing duties, changing a reporting line, altering hours, declining a promotion or moving someone to a different site may or may not injure the employee in their employment or prejudicially alter their position; it depends on remuneration, status, opportunity and the terms of the engagement. The safer working assumption is that any decision an employee would experience as a detriment should be documented as though it will be examined.

Workplace rights (s 341)

Section 341(1) gives a person a workplace right if the person:

• is entitled to the benefit of, or has a role or responsibility under, a workplace law, workplace instrument or order made by an industrial body;
• is able to initiate, or participate in, a process or proceedings under a workplace law or workplace instrument; or
• is able to make a complaint or inquiry to a body with capacity under a workplace law to seek compliance, or — if the person is an employee — in relation to his or her employment.

Section 341(2) lists what counts as a process or proceedings, including Commission conferences and hearings, court proceedings under a workplace law, protected industrial action and protected action ballots, making, varying or terminating an enterprise agreement, appointing a bargaining representative, individual flexibility arrangements, cashing out leave, requests for flexible working arrangements, casual conversion notifications and offers, and dispute settlement procedures.

Prospective employees are taken by section 341(3) to have the workplace rights they would have if employed, which is why recruitment decisions sit within this jurisdiction. Sections 341(4) and (5) contain narrow exceptions for conditional offers involving a guarantee of annual earnings and for refusals connected with transfer of business entitlements.

Complaints and inquiries

The most frequently litigated limb is the ability to make a complaint or inquiry in relation to employment. It is often summarised as "any internal complaint is a workplace right". That summary is too broad. The statutory language is that the employee is able to make the complaint or inquiry, and the cases turn on where that ability comes from, what the complaint is about, and the circumstances in which it was made. A grievance lodged under a policy or dispute procedure, a query about pay or entitlements, or a report made under a statutory obligation sits comfortably within the section. A general expression of unhappiness with a colleague may not.

From a risk perspective the distinction is thin comfort. Once a complaint is on the record, any subsequent detriment invites the inference that the two are connected, and section 361 puts the employer to proof. The practical response is not to avoid acting — it is to be able to show that the performance concern, restructure or disciplinary process predated or was independent of the complaint, and to keep the person handling the complaint separate from the person making the employment decision where that is feasible. Our article on procedural fairness in workplace investigations deals with that separation in detail.

Industrial activity (ss 346-350)

Section 346 prohibits adverse action against a person because the person is or is not an officer or member of an industrial association, engages or has engaged in industrial activity within the meaning of section 347(a) or (b), or does not engage in industrial activity within the meaning of section 347(c) to (g). Section 347 defines industrial activity to include becoming or ceasing to be a member, organising or promoting lawful activity for an association, encouraging or participating in such activity, complying with a lawful request of an association, representing its views, paying fees, seeking representation, and taking part in industrial action.

The structure is deliberately symmetrical: it protects union members and non-members alike, and it protects a refusal to participate in unlawful activity. Sections 348 and 349 prohibit coercion and misrepresentations in relation to industrial activities, and section 350 prohibits award and agreement terms that discriminate on membership grounds.

For most employers the exposure arises during bargaining, delegate activity and site disputes, where decisions about rostering, access, discipline or redundancy selection are made against a background of union involvement. The evidentiary discipline is the same as elsewhere: identify the decision-maker, record the operational reason, and be able to show the same decision would have been made for a person who was not involved.

Protected attributes (s 351)

Section 351(1) prohibits an employer taking adverse action against an employee or prospective employee because of the person's race, colour, sex, sexual orientation, breastfeeding, gender identity, intersex status, age, physical or mental disability, marital status, family or carer's responsibilities, subjection to family and domestic violence, pregnancy, religion, political opinion, national extraction or social origin.

Section 351(2) contains three exceptions. The provision does not apply to action that is:

• not unlawful under any anti-discrimination law in force in the place where the action is taken;
• taken because of the inherent requirements of the particular position concerned; or
• taken against a staff member of an institution conducted in accordance with the doctrines, tenets, beliefs or teachings of a particular religion or creed, in good faith and to avoid injury to the religious susceptibilities of adherents of that religion or creed.

Section 351(3) lists the anti-discrimination laws for the first exception, including the Commonwealth Acts and, in Victoria, the Equal Opportunity Act 2010. The inherent requirements exception is not a general defence of reasonableness: it requires evidence about what the position actually requires, and whether the person can perform those requirements, usually with current medical or functional material rather than assumption. Where a disability is involved, the analysis runs in parallel with adjustment obligations under discrimination law and, in Victoria, with the employer's duties in relation to psychosocial hazards.

A section 351 claim can be run instead of, or as well as, a complaint under Commonwealth or State discrimination law, subject to the multiple-action rules discussed below. The Fair Work route carries the reverse onus; the discrimination route usually does not. That difference alone explains much of the forum choice.

Illness or injury absence (s 352)

Section 352 prohibits an employer dismissing an employee because the employee is temporarily absent from work because of illness or injury of a kind prescribed by the regulations. Regulation 3.01 of the Fair Work Regulations 2009 (Cth) prescribes those kinds of illness or injury through alternative pathways:

• the employee provides a medical certificate or a statutory declaration within 24 hours after the absence commences, or such longer period as is reasonable in the circumstances (reg 3.01(2));
• the employee is required by a workplace instrument to notify and substantiate the absence and complies with those terms (reg 3.01(3)); or
• the employee has provided evidence for paid personal/carer's leave for a personal illness or injury (reg 3.01(4)).

Regulation 3.01(5) removes the protection where the absence extends for more than three months, or total absences exceed three months within a 12-month period, and the employee is not on paid personal/carer's leave for the duration of the absence. Regulation 3.01(6) excludes periods of workers compensation from that paid-leave calculation.

The common employer error is to treat the three-month mark as a green light. It is not. Expiry of the prescribed period only means section 352 no longer applies; disability discrimination under section 351, unfair dismissal, State workers compensation legislation, the contract and any applicable award or agreement all continue to operate. Our guide to managing ill and injured employees covers the assessment that should precede any decision.

Coercion, pressure and sham arrangements

Section 343 prohibits organising or taking, or threatening to organise or take, action against a person with intent to coerce that person or a third person to exercise or not exercise a workplace right, or to exercise it in a particular way. Coercion requires both illegitimate pressure and an intent to negate choice, which sets it apart from ordinary commercial or managerial persuasion — but the line is crossed more often than employers expect during bargaining and restructures.

Section 344 prohibits an employer exerting undue influence or undue pressure on an employee in relation to decisions about agreements or arrangements under the National Employment Standards, permitted award or agreement terms, individual flexibility arrangements, guarantees of annual earnings, and deductions from amounts payable to the employee. Section 345 prohibits knowingly or recklessly making false or misleading representations about another person's workplace rights or their exercise.

Sections 357 to 359 address sham contracting: misrepresenting employment as an independent contracting arrangement, dismissing an employee in order to engage them as a contractor for the same work, and misrepresentations made to persuade a person to become a contractor. These sit in the same Part and attract the same procedural machinery, and they interact directly with engagement structures — see our article on employee or contractor classification.

Causation and the reverse onus

Section 360 provides that a person takes action for a particular reason if the reasons for the action include that reason. There is no requirement that the prohibited reason be the sole or even the dominant reason; it is enough that it was an operative reason among others.

Section 361(1) then provides that, where a contravention is alleged on the basis that action was taken for a particular reason or with a particular intent, that reason or intent is presumed unless the person proves otherwise. Section 361(2) excludes the presumption from applications for an interim injunction.

The sequence in practice is:

1. the applicant proves the objective elements — that the respondent took action falling within the section 342 table, and that the applicant held the workplace right, engaged in the industrial activity, or has the attribute relied on;
2. the applicant alleges the prohibited reason, which is then presumed; and
3. the respondent must prove, on the balance of probabilities, that the prohibited reason formed no part of the reasons for the action.

Section 340(1)(b) adds a further dimension. In Qantas Airways Ltd v Transport Workers' Union of Australia [2023] HCA 27, the High Court held that the prohibition on action taken to prevent the exercise of a workplace right is not confined to rights held at the time of the action, and can extend to preventing the exercise of a right the person would or might have in the future. Restructuring and outsourcing decisions therefore need reasons that stand on their own, recorded when the decision is made, not reconstructed later.

Proving the real reason

The statutory question is what actually motivated the person who made the decision. In Board of Bendigo Regional Institute of TAFE v Barclay (2012) 248 CLR 500 and Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union v BHP Coal Pty Ltd (2014) 253 CLR 243, the High Court directed attention to the actual reasons of the actual decision-maker, and confirmed that direct evidence from that person, if accepted, is capable of discharging the onus. That evidence is not determinative. It is weighed against the contemporaneous record and the objective circumstances, and it can be rejected where the documents tell a different story.

Several situations make the presumption much harder to displace:

• No identifiable decision-maker. Where a decision emerged from a committee, a series of emails or an unminuted meeting, there may be nobody who can give evidence of the operative reasoning.
• Adopted recommendations. Where the nominal decision-maker approved an investigator's or manager's recommendation without independent consideration, a court may look to the reasoning of the person who framed the recommendation.
• Contaminated inputs. Where the material placed before the decision-maker itself refers to the complaint, union role or attribute, the separation between the two is harder to maintain.
• Shifting reasons. Where the reason given at the time differs from the reason advanced in the response, the inconsistency usually does more damage than the underlying decision.
• Unavailable witnesses. Where the decision-maker has left the business and will not give evidence, the employer may be unable to prove the reason at all.

The controllable variables are all upstream. Name a single decision-maker for each significant decision. Have that person record their reasons in their own words before the decision is communicated. Keep the material they relied on. Where a complaint or protected attribute is in the background, address it explicitly in the file rather than leaving it unmentioned.

The Fair Work Commission pathway

The procedure depends on whether the claim involves dismissal.

The Commission must deal with a dismissal dispute other than by arbitration under section 368 and will ordinarily list the matter for conciliation or another appropriate process. For a non-dismissal dispute under section 372, however, the Commission may conduct a conference under section 374 only if both parties agree to participate. A Form F8C application therefore does not automatically result in a conference. Where a conference does occur, three features are worth planning for. First, it is confidential and directed at resolution, and the Commission may express views on the merits; those views are not binding but they shape expectations. Second, section 596 means a party may be represented by a lawyer or paid agent only with the Commission's permission, granted where representation would allow the matter to be dealt with more efficiently given its complexity, or where it would be unfair not to allow it. An in-house or employed lawyer, and an officer or employee of the business, are treated differently from external representation — permission should be addressed early rather than assumed.

Third, the Commission stage is not costs-free in every case. Section 375B allows a costs order against a party to a section 365 dispute where an unreasonable act or omission in connection with the conduct or continuation of the dispute caused the other party to incur costs, and section 376 allows costs against a lawyer or paid agent in defined circumstances. Section 377 governs the application. Section 375A restricts appeals from a consent arbitration decision, requiring public interest for permission and, on questions of fact, a significant error of fact.

Time limits repay care. Section 544 provides that a person may apply for an order under Division 2 of Part 4-1 in relation to a contravention "only if the application is made within 6 years after the day on which the contravention occurred", but Note 1 to that section states that it "does not apply in relation to general protections court applications". Section 368(4) defines a general protections court application as an application to a court under Division 2 of Part 4-1 for orders in relation to a contravention of Part 3-1. The six-year limit therefore does not govern a Part 3-1 court application. For a dismissal claim, the specific limits apply instead — 21 days to apply to the Commission under section 366, and 14 days after the certificate to apply to a court under section 370(a)(ii), or such further period as the court allows. For a non-dismissal claim, the Act imposes no equivalent express limitation period on the court application, and a section 372 application does not stop, extend or replace any limitation period. Delay still matters: it affects the quality of the evidence, the exercise of discretion in relation to remedies, and any limitation arising under another law relied on alongside the Part 3-1 claim.

Multiple claims for one dismissal

Part 6-1 prevents a dismissed person from running the same dismissal through several jurisdictions at once. Section 725 provides that a person who has been dismissed, or allegedly dismissed, must not make an application or complaint of a kind referred to in any one of sections 726 to 732 in relation to the dismissal if any other of those sections applies. The listed categories include dismissal remedy bargaining order applications (s 726), general protections Commission applications (s 727), general protections court applications (s 728), unfair dismissal applications (s 729), unlawful termination applications (ss 730 and 731) and certain other applications and complaints under anti-discrimination laws (s 732).

The detail matters. Each section is engaged only while the relevant application has not been withdrawn or failed for want of jurisdiction, and in the general protections context section 727 also turns on whether a certificate has issued and whether the parties have agreed to consent arbitration. Withdrawal does not necessarily restore every alternative, and the framework is directed at dismissal. An employer should not assume the rules bar a non-dismissal general protections claim, a workers compensation claim, a safety complaint or a claim under the contract.

Where an employee has an arguable unfair dismissal claim and an arguable general protections claim, the choice is theirs, and it is usually driven by the absence of a compensation cap and the reverse onus. Our unfair dismissal guide sets out the comparison from the employer's side.

Court proceedings and costs

General protections court applications are heard in the Federal Court or the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2). Most matters are commenced in the Federal Circuit and Family Court, which lists them in its general federal law jurisdiction.

The shape of a defended proceeding is broadly:

1. Pleadings. The applicant identifies the adverse action, the workplace right, activity or attribute, and the prohibited reason. The response must plead the reasons for the decision positively — a bare denial is not a defence when the onus has reversed.
2. Interlocutory steps. Disclosure is not automatic in every proceeding and its scope is case-managed, but where it is ordered it commonly reaches decision-making emails, HR files, investigation material and the documents placed before the decision-maker.
3. Evidence. Affidavits or witness statements from the decision-maker are central. Cross-examination is usually directed at whether the stated reasons are the real ones.
4. Hearing and orders. Liability and relief are often heard together, with penalty sometimes deferred.

Interim injunctions are available under section 545 and are the main reason a claim can reach court before any certificate — an application for an interim injunction is an exception to the section 370 restriction. The applicant must establish the usual requirements, and section 361(1) does not apply on an interim injunction application, which materially changes the balance at that stage.

Costs are the exception rather than the rule. Section 570 allows a costs order only where the court is satisfied the party instituted the proceedings vexatiously or without reasonable cause, an unreasonable act or omission of the party caused the other party to incur costs, or the party unreasonably refused to participate in a Commission matter arising from the same facts. An employer defending a weak claim should budget on bearing its own costs.

Remedies, penalties and s 550

Section 545(1) allows the Federal Court or the Federal Circuit and Family Court to make any order the court considers appropriate where a civil remedy provision has been contravened or a contravention is proposed. Section 545(2) gives examples: injunctions and interim injunctions to prevent, stop or remedy the effects of a contravention; compensation for loss suffered because of the contravention; and reinstatement.

Compensation under section 545 is not subject to the unfair-dismissal cap in section 392. That does not make awards unlimited: compensation is for loss caused by the contravention and must be proved. Where the evidence supports it, awards may include an amount for non-economic loss such as distress and humiliation, in addition to economic loss.

Civil penalties are separate from compensation. Item 11 of the table in section 539(2) prescribes 60 penalty units for the principal Part 3-1 provisions, including sections 340, 343, 344, 345, 346, 348, 351 and 352. Under section 546(2) the maximum is that number of penalty units for an individual and five times that number for a body corporate. With the Commonwealth penalty unit at $364 from 1 July 2026, the maxima are $21,840 for an individual and $109,200 for a body corporate for each contravention. Section 546(3) provides that the court may order the penalty, or part of it, to be paid to the Commonwealth, to a particular organisation, or to a particular person — so a penalty is not necessarily paid to consolidated revenue.

Section 550 extends liability to a person involved in a contravention. Involvement is defined exhaustively in section 550(2) as aiding, abetting, counselling or procuring the contravention, inducing it by threats or promises or otherwise, being knowingly concerned in or party to it, or conspiring with others to effect it. It requires actual knowledge of the essential facts and participation in the contravention. Holding a senior title is not involvement, and signing a letter drafted by someone else is not automatically involvement — but a manager who knew of the protected complaint and drove the decision may well be. Naming individuals is a tactical decision by applicants; when it happens, consider conflicts, separate representation and any directors and officers or employment practices insurance immediately.

Where the parties consent to arbitration under section 369, the Commission may instead order reinstatement, compensation, payment for remuneration lost, and continuity of employment and service. Civil penalties are not available in that pathway.

Responding to a claim

The first two weeks usually determine how the matter runs, and the first two days set up everything after them.

First 48 hours after receiving a claim

• Diary the applicable response deadline — Form F8A for a dismissal claim or Form F8D for a non-dismissal claim — and the date of any conference or other listed event. Flag any out-of-time dismissal application under section 366(2) immediately.
• Preserve relevant documents and suspend routine deletion across email, chat, HR and payroll systems.
• Identify the actual decision-maker or decision-makers, together with anyone who recommended or implemented the decision.
• Notify the appropriate insurer or broker within the policy timeframe, keeping the notification factual so it does not prejudice privilege.
• Separate and preserve privileged legal advice, and be deliberate about who is copied on what.
• Do not create retrospective documents, rehearse witnesses, or contact an applicant who is legally represented.
• Identify any jurisdictional or out-of-time objection promptly, so it is raised in the response rather than at the conference.
• Obtain legal advice before lodging the response — the response is the first statement of the employer's reasons and is used against it later if it shifts.

Once the immediate steps are secured, the work turns to evidence and strategy:

1. Take the reasons in their own words. Do not draft a reason and ask the decision-maker to adopt it. The evidence has to be theirs to survive cross-examination. If the decision-maker has left the business, establish whether they will assist and obtain a statement while recollection is fresh.
2. Map the chronology. Place the alleged protected conduct and the decision on one timeline with the supporting documents. Proximity is the applicant's best material and an early view of it drives strategy. Gaps in the contemporaneous record can make the section 361 presumption harder to displace and, depending on the evidence and the circumstances, may contribute to an adverse inference; that does not mean every missing document is construed against the employer.
3. Decide the objective early. Commercial resolution at the conference, consent arbitration, or defending in court are materially different strategies with different evidence requirements.

Reducing the risk before you act

Every general protections case is decided on material created before the claim existed. The controls that make a defence possible are ordinary management disciplines applied consistently:

• identify one decision-maker for each significant employment decision, and record their reasons contemporaneously;
• separate the person who investigates a complaint from the person who decides the employment consequence, as far as the size of the business allows;
• keep performance management on a documented footing before a complaint or claim arrives, not after;
• in restructures and redundancies, record the business case, selection criteria and scoring, and apply them consistently — see our guide to genuine redundancy and consultation;
• where a complaint concerns discrimination or sexual harassment, deal with it under the framework in our article on the positive duty, and keep that process out of the employment decision;
• train managers that a threat of detriment is itself adverse action under section 342(2); and
• obtain advice before, not after, decisions affecting an employee who has recently complained, raised an entitlement, taken protected leave, disclosed a health condition or become involved in union activity.

Settlement and resolution

Most general protections claims resolve at or shortly after the Commission conference. When assessing a commercial resolution, weigh the cost and distraction of a defended proceeding, the restricted recoverability of costs under section 570, the quality of the decision-maker's evidence, the exposure of individual managers under section 550, and whether reinstatement is genuinely in issue.

A settlement should be documented in terms of settlement or a deed that releases the Fair Work claims and the related claims the same facts could generate, provides for withdrawal or discontinuance, and deals with confidentiality, non-disparagement and any statement of service. Confidentiality clauses should be drafted so they do not purport to restrain a person from exercising a workplace right or making a disclosure the law permits or requires — a clause that overreaches can create the very exposure the deed was meant to close.

Practical matters that are easy to miss:

• make sure the person attending the conference has authority to settle, or immediate access to someone who does;
• separate monetary terms from non-monetary terms such as a statement of service, an agreed announcement, a reference or the return of equipment;
• consider the tax characterisation of each component, any withholding obligation and whether superannuation is payable, and take advice on those questions rather than assuming an outcome;
• specify the payment amount, timing, method and what happens on default;
• identify the correct procedural step — withdrawal of the Commission application, discontinuance of the proceeding, or consent orders dismissing it — and make payment conditional on it where appropriate;
• remember that compensation and civil penalties are distinct: parties cannot simply label a payment a penalty, and only a court can impose one; and
• accept that a private settlement or release does not necessarily bind the Fair Work Ombudsman, another regulator or a person who is not a party, and does not prevent statutory regulatory action. Not every statutory right can be contracted away.

Official sources

• Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) — current compilation, including Part 3-1 (ss 334-378A), Part 4-1 (ss 539-570) and Part 6-1 (ss 725-732).
• Fair Work Regulations 2009 (Cth) — current compilation, including regulation 3.01 on temporary absence for illness or injury.
• Fair Work Commission — General protections and harmful (adverse) action — the Commission's overview of the jurisdiction.
• Fair Work Commission — General protections applications involving dismissal — process, timing and the Form F8 application.
• Fair Work Commission — Response to a general protections application involving dismissal (Form F8A) — the employer response form for dismissal claims.
• Fair Work Commission — General protections application not involving dismissal (Form F8C) — the non-dismissal pathway under section 372.
• Fair Work Commission — Response to a general protections application not involving dismissal (Form F8D) — the employer response form for non-dismissal claims.
• Fair Work Commission — Notification of agreement for consent arbitration (Form F8B) — the consent arbitration pathway under section 369.
• Fair Work Commission — Representation by lawyers and paid agents — how permission under section 596 is dealt with.
• Crimes (Amount of a Penalty Unit) Instrument 2026 (Cth) — the $364 penalty unit applying from 1 July 2026.
• High Court of Australia — Board of Bendigo Regional Institute of Technical and Further Education v Barclay [2012] HCA 32 — the judgment on the actual reasons of the actual decision-maker.
• High Court of Australia — Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union v BHP Coal Pty Ltd [2014] HCA 41 — the judgment applying Barclay to industrial activity under section 346.
• High Court of Australia — Qantas Airways Limited v Transport Workers Union of Australia [2023] HCA 27 — the judgment on section 340(1)(b) and future workplace rights.
• Federal Court of Australia — Employment and Industrial Relations National Practice Area — how the Federal Court manages Fair Work proceedings.
• Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) — Fair Work jurisdiction — the general federal law pathway for general protections court applications.

Frequently asked questions