2025 has seen a slew of Fair Work Commission (Commission) decisions considering applications for extension of time, in circumstances where applicants have missed the statutory deadline for filing their unfair dismissal, general protections or unlawful termination claims.  Successfully challenging an application that has been filed late is one way for an employer to dispense with

Queensland’s new state government has moved urgently to make changes to the Work Health and Safety Act 2011 (Qld) (WHS Act).  We set out below a summary of the changes which were passed by Parliament late on Thursday 28 November 2024 and commenced on Friday 29 November 2024.

1 Cease Work Notices

Only a few

This article was co-authored by Jonathan McMillan and Terry Stavrianos.

In our previous article, we explored the introduction of sunsetting provisions for what are commonly referred to as ‘zombie agreements’.  Broadly, zombie agreements are workplace agreements made before the commencement of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (FW Act) and during the

This article was co-authored by Roxanne Hilton, Amy Parry and Grace Carlson.

The High Court in CCIG Investments Pty Ltd v Schokman has recently overturned a decision of the Queensland Court of Appeal, shedding light on when wrongful acts occur ‘in the course or scope of an employee’s employment’.[1]

Course or scope of

The Fair Work Commission (FWC) has acted on applications made by employer associations and unions by varying a number of awards to introduce temporary flexibility provisions in light of the COVID-19 pandemic and the associated public health orders. These important measures aim to provide employers with the flexibility to resource their businesses appropriately in the current climate whilst maintaining compliance with the applicable modern award, allowing them to continue active operations and retain employees.

The everyday use of biometric technology in contemporary society is nothing new.

We live in a world where we regularly use fingerprint recognition for home security, facial recognition to open our phones and voice recognition to ask Siri to spice up a party by playing the latest Taylor Swift tune.  Despite the significant advancements and prevalence of biometric technology in everyday society, the legality of the use of biometric fingerprint technology in the workplace has been given a thumbs down in a recent case.

A recent Fair Work Commission Full Bench decision has shed light on the obligations and risks associated with the use of biometric technology by employers.  In the first Full Bench decision considering an employee’s refusal to provide biometric data through fingerprint scanning, it was held in Jeremy Lee v Superior Wood Pty Ltd t/a Superior Wood [2019] FWCFB 2946 (1 May 2019) that directing an employee to provide fingerprint data, in circumstances where the employee did not consent to that collection, was not lawful.

The decision is important for employers to consider as it raises questions around data collection, data policies, the storage of data and whether the refusal to provide sensitive information is a valid reason for dismissal.