The National Workplace Brief is our quarterly newsletter to bring you up to speed on happenings in workplace and industrial relations law around the country, brought to you by our specialist team here at HWLE. Please reach out to the authors or the Workplace Relations team in your local HWLE office should you have any questions or require assistance.

Fair Work Commission to reform general protections dismissal application process

The Fair Work Commission is reforming its general protections dismissal application process in response to significant growth in caseloads, with 44,075 applications in 2024-25 and a sharp rise in general protections dismissal matters. A three stage review will update application and response forms, conference procedures, and information materials. New F8 and F8A forms require more detailed information on representation, out of time lodgement, and alleged contraventions or jurisdictional objections. Representation permission may now be determined before conferences, and out of time applications will be assessed by a Commission Member before service on respondents. The Commission is trialling new settlement focused conference procedures and proposing an extension to the seven day response period under rule 65. Further reviews of other general protections and unfair dismissal application types will begin in 2026.

This article was written by Chris Morey, Special Counsel, and reviewed by Clare Raimondo, Partner.

Click here to read more.

Complainant 202258 v Southern Restaurants (VIC) Pty Ltd [2025] ACAT 3

The ACT Civil and Administrative Tribunal (ACAT) has delivered a precedent setting award of damages which confirms that failure to make reasonable accommodations for employees with attributes protected under anti-discrimination law can expose employers to significant legal, financial and reputational risks.

This article was written by Alison Spivey, Partner, and Charlotte Lane, Law Clerk. 

Click here to read more.

New Workplace Gender Equality Targets – What Employers Need to Know

Employers with 500 or more employees must select and work towards three gender equality targets over a three‑year cycle. Targets must be chosen from a legislated set of 19, including at least one numeric target. The first selection point will be the 2026 reporting year, based on each employer’s 2025 baseline. Non‑compliant employers risk public naming and loss of eligibility for Commonwealth procurement opportunities. The reforms are designed to convert awareness of gender gaps into tangible action and measurable progress.

This article was written by Jessica Nicholls, Partner, and Maggie Feuerherdt, Associate.

Click here to read more.

Sexual Harassment: Record $305,000 Personal Damages Order Should Prompt Employer Action

Warning – This article contains explicit content that some readers may find confronting.

In 2025, the Federal Court of Australia awarded the largest order for damages for a claim under the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth) (SD Act) to date. The case of Magar v Khan [2025] FCA 874 (Magar Decision) was one of the first to consider key changes made to the SD Act, including introduction of the definition of sex-based harassment and the positive duty to prevent sexual harassment. This decision serves as a timely reminder to employers of the duty to proactively prevent sexual harassment in the workplace.

This article reviews the positive duty in the context of the decision in the Magar Decision and outlines the implications and practical measures to be taken to ensure the positive duty is met.

This article was written by Danielle Flint, Partner, and Jackie Sorial, Solicitor.

Click here to read more.

‘Define Client’: The words that could leave your business unprotected

National reforms to the enforceability of non-competes and other restrictive covenants are anticipated to commence in 2027, in particular in relation to low and middle-income workers. The extent to which non-solicit and non-deal provisions will be impacted (for all employees) remains unclear.

In the meantime, and for employees outside of the scope of those reforms, the enforceability of restraints remains subject to established common law and, for those in NSW, statutory requirements.

Recent decisions illustrate how subtle differences in drafting, evidence, and contractual mechanics can produce sharply different outcomes. Drafting that is commonly used and relied on to protect valuable assets and relationships has been held unenforceable.

Employers are placing an increasing focus and reliance on non-solicit and non-deal provisions to protect their valuable assets and relationships, however Courts continue to apply increasing scrutiny to the scope of these restraints.

This article was written by Chris Shelley, Partner, and Shivani Gandhi, Solicitor.

Click here to read more.

Supporting Neurodiversity in the Workplace: Lessons from Stevenson v State of Queensland and Practical Steps for Employers

Proactively supporting neurodiversity is essential for an inclusive, high performing and legally compliant workplace. Neurodivergence, including autism, ADHD and dyslexia, brings valuable diversity, and when employees receive appropriate tools, communication styles and environments, workplaces benefit through improved productivity, psychological safety and reduced turnover. Employers must make reasonable adjustments under the Disability Discrimination Act unless doing so causes unjustifiable hardship, and WHS laws require protection of psychological and physical safety for all employees.

The Stevenson v State of Queensland decision highlights the need for recruitment processes that remove systemic barriers and invite candidates to request adjustments. The Victorian Public Sector Commission’s Neurodiversity Employment Toolkit offers practical guidance on inclusive hiring, workplace adjustments, policies and leadership training. It emphasises small, low cost adjustments, clear mechanisms for requesting support and creating psychologically safe environments. Employers should take proactive steps, as many neurodivergent employees may not disclose their needs and may require flexible, evolving adjustment processes.

This article was written by Zoe Weir, Partner, and Isabella Maio, Associate.

Click here to read more.