The Fair Work Commission continues to carry one of the highest caseloads of any jurisdiction in Australia, receiving 44,075 applications in 2024–25. This is 24% above the 5-year average. The increase has been substantially driven by the growing number of applications in the two largest areas, namely unfair dismissal and general protections dismissal applications.

The rate of growth has been highest for general protections dismissal applications. There were 6,209 general protections dismissal applications made in the 2024–25 financial year. This is 27% above the 5-year average. The rate of growth accelerated in the first quarter of 2025–26, during which there were 13,671 applications made, exceeding the 3-year average by 45%. This included 2,102 general protections dismissal applications which represented a 57% increase on the 3-year average.

The President of the Fair Work Commission, Justice Hatcher, issued a statement on 12 November 2025 about reforms to the general protections dismissal application processes to accommodate the increasing workload. The Fair Work Commission primarily exercises only a dispute resolution function for these matters (through a conciliation conference process), having a determinative role only if the parties agree the Commission should arbitrate the dispute.

Of the over 6,089 general protections dismissal matters that the Commission finalised in 2024–25:

• 9% were resolved by triage and early case management processes;
• 5% were dismissed as a result of a jurisdictional objection being upheld by a Commission Member;
• 18% were settled at a conference conducted by a staff conciliator;
• 34% were settled at a conference conducted by a Commission member; and
• 33% were not settled and were finalised by a certificate under s 369(3)(a) being issued.

Of the general protections dismissal matters that resolved in 2024–25 involving a monetary settlement:

• 33% had a monetary settlement amount of less than $4,000.
• 61% had a monetary settlement amount of less than $10,000.
• The median monetary settlement amount was in the range of $4,000–$5,999.

Lawyers and ‘paid agents’ (persons who are paid to represent parties but are not lawyers) play a significant role in bringing general protections dismissal applications. Approximately 46% of applicants were represented by a lawyer or paid agent between 1 July 2022 to 30 September 2025. Of these, about a quarter were represented by one of a small group of eight ‘regular’ paid agents. Lawyers and paid agents require permission under s 596 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (FW Act) to participate in a conference, but do not require permission to lodge an application on behalf of an applicant. There is no federal scheme for the regulation of paid agents, although the Commission has recently reviewed the role of paid agents and implemented recommendations arising from this review.

Over half of applications are made by applicants who do not meet the qualifying period for making an unfair dismissal application. It is reasonable to infer from this that many general protections dismissal applications are being used as a substitute for an unfair dismissal application rather than raising a genuine allegation of unlawful dismissal.

The Commission will conduct a three stage review, reviewing the application and response forms, reviewing the process for conducting conference, and a review of the information and education materials.

Amended application form

Applicants who wish to make an application to the Commission alleging they have been dismissed in breach of Part 3-1 of the FW Act are required by the Fair Work Commission Rules 2024 (FWC Rules) to lodge their application on the approved form F8 – General protections dismissal application. Applicants can apply by lodging their application through the MyFWC portal online or by downloading, completing and emailing the form to the Commission.

The approved form F8–General protections dismissal application has been amended to require additional information from the applicant at the lodgement stage. The changes include:

• An additional question requiring submissions relevant to the requirement contained in s 596(2) of the FW Act if the applicant requests permission to be represented by a lawyer or paid agent at the conciliation conference.
• Additional questions to be completed if the applicant is lodging their application outside of the 21-day timeframe for lodgement, which address the requirements in s 366(2) of the FW Act.
• Amendments to the section of the form requiring the applicant to articulate the contraventions of the general protections provisions that are alleged (in place of the previous requirement merely to tick a box to identify the alleged contravention).

Amended response form

Rule 65 of the FWC Rules currently requires a respondent to a general protections application to lodge a response within seven days after the day on which the respondent was served with the application.  Respondents are required to lodge their response on the form F8A–Response to a general protections dismissal application.

The approved form F8A–Response to a general protections dismissal application has been amended as follows:

• There is an additional question requiring submissions relevant to the requirement contained in s 596(2) of the FW Act if the respondent requests permission to be represented by a lawyer or paid agent at the conciliation conference.
• There are additional optional response questions if the application has been lodged out of time by the applicant.
• There is an amended question regarding jurisdictional objections requiring the respondent to identify and explain the objection (in place of the previous requirement merely to tick a box to identify the objection). Any objection must now be raised in the F8A response and not at a later time prior to the issue of a certificate.

Process changes

The new forms will facilitate new case management processes intended to produce efficiencies in the way the Commission deals with general protections dismissal applications.

Representation

Where an applicant or respondent indicates on their form that they are seeking permission to be represented by a lawyer or paid agent at the conciliation conference, they are now required to outline why the Commission should grant them permission to be represented. This will facilitate a more timely and rigorous approach to the consideration of permission for representation.

Permission for representation can now be determined prior to the conference, using the information provided on the forms. This decision is likely to be made ‘on the papers’ without the need for a formal hearing.

Extension of time applications

General protections dismissal applications must be made within 21 days after the dismissal took effect or within such further period as the Commission allows.

The Commission may only extend time for lodging the application if satisfied that there are exceptional circumstances. Section 366(2) of the FW Act sets out the matters which the Commission must take into account when considering if exceptional circumstances exist.

If an application is lodged by an applicant outside of the 21-day time limit, applications using the new forms will no longer be served on the respondent(s) by staff of the Commission. Instead, these matters will be escalated to Members of the Commission at first instance for review and consideration prior to service on the respondent. Should the Member form the view on the application alone that exceptional circumstances do not exist for extending time for lodgement, the matter will be dismissed at that point and a decision issued to that effect. Alternatively, if the Member considers that they need to hear from the respondent before making that determination, the application will then be served on the respondent.

New conference processes

The Fair Work Commission is currently trialling and will shortly implement a new procedure for the conduct of general protections dismissal application conferences under s 368 of the FW Act.

The trial includes:

• a new notice of listing that includes information about the Commission’s limited role and what to expect at the conference;
• a new opening statement on the record which outlines expectations and frames the conference solely as an attempt to resolve the matter; and
• the conduct of expedited, settlement-focused conferences.

Proposed amendment to rule 65

Rule 65 of the FWC Rules currently requires a respondent to a general protections application to lodge their Form F8A response to the application within seven days. The Commission has received feedback from its Small Business Reference Group that this response time imposes an oppressive burden on business and is too short a period for the respondent to provide a considered response. The Commission proposed to amend rule 65 to extend the time to lodge the response.

Next steps in the reform process

Following the completion of Stage 3 of the review of the Commission’s case management processes in respect of general protections dismissal applications, the Commission will in 2026 commence reviews of the following application types:

• general protections applications not involving dismissal under s 372; and
• unfair dismissal applications under s 394.

At HWLE Lawyers we have also observed the increasing flood of general protections applications, often brought by dismissed employees who do not meet the eligibility requirements to bring an unfair dismissal application. Defending such applications can be complex and we encourage employers to seek legal advice to assist in dealing with matters efficiently and effectively.

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