[2025] FWC 157
Citation: [2025] FWC 157
What happened
the Applicant sought relief from unfair dismissal after being dismissed by Murrin Murrin Operations Pty Ltd. The company initially named Minara Resources Pty Ltd. The dispute centered on whether the Applicant was protected from unfair dismissal under the Fair Work Act 2009. Section 382 of the Act requires employees to have a minimum employment period and either be covered by a modern award, enterprise agreement, or have annual earnings below a high income threshold of $175,000. the Applicant’s employment commenced on 6 May 2019, with a base salary of $147,000, increasing to $163,794 by January 2023. He took unpaid leave from December 2023 and received salary continuance payments of 75% of his gross salary.
What was decided
the Commissioner dismissed the Applicant’s application for unfair dismissal relief. The Commission found that the Applicant did not meet the requirements of section 382(b)(iii) of the Fair Work Act. The Commission determined that the relevant figure for assessing the high income threshold is the employee's annual rate of earnings at the time of termination, not the amount actually received in the previous 12 months. The Commission relied on previous decisions like Zappia and Rossi to support this interpretation. The Commission concluded that the amounts the Applicant was entitled to receive under his employment contract and remuneration policy, rather than his salary continuance payments, constituted his annual rate of earnings.
Want this applied to your situation?
Reading the decision is free. FairWork Mate goes further — it reads the full case library and applies precedents like this one to your specific facts, citing the cases as it reasons. General information, not a guaranteed outcome or legal advice.
Every statement above is drawn from the published decision. Read the original here:
https://www.fwc.gov.au/documents/decisionssigned/pdf/2025fwc157.pdfWant more cases like this?
FairWork Mate tracks Fair Work Ombudsman, Fair Work Commission and Federal Court decisions across Australia. The AI advisor answers plain-English questions grounded on the full corpus — awards cited, industry, penalty amounts and affected employee counts — with a citation to the underlying decision on every answer.
Individual case summaries on this site are free. Full-corpus advisor access is a paid product — Business Solo from $99/mo, 50% off your first 3 months for the first 100 signups.
Get notified on new Fair Work cases
Free email alerts when we publish new underpayment decisions, penalty orders, and workplace law updates.
Free forever. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
This summary was drafted from the published decision and reviewed before publishing. It is general information, not legal advice. For your specific situation, speak to the Fair Work Ombudsman (13 13 94) or a qualified lawyer. About these summaries & corrections →