Skip to main content
FairWorkMate
FWCFair Work Commission · 27 February 2025

[2025] FWC 385

Citation: [2025] FWC 385

At a glance

Penalty
$23,587
Employees affected
1
Awards cited
MA000433

What happened

Jacqueline Taylor was dismissed from her role as Coordinator – Elite Process and Timelines at Classic Sports Industries Pty Ltd on November 26, 2024. The company claimed her position was made redundant following a review of operations. Taylor challenged the dismissal, arguing it was unfair and she was entitled to redundancy pay. Classic Sports was represented by its CEO, Ross Smart. Taylor's role involved monitoring sportswear orders, ensuring contractual timelines were met, and handling administrative tasks. The company created two new roles in July and November 2024, which Taylor believes she could have applied for.

What was decided

The Fair Work Commission found Taylor's dismissal was unfair and not a genuine redundancy. The Commission determined her role fell under the Clerks – Private Sector Award 2020, which Classic Sports had previously disputed. The company did not adequately consult regarding the redundancy. The Commission ordered Classic Sports to pay Taylor compensation totaling $23,586.58. The decision hinged on whether the dismissal met the definition of genuine redundancy under the Fair Work Act 2009 and whether it was harsh, unjust, or unreasonable.

What it means for employers

Employers must ensure redundancy processes are genuine and comply with relevant modern awards. Failing to properly consult with employees and creating new roles after announcing a redundancy can undermine the claim of genuine redundancy. Employers should review their redundancy processes and ensure they are consistent with Fair Work legislation and relevant awards.

What it means for employees

Employees facing redundancy should understand their rights and challenge dismissals they believe are unfair. It's important to document any new roles created by the employer after a redundancy announcement, as this can be used to support a claim of unfair dismissal.

unfair-dismissalgeneral-protectionsmodern-award-variationpenalty-ratesredundancy

Every statement above is drawn from the published decision. Read the original here:

https://www.fwc.gov.au/documents/decisionssigned/pdf/2025fwc385.pdf

Want more cases like this?

FairWork Mate tracks Fair Work Ombudsman, Fair Work Commission and Federal Court decisions across Australia. The full dataset, with structured fields for awards cited, industry, penalty amounts and affected employee counts, is available through the Business API. FairWork Mate AI answers plain-English questions grounded on the full corpus.

Individual case summaries on this site are free. API + AI access is a paid product. Contact us for pricing or a 50% off first month.

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 by AI 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 →

← All cases