Skip to main content
FairWorkMate
FWCFair Work Commission · 29 September 2025

[2025] FWCFB 204

Citation: [2025] FWCFB 204

What happened

The Australian Municipal, Administrative, Clerical and Services Union (ASU) appealed a Fair Work Commission decision approving the Warrnambool City Council Enterprise Agreement No. 10 2025. The ASU was a bargaining representative but didn't actively participate in negotiations. They claim Warrnambool City Council failed to properly notify them about the agreement application (Form F16 and F17B) as required by Fair Work Commission rules, denying them the opportunity to object and potentially have the agreement cover them. The Council argued the ASU declined to participate in bargaining and therefore didn't require notification. The agreement was approved with conditions regarding trainee rates and consultation terms.

What was decided

The Full Bench of the Fair Work Commission is considering whether the ASU was denied procedural fairness due to the Council's failure to serve the required documents. The Full Bench received witness statements from both the ASU and the Council to assess the circumstances. The appeal seeks to quash the approval decision and remit the application for reconsideration, allowing the ASU to participate. The decision hinges on whether the Council's actions denied the ASU procedural fairness and whether the Commission's rules regarding notification were followed.

What it means for employers

Employers must strictly adhere to Fair Work Commission rules regarding serving documents to employee organisations, even if those organisations choose not to actively participate in bargaining. Failing to do so can lead to appeals and potential overturning of approved enterprise agreements. Understanding the implications of 'bargaining representative' status is crucial.

What it means for employees

Employee organisations have the right to be notified about enterprise agreement applications and potentially have the agreement cover them, even if they haven't actively participated in negotiations. This ensures procedural fairness and allows for representation.

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

https://www.fwc.gov.au/documents/decisionssigned/pdf/2025fwcfb204.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