Skip to main content
FCAFederal Court of Australia · 8 July 2026

WorkPac Pty Ltd v Coal Mining Industry (Long Service Leave Funding) Corporation

Citation: [2026] FCA 874

At a glance

Employees affected
10

What happened

WorkPac Pty Ltd, a company employing workers in the coal mining industry, disputes how levies for long service leave are calculated for its eligible employees. The Coal Mining Industry (Long Service Leave Funding) Corporation administers the scheme and initially claimed WorkPac had underpaid levies. This case concerns the calculation of 'eligible wages' and 'base rate of pay' for 10 sample employees during a period from July 2012 to December 2023, focusing on whether rostered or ordinary hours should be used in calculations.

What was decided

The Federal Court (Younan J) determined specific instructions regarding the calculation of levies for WorkPac's eligible employees. The court ruled that each employee’s 'base rate of pay' would be their flat rate less any casual loading, and this rate should be multiplied by the hours actually worked corresponding to rostered hours. The parties were directed to provide proposed orders for consideration, with a deadline set. Costs will be determined based on written submissions.

What it means for employers

Employers operating in industries with similar long service leave schemes need to carefully review how they calculate employee entitlements and levies. The court’s decision highlights the importance of accurately defining 'base rate of pay' and considering how hours are calculated for levy purposes, particularly when using casual employment agreements.

What it means for employees

Employees working in industries with portable long service leave schemes should understand how their wages are defined for levy calculations. This case clarifies that actual hours worked aligning with rostered shifts are relevant, potentially impacting the amount contributed towards their long service leave entitlements.

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.

underpaymentpenalty-ratescasual-conversiongeneral-protectionsmodern-award-variationlong-service-leave

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

https://www.judgments.fedcourt.gov.au/judgments/Judgments/fca/single/2026/2026fca0874

Want 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. The full FWC and Federal Court library behind every advisor answer is on Pro.

FairWork Mate AI

This is one decision. Pro reads all of them.

Free case pages cite the top 250 decisions. Pro opens the full Fair Work Commission and Federal Court library, cross-references your own situation against it, and cites the decision behind every answer — plus document upload, so it can read your letter or contract line by line. 150 questions a month, cancel anytime.

Just need this week sorted? A 7-Day Pass is 50 questions over 7 days, no account. Get a 7-Day Pass — $14.99

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

All cases