the Applicant v 360 Personnel Pty Ltd
Citation: [2026] FWC 1818
At a glance
- Employees affected
- 1
What happened
the Applicant worked as a High Reach Forklift Operator for 360 Personnel Pty Ltd at Allied Pinnacle from November 2024 until December 2025. He was offered the role through an advertisement that suggested stable, ongoing work with potential for permanent transition. On December 12, 2025, he received a phone call informing him his employment ended due to performance and attendance issues. A separation certificate stated the reason as 'end of assignment'. An email confirming this end was sent but not received by the Applicant. He subsequently requested written confirmation and clarification, which went unanswered.
What was decided
The Fair Work Commission found that the Applicant was unfairly dismissed from 360 Personnel Pty Ltd. The Commissioner rejected the Respondent’s jurisdictional objection arguing he wasn't dismissed but rather stood down due to workload fluctuations. It considered evidence including emails and witness statements, noting inconsistencies in the Respondent’s explanations for the end of his employment. Compensation was ordered.
What it means for employers
Employers using labour hire arrangements should ensure clear communication regarding assignment durations and reasons for termination. They must also confirm that employees receive important communications, especially written confirmations of employment changes. Using inconsistent language like 'end of assignment' and 'termination' can create confusion and undermine the employer’s position.
What it means for employees
Employees in similar situations should document all communication with their employers and seek clarification if unsure about the status of their employment. Union representation, as seen in this case, can be beneficial in navigating these issues.
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/2026fwc1818.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 →