Toll Transport Pty Ltd v United Workers' Union (108V)
Citation: [2026] FWC 2519
At a glance
- Employees affected
- 122
What happened
Toll Transport Pty Ltd closed its warehouse facility at Altona, Melbourne, impacting approximately 122 employees who were subsequently relocated to other Toll distribution warehouses. The closure stemmed from Nike's decision not to renew its contract with Toll, which was initially expected to end in February 2025 but extended to April 2025. A dispute arose between Toll and the United Workers’ Union (UWU) regarding whether redundancy pay or consultation was required under the Toll Global Logistics and United Workers Union Enterprise Agreement 2024. Five employees, the Applicant, Habib Issahaku, Elizabeth O’Brien, Terry Boram and Robyn Pohutu, were selected as 'Test Employees' to focus on the key issues.
What was decided
The Fair Work Commission found that Toll was not obligated to provide redundancy pay or consult about redundancy because it did not terminate any employment and didn't make a definitive decision ending required jobs. While relocation was generally permitted under employee contracts and the enterprise agreement, a 'restructuring necessity' clause meant relocation needed to meet specific requirements outlined in Clause A12 of the agreement. Toll failed to comply with these requirements for the Test Employees but can still rectify this. The Commission considered evidence from five test employees and representatives from both Toll and the UWU.
What it means for employers
Employers should carefully review their enterprise agreements, particularly clauses related to restructuring, relocation, and redundancy obligations. Ensure compliance with all consultation requirements when making changes that affect employee roles or locations. Understand how 'suitable alternative employment' is defined within your agreement and consider the impact of any potential reductions in pay or shift penalties.
What it means for employees
Employees should be aware of their rights regarding redundancy pay and consultation under enterprise agreements. If relocation is proposed, understand the requirements outlined in the relevant clauses and ensure employers adhere to those obligations. Seek advice from a union representative if concerns arise about compliance with the agreement’s terms.
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/2026fwc2519.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 →