the Applicant v Cosmetic Laboratories (Aust) Pty Ltd
Citation: [2026] FWC 2674
At a glance
- Penalty
- $1,039
What happened
the Applicant worked as a quality control officer for Cosmetic Laboratories (Aust) Pty Ltd, starting casually in February 2023 and transitioning to a permanent role in July 2023. In May 2025, the company informed employees of potential restructuring due to financial losses. Following a review in August 2025, the Applicant's position was deemed redundant and he was notified on September 1, 2025. He argues the redundancy wasn’t genuine and lacked proper consultation.
What was decided
The Fair Work Commission found Cosmetic Laboratories (Aust) Pty Ltd unfairly dismissed the Applicant. The Commission determined that while the company experienced financial difficulties justifying restructuring, they failed to adequately consult with the Applicant regarding his redundancy. This failure meant the dismissal didn't meet the criteria for genuine redundancy under section 389 of the Fair Work Act. Compensation of $1,038.99 plus superannuation was ordered.
What it means for employers
Employers must genuinely consider redeployment options before declaring a role redundant and conduct proper consultation with affected employees, even in small businesses facing financial difficulties. Simply demonstrating financial losses isn't enough to establish genuine redundancy; the process of assessing alternatives and communicating with employees is crucial.
What it means for employees
Employees have rights regarding redundancies. If an employer declares a position redundant, employees should ensure they are consulted about potential redeployment options and receive adequate notice and information. Failure by the employer to consult can lead to a finding of unfair dismissal.
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/2026fwc2674.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 →