Application by the Applicant
Citation: [2026] FWC 2753
At a glance
- Employees affected
- 1
What happened
the Applicant sought an unfair deactivation remedy under the Fair Work Act 2009, claiming she was unfairly deactivated from Amazon's digital labour platform. Amazon Commercial Services Pty Ltd argued the Applicant did not perform work on a regular basis for at least six months prior to her deactivation, which is a requirement for protection against unfair deactivation. The case involved Amazon Flex Delivery Partners collecting and delivering goods purchased online. Workers choose which delivery blocks they accept.
What was decided
The Fair Work Commission dismissed the Applicant’s application. the Commissioner found she did not meet the requirement of performing work on a regular basis for at least six months. The Commission emphasized that the legislation requires a point-in-time inquiry, focusing on whether work was performed regularly immediately before deactivation. Previous periods of work do not count towards this six-month period. The Digital Labour Platform Deactivation Code provides guidance on what constitutes 'regular basis' including completing 60 hours per month or working three days a week.
What it means for employers
Employers using digital labour platforms should be aware of the strict requirements for unfair deactivation remedies. Ensure workers are not performing work regularly for at least six months before deactivation to avoid potential claims. Regularly review worker activity and maintain records to demonstrate compliance with the 'regular basis' definition, as outlined in the Digital Labour Platform Deactivation Code.
What it means for employees
Workers on digital labour platforms seeking protection from unfair deactivation must consistently perform work for at least six months immediately before their deactivation. Sporadic or intermittent work, even if frequent overall, may not satisfy the 'regular basis' requirement. Understand that previous periods of work do not count towards this timeframe.
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/2026fwc2753.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 →