the Applicant v Dja Dja Wurrung Clans Aboriginal Corporation
Citation: [2026] FWC 2906
At a glance
- Employees affected
- 6
- Awards cited
- MA000123
What happened
the Applicant was employed by Dja Dja Wurrung Clans Aboriginal Corporation as a Procurement and Asset Management Coordinator from July 2024 to December 2025, under the Social, Community, Home Care and Disability Services Industry Award 2010 (SCHADS Award). The corporation underwent a Strategic Realignment Project following projected financial deficits. This involved consultants Nous Group reviewing the structure. the Applicant's position was made redundant on December 2, 2025, as part of this restructure. She collected her belongings from work and provided a medical certificate. Two administrative staff reported to the Applicant; one position was vacant and another filled by a secondee.
What was decided
The Fair Work Commission heard an unfair dismissal application brought by the Applicant against Dja Dja Wurrung Clans Aboriginal Corporation. the Respondent argued the dismissal was a genuine redundancy, disputing the claim of unfairness. Deputy President Farouque found that the Applicant’s position was made redundant as part of a genuine restructure and therefore not unfairly dismissed. He noted communications to staff about the project and the final report from Nous Group. The Commission did not consider the matter harsh, unjust or unreasonable.
What it means for employers
Employers undertaking structural reviews should ensure clear communication with employees regarding potential changes, including redundancies. Engaging consultants can be beneficial but requires careful management of information flow and employee expectations. A genuine redundancy process must be demonstrably linked to a business need and not simply a way to avoid other employment options.
What it means for employees
Employees facing potential redundancy should actively engage in discussions about the restructure and explore redeployment opportunities. Providing medical certificates can impact ongoing employment considerations, but it's important to understand how this may be factored into decisions.
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/2026fwc2906.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 →