Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing And Allied Services Union Of Australia - Communications Division - CWU Central Branch (128V-CWC) v Telstra
Citation: [2026] FWC 3073
What happened
Telstra announced the closure of its Hybrid Fibre Coaxial (HFC) Network in March 2025. This led to concerns about job losses for employees. The Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia (CEPU) filed a dispute on behalf of four employees, Darren Bishop, Andrew Forde, Ty Bernard and Kendall Nobbs, regarding whether their jobs were made redundant. The relevant enterprise agreement, the Telstra Limited Enterprise Agreement 2024-2027, replaced a previous agreement in October 2024.
What was decided
The Fair Work Commission found it *did* have jurisdiction to deal with the dispute. The Commission considered whether the dispute was "about things covered" in the enterprise agreement. It concluded that the dispute, concerning job redundancy, related to matters covered by the agreement, even though events leading to the redundancy occurred under a previous agreement. The Commission distinguished the case from previous rulings where agreements no longer applied.
What it means for employers
Employers should be aware that disputes can arise even after an enterprise agreement changes. The Commission may consider facts relating to a previous agreement when determining a dispute under a new agreement, especially if the relevant clauses are identical. A narrow interpretation of "things covered" in an enterprise agreement may not always be appropriate.
What it means for employees
Employees should be aware that disputes about job security, such as redundancy, can be pursued even if the events leading to the dispute occurred under a previous enterprise agreement. The union can represent employees in these disputes and seek arbitration from the Fair Work Commission.
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/2026fwc3073.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. The full FWC and Federal Court library behind every advisor answer is on Pro.
FairWork Mate AI
This is one decision. Pro reads all of them.
Free case pages cite the top 250 decisions. Pro opens the full Fair Work Commission and Federal Court library, cross-references your own situation against it, and cites the decision behind every answer — plus document upload, so it can read your letter or contract line by line. 150 questions a month, cancel anytime.
Just need today sorted? A Day Pass is 25 questions over 24 hours. No account, nothing to cancel.
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