Application by Transport Workers' Union of Australia
Citation: [2026] FWCFB 167
What happened
The Transport Workers' Union of Australia (TWU) applied for a minimum standards order (MSO) under the Fair Work Act 2009, aiming to set standards for 'employee-like workers' (ELWs) engaged via digital labour platforms. These ELWs perform on-demand delivery work involving food, beverages, and other goods ordered online. The TWU also applied for MSOs covering ‘last mile’ delivery work. The Transport Workers Union reached a consent proposal with Uber Eats and DoorDash Technologies Australia Pty Ltd t/a DoorDash, which proposed lower remuneration rates than the 'last mile' delivery applications. Concerns were raised by some businesses about creating a level playing field between competing delivery services.
What was decided
The Commissioner decided to proceed with an early hearing regarding the TWU’s draft MSO for on-demand delivery workers, due to the agreement reached with Uber Eats and DoorDash. The Commission will publish a notice of intent to make a MSO broadly consistent with the TWU's proposal. This MSO will be interim pending consideration of ‘last mile’ delivery applications. The Commission must first determine if the proposed workers are indeed 'employee-like workers'. A review will occur after decisions in related matters.
What it means for employers
Employers using digital labour platforms for deliveries should be aware of potential minimum standards orders impacting remuneration and conditions. The Commission prioritised a consent proposal, highlighting the importance of considering the impact on businesses and ensuring a level playing field between competing services. Businesses should engage proactively with consultations and submissions to ensure fair outcomes.
What it means for employees
On-demand delivery workers engaged through digital platforms may see improved minimum standards regarding pay and conditions following this decision. The interim MSO will be reviewed after consideration of ‘last mile’ delivery applications, so further changes are possible. Workers should participate in consultations to shape future regulations.
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/2026fwcfb167.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 →