NOTICE is given that the Commission in Court Session will hear matter CICS 2 of 2026 on Tuesday, 16 June 2026 at 2:15 PM (AWST).
This is an application on the Commission's own motion to rescind Location Allowance General Order 2 of 2025 and issue a new Location Allowance General Order pursuant to section 50 of the Industrial Relations Act 1979.
NOTICE is given that an application has been made to the Commission by the Construction, Forestry, Mining And Energy Union Of Workers under section 40 of the Industrial Relations Act 1979 (WA) to vary the Timber Yard Workers Award No. 11 of 1951.
NOTICE is given that an application has been made to the Commission in Court Session by The Australian Nursing Federation, Industrial Union of Workers Perth to alter Rule 1 – NAME, Rule 4 – MEMBERSHIP and Rule 10 – COUNCIL of its registered rules.
In September 2025, the Commission found that the applicant had been unfairly dismissed from her employment by the respondent: [2025] WAIRC 00805. These further reasons deal with remedy. The respondent gave no evidence or submissions about remedy at the initial hearing in January 2025 and did not appear at the further hearing in November 2025, which was convened for that purpose.
The applicant did not seek reinstatement, saying the employment relationship had broken down and her former position had been abolished. Instead, she sought compensation of six weeks’ wages (which she said reflected the minimum period it would have taken to end her employment fairly), as well as compensation for emotional distress. She relied on evidence that the respondent had offered her reduced hours on the basis that she would remain employed, and that she had made financial and medical arrangements accordingly. She was then dismissed by email while on leave, with only a general statement that it was in the business’s best interests. The applicant also gave evidence about her efforts to find work after the dismissal, and the impact of her visual impairment, ongoing medical costs and financial stress on her ability to obtain alternative employment.
The Commissioner determined that reinstatement was impracticable on the evidence and therefore proceeded to assess compensation for loss and injury under the statutory framework. The Commissioner applied established principles drawn from precedent case law, including that compensation must reflect demonstrated loss or injury caused by the dismissal, is not punitive, and must be assessed judicially on the evidence and all relevant circumstances. On economic loss, the Commissioner accepted the applicant’s submission that six weeks represented the minimum period in which the respondent could have lawfully and fairly brought the employment to an end, having regard to consultation obligations under the Minimum Conditions of Employment Act 1993 (WA) and notice requirements under the Clerks (Commercial, Social and Professional Services) Award. The Commissioner also accepted that the abrupt termination of the applicant, after earlier representations that employment would continue on reduced hours, caused distress beyond the ordinary upset associated with termination.
Commissioner Walkington ordered the respondent to pay the applicant a total of $11,814.92 gross, comprising $6,814.92 for loss (equivalent to six weeks’ wages, being the minimum period in which the respondent could have fairly implemented a redundancy process, including consultation and notice) and $5,000 for injury. Payment was ordered within seven days.
The decision can be read here.
