Poor process not enough to win redundancy case
A mother lost her unfair dismissal case. The Fair Work Commission found the employer's consultation was rushed and inadequate.
Jessica James worked two days a week as a reporting and rehabilitation supervisor for Illawarra Coal. She spent a third day at home to care for her son.
In August 2024, GM3 bought the company from South32. In June 2025, the new owners reviewed staffing.
They cut her role from five days back to three. This made her position redundant.
Her job share partner kept the three days. James took the company to the Fair Work Commission.
She argued the role was still needed because her work had been handed to others. Commissioner Phillip Ryan found the company's consultation process was hasty and not thorough.
This denied her a real chance to influence the decision. But he ruled that even with that failure, James did not prove the dismissal was unfair overall.
The underlying redundancy decision was sound. She was not singled out for different treatment.
- 2 days a week
- Weekly hours
- August 2024
- Acquisition date
- 5 days to 3 days
- Role reduction
- reporting and rehabilitation supervisor
- Position
Why it mattersThe ruling shows an important lesson. Even when courts criticise an employer's process, poor consultation alone may not win a redundancy case. The employee must prove the job cuts were not genuinely needed.
AustraliaAustralian workers facing redundancy may struggle to win unfair dismissal claims even when their employer rushes the process, unless they can show the role was still required.
✓ Claims checked against the source and corrected before publish. checked 7 d ago
