Employment law for employers

Changes affecting unfair dismissal and minimum wage

HomePrivate: BlogCommercial lawEmployment law for employersChanges affecting unfair dismissal and minimum wage

by

reviewed by

Malcolm Burrows

Reading Time:

2–3 minutes

On 1 July 2016 three (3) significant changes to employment law came into effect:

  • the unfair dismissal high income threshold increased;
  • the maximum compensation for unfair dismissal claims increased; and
  • the minimum wage increased.

Employers need to be aware of these changes as they impact the rights of both current and future employees of a business.

Increase to high income threshold

An employee is protected from unfair dismissal under section 382 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (Act) if:

  • the person is an employee who has completed a period of employment with his or her employer of at least the minimum employment period; and
  • either:
    • a modern award covers the person;
    • an enterprise agreement applies to the person in relation to the employment; or
    • the employee’s earnings are less than the high income threshold.

The definition of “high income threshold” in section 333 of the Act, which relies on the calculation method stated in the Fair Work Regulations 2009 (Cth), was updated on 1 July 2016 from $136,700 to $138,900.  This means that more employees will have access to the unfair dismissal remedy.

Increase to maximum compensation

If it is satisfied that an employee has been unfairly dismissed, the Fair Work Commission (FWC), under section 390 of the Act, can order either:

  • that an employee be reinstated; or
  • if reinstatement is inappropriate, that the employee be compensated.

Pursuant to section 392(5) of the Act, the amount of compensation ordered must not exceed the “compensation cap”.  On 1 July 2016 this cap increased from $68,350 to $69,450.  This increase means that employees who have been unfairly dismissed may now be better compensated when reinstatement is not appropriate.

Increase of minimum wage

Section 282 of the Act provides for the Minimum Wage Panel to set and vary minimum wages for “national system employees” (employees not covered by an award or enterprise agreement).  On 1 July 2016 the national minimum wage was increased to $672.70 per 38 hour working week ($17.70 per hour).  This increase benefits the nation’s lowest paid employees, but was strongly opposed by many employers, especially retailers, who argued that the increase may cause them to cut their employee’s hours or prevent them from hiring new staff.

Takeaways for employers

When drafting employment contracts, employers must ensure that all national system employees receive the increased minimum wage, and must be conscious that employees who earn under the new high income threshold will have access to the unfair dismissal remedy.  Employers must also be aware of their liability to pay increased compensation if an employee is unfairly dismissed.

Links and further references

Legislation

Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth)

Fair Work Regulations 2009 (Cth)

Further information about employment law

If you are an employer who needs assistance drafting employment contracts or advice on another area of employment law, contact us for a confidential and obligation-free discussion:


Related insights about employment law

  • Individual Flexibility Arrangements: an overview

    Individual Flexibility Arrangements: an overview

    Modern awards and enterprise agreements set out the minimum terms and conditions of employment for most Australian workers performing different roles.  The Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (Act) provides a mechanism by which an employer and an individual employee may, by agreement, adjust the operation of certain terms in their Award to better suit theircircumstances. …

    Read more …

  • White-Anting: An employer’s lawful termination guide

    White-Anting: An employer’s lawful termination guide

    Employees who use White Anting tactics to deliberately undermine management or disrupt workplace harmony may be summarily dismissed, provided the relevant legal conditions are met and a proper process is followed.  Following our 28 April 2026 article “White Anting: serious misconduct?“, this article provides practical “how to” steps for employers to lawfully dismiss employees who…

    Read more …

  • White Anting: serious misconduct?

    White Anting: serious misconduct?

    White Anting is an Australian term meaning to sabotage, undermine, or destroy an organisation, project, or person from within.  White Anting in the workplace often involves the quiet, insidious undermining of a colleague or superior through gossip, withholding information, exclusion, or spreading doubt.  White Anting  has been recognised by psychologists as a psychosocial hazard and…

    Read more …

  • Franchisors must provide franchisees a reasonable opportunity to make a ROI

    Franchisors must provide franchisees a reasonable opportunity to make a ROI

    Recent reforms to the Franchising Code of Conduct introduced a new obligation requiring franchisors to give franchisees a reasonable opportunity to make a return on their investment (ROI).  This change reflects concern that some franchise arrangements required franchisees to make substantial upfront investments without a realistic opportunity to make a return on this investment.

    Read more …

  • Bill to allow victims of AI deepfakes to sue for emotional damages

    Bill to allow victims of AI deepfakes to sue for emotional damages

    On 24 November 2025, Senator David Pocock introduced a private Senator’s bill, the Online Safety and Other Legislation Amendment (My Face, My Rights) Bill 2025 (Cth) (Bill) to amend the Online Safety Act 2021 (Cth) (Online Safety Act) and the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth) (Privacy Act). 

    Read more …

  • Can a unit trust be wound up by the oppression remedies

    Can a unit trust be wound up by the oppression remedies

    The Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (Corps Act) grants the Courts the power to award remedies under section 233, specifically designed to address situations of oppression within corporate entities under section 232.  These remedies, also known as the “Oppression Remedies”, aim to resolve situations where a company’s conduct unfairly prejudices its members or shareholders.  While primarily…

    Read more …

  • Dundas Lawyers achieves SMB1001 gold level cyber security certification

    Dundas Lawyers achieves SMB1001 gold level cyber security certification

    On 14 November 2025 Dundas Lawyers achieved the Gold level of the SMB1001 cybersecurity standard.

    Read more …

  • OAIC publishes new guidance for under-16s social media ban

    OAIC publishes new guidance for under-16s social media ban

    On 10 October 2025, the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC), led by Privacy Commissioner, Ms Carly Kind, released a twenty-nine (29) page Privacy Guidance on Part 4A (Social Media Minimum Age) of the Online Safety Act 2021 (New Guidance).  This New Guidance details the privacy obligations for Age-Restricted Social Media Platforms (Restricted Platforms)…

    Read more …

  • Aust Clinical Labs fined $5.8mil for failing to report data breach

    Aust Clinical Labs fined $5.8mil for failing to report data breach

    On 8 October 2025, the Federal Court published the judgement of Justice Halley in the case of Australian Information Commissioner v Australian Clinical Labs Limited (No 2) [2025] FCA 1224 (AIC v ACL).  Australian Clinical Labs Limited (ACL) was ordered to pay $5.8 million in civil penalties in relation to a 2022 data breach.  This…

    Read more …

Send this to a friend