Australian Journal of Labour Law

The Australian Journal of Labour Law is published by LexisNexis in three issues per year.

The Journal is designed to be of service both to the academic community and to practitioners in labour law and industrial relations.

The Journal seeks to publish articles, notes and comments, and detailed commentaries upon recent cases and legislation in the field of labour law. Articles may deal with an area of labour law in an analytical, theoretical or empirical fashion. Contributions detailing or analysing the importance of recent developments in labour law, or dealing with issues of policy and reform are also welcomed. The Journal is controlled by an Editorial Committee following a formal process of peer review.

Although the primary focus of the Journal is on Australian labour law, articles and contributions on overseas developments will be accepted for publication where they are of relevance to the Australian situation.

Call  for Papers

Special Issue, Issue 2, 2027 - Abstracts due: 1 July 2026
This special issue of the Australian Journal of Labour Law seeks to celebrate and commemorate Richard Mitchell’s retirement from academia and his significant contribution to the field in Australia, and internationally.

Please click here for more information.

Inquiries regarding subscriptions or particular issues of the Journal should be directed to the Product Manager

Australian Journal of Labour Law
LexisNexis
Locked Bag 2222
Chatswood Delivery Centre
Chatswood NSW 2067

For general queries, please email: law-ajll@unimelb.edu.au

Website
www.lexisnexis.com.au

Contributions and correspondence concerning the various sections of the Journal's activities should be addressed as follows.

Editors

  • Tess Hardy – University of Melbourne
  • Ingrid Landau – Monash University


Associate Editor

  • Tom Hvala


Editorial Assistants

  • To be confirmed

From time to time, the AJLL recruits editorial assistants to assist with editing submissions. If you are interested in undertaking editing work, please contact the Associate Editor at law-ajll@unimelb.edu.au


Editorial Committee

  • Pauline Bomball
  • Josh Bornstein
  • Anna Chapman
  • Sean Cooney
  • Amanda Coulthard
  • Tom Dixon
  • Dawn Duncan
  • Keith Ewing
  • Colin Fenwick
  • Anthony Forsyth
  • Judy Fudge
  • Emma Goodwin
  • Laura Hilly
  • Natalie James
  • Richard Johnstone
  • Jillian Murray
  • Paul O'Grady
  • Graeme Orr
  • Rosemary Owens
  • Marilyn Pittard
  • Joellen Riley Munton
  • Justice Iain JK Ross
  • Graham Smith
  • Carolyn Sutherland
  • Joo-Cheong Tham
  • Justice M J Walton

In preparing material for submission of an article, authors should be guided by the following points:

  1. Where an earlier version of a submission has been published as a working paper or conference paper, the Journal will only proceed with the submission where it is significantly different to the earlier working paper or conference paper.
  2. Manuscript Presentation
    All article manuscripts should be emailed as a Microsoft Word document to law-ajll@unimelb.edu.au. Case notes and other short pieces should be emailed direct to the appropriate section editor. Electronic submissions need not be accompanied by paper copies.
  3. Title
    Each manuscript should have a title which is both succinct and descriptive.
  4. Abstract
    An abstract of no more than 150 words must be supplied at the beginning of each article. The abstract should briefly outline the structure and content of the article and summarise its conclusions.
  5. Footnotes
    These should be numbered consecutively throughout and appear at the foot of the page. All bibliographical details, case citations etc should be contained in the footnotes and not in the text. Footnotes should not be used to make substantive points.
  6. Word length policy
    In making editorial decisions we will accept articles up to 12,000 words (including footnotes), and section contributions up to 5,000 words (including footnotes).

Please click here for a copy of the Style Guidelines (updated September 2025).

2026 Volume 39 Issue 1

Articles

Industrial Legislation in Australia in 2025
Adriana Orifici

Abstract

This article reviews industrial legislation reform in Australia in 2025 and highlights significant changes and key trends. While fewer reforms were passed by the Commonwealth Parliament in 2025 than in the previous three years, key legislative changes were enacted under the Workplace Gender Equality Amendment (Setting Gender Equality Targets) Act 2025 (Cth), Fair Work Amendment (Protecting Penalty and Overtime Rates) Act 2025 (Cth) and Fair Work Amendment (Baby Priya’s) Act 2025 (Cth). States and territories reformed regimes that regulate labour hire, wage theft, and long service leave portability. The Parliaments of Victoria, New South Wales and the Australian Capital Territory respectively engaged in significant reforms of their state and territory-specific statutory frameworks about anti-discrimination, industrial relations, and workers’ compensation.

Major Court and Tribunal Decisions in 2025
Caroline Kelly

Abstract

This article explores significant court and tribunal decisions in Australian labour law in 2025. It does so according to nine key categories or themes which span a broad range of subjects and jurisdictions. A number of the selected cases or categories of cases shed important light upon the interpretation and application of relatively new provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (‘FW Act’) which were introduced as part of the Closing Loopholes reforms including in relation to employment status; delegates’ rights; same job, same pay provisions; and flexible working arrangements. Others clarify parts of the FW Act which have heretofore received little attention, including the meaning of genuine redundancy and the concept of political opinion in unlawful termination. Yet others consider complex questions of award interpretation; interaction of award entitlements with contractual terms and statutory provisions; and questions of civil penalties and deterrence. The article concludes by drawing some observations from the selected cases and categories relating to, among other things, the protective purposes of the FW Act; the challenges presented by evolving and sometimes conflicting expectations about flexibility in the modern world of work; major compliance failures by large or publicly significant employers; and the significance of procedural obligations imposed upon employers under awards and legislation.

Inconsistencies in Industrial Manslaughter Laws and Category 1 Reckless Offences in Australia: Same, Same — But Different?
Trajce Cvetkovski and Neville Weston

Abstract

The introduction of industrial manslaughter laws in every Australian jurisdiction suggests a consistent approach to the prosecution of serious workplace health and safety crimes. However, this article argues these laws, and recent amendments to Category 1 reckless offences, have resulted in significant inconsistencies which have undermined the goal of legislative uniformity. A comparative analysis of these provisions reveals substantial differences. A disjointed approach has created a patchwork of legal obligations for organisations operating nationally. This article contends that the lack of harmonisation poses significant challenges for corporate compliance and raises concerns regarding the equitable application of criminal sanctions for officers. In particular, the expanded scope for alternative offences in the commission of serious crimes, and the divergent approaches to attribution of individual conduct to corporate entities through imputation complicate the landscape of workplace safety law in Australia. The article concludes that ad hoc and incremental changes have created unintended consequences for national legislative reform.

Practice and Procedure

Pecuniary Penalty Orders in Fair Work Act Sexual Harassment Claims: Are They an Effective Deterrent?
Tae Kim

Abstract

The express prohibition against sexual harassment in s 527D(1) of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (‘FW Act’) has been in place since 6 March 2023. Introduced following Recommendation 28 of the Respect@Work: National Inquiry into Sexual Harassment in Australian Workplaces report (‘Respect@Work Report’), and enacted pursuant to the foreign affairs power, this provision enables sexual harassment claims to be brought under the FW Act. A s 527D(1) contravention can attract a pecuniary penalty, alongside other remedies including compensation and injunctive orders.

This article examines the extent to which pecuniary penalty orders (or the risk of such an order) in the FW Act sexual harassment claims may operate as a deterrent against sexual harassment and influence organisational behaviour in addressing and preventing sexual harassment. It does so by, firstly, examining the limitations in the remedies that are presently available for sexual harassment claims under state and federal anti-discrimination laws (whilst noting present reform proposals in this context) and considering how authorities concerning the application of the FW Act’s penalty regime may apply to contraventions of s 527D(1). Secondly, it considers the procedural limitations that apply before penalties for an alleged contravention of s 527D(1) can be sought, and the Fair Work Ombudsman’s (‘FWO’) potential enforcement role in this context, to assess how these matters may enhance or diminish deterrence against conduct that contravenes s 527D(1). Finally, this article briefly analyses cognate provisions in Western Australia and New South Wales industrial legislation to examine how certain aspects of these regimes may impact the deterrent effect of penalties under the FW Act’s regime, especially where (as is the case in Western Australia) a worker can bring a sexual harassment claim in either jurisdiction even if they are a national system employee.

Book Review

A Fair Day’s Work: The Quest to Win Back Time, Sean Scalmer
Christopher Arup

International Association of Labour Law Journals

View a list of foreign labour law journals