The Fair Work Commission is overhauling how it manages general protections dismissal claims, and AI is a significant part of why. If you have recently terminated an employee or are worried about a potential claim, here is what is changing, what is driving it, and what you need to do about it.
Why is the Commission doing this?
The short answer: the system is under enormous strain, and AI is a significant part of the reason. There were 6,209 general protections dismissal applications in 2024-25, a surge of 57 per cent in Q1 2025-26 against the three-year average. Total FWC applications reached more than 44,000 in 2024-25, 24 per cent above the five-year average, and the Commission is now projecting between 50,000 and 55,000 lodgements for 2025-26, growth of over 70 per cent in just three years.
Three things in particular are driving it. First, AI-generated claims: AI tools have significantly reduced the time and effort involved in commencing a claim, and while many applications are generically framed, they still require employers to devote time and resources to responding. Second, paid agents operating at volume: around 46 per cent of applicants were represented by a lawyer or paid agent, and about a quarter of those by a small group of just eight regular paid agents who, unlike lawyers, operate outside any professional conduct framework. Third, claims used as settlement leverage: a significant portion appears to be unfair dismissal claims in substance, reframed by AI tools as general protections applications to get around eligibility requirements and leverage an early settlement.
What changed, and when?
On 12 November 2025, the Commission announced significant reforms with immediate effect. The key reform is the application form: employee applicants filing their Form F8 must now clearly state the alleged breaches, replacing the old practice of just ticking boxes and filtering out generic AI-generated applications.
Other significant changes: late claims face a higher bar, with applicants who lodge after the 21-day deadline needing to explain why exceptional circumstances apply. Employer responses must be detailed, giving reasons for any jurisdictional objections in the Form F8A, as this may be the only opportunity to do so. Conferences are now shorter and settlement-focused, typically around one hour. And there is a stronger emphasis on early triage and case management.
Does this mean employers can sit back?
No, and this is the point most employers get wrong. Do not assume early resolution means no response is required. The usual guidance still requires employers to respond within 7 days of receiving the application. Failing to respond within the deadline, or filing a weak, generic response, can put your entire position at risk.
The safer approach is to act immediately: diarise the 7-day response deadline the moment you receive the application, review it carefully and identify any jurisdictional objections, gather all relevant documentation including contracts, warnings, performance records and termination letters, prepare your position and the genuine reason for dismissal, seek HR or legal advice before deciding how to respond, and detail your jurisdictional objections fully in the Form F8A.
What you still need to be able to show
Early resolution processes do not reduce the underlying risk. If a claim proceeds, you still need clear, documented evidence of the genuine and documented reason for the dismissal, the process followed before termination was decided, any prior warnings, performance discussions or PIPs, relevant policies, contracts and acknowledgements, whether any workplace rights were exercised before the dismissal, and why the decision was not connected to any prohibited reason under the Fair Work Act.
Settlement amounts in general protections matters appear to be trending upward, with more cases resolving above the 10,000 dollar mark. Because these matters are uncapped and often complex, employers may feel pressure to settle early even where a claim’s merits are weak. Strong documentation is your best leverage at the negotiating table, not just in a hearing.
The takeaway for Australian employers
The Commission is clearly moving toward earlier intervention, stronger case management and a more settlement-focused system, and it expects a higher level of preparation from the outset. For small and medium businesses this is both an opportunity and a warning. Faster processes are good, but faster processes that catch you underprepared, without documentation, without proper termination procedures, without compliant contracts, are far worse than the old system. Preventative HR is still the best defence. Get the foundations right before a dispute arises and you will be in a much stronger position, whether a claim is resolved in a 60-minute settlement conference or proceeds further.
This article is general in nature and does not constitute legal advice. Employment law matters are fact specific. If you have received a general protections application, seek advice from a qualified HR professional or employment lawyer promptly.
Principal, HR Automate. Senior HR and industrial relations practitioner.