There are reasons for dismissal that are automatically unfair. If you are dismissed for any of these reasons, you should be able to file an unfair dismissal application in an employment tribunal. There are several ways in which your dismissal could be unfair: if the work done by a person is provided for in an enterprise agreement or in a transitional instrument based on the agreement, the person may have an annual rate of pay above the high income threshold and nevertheless fall within the jurisdiction of the Fair Work Commission. In the event that a commercial dispute cannot be resolved after conciliation at MOM and there has been an impasse in the negotiations, the commercial dispute may then be referred to the Industrial Arbitration Court (IAC). The escalation of a trade dispute over the IAC for arbitration should be a last resort, which is only possible if all attempts at conciliation have failed. All collective agreements that set the duration of the contract, which cannot be less than three years, must be considered by the labour tribunal, i.e. as a binding, valid and enforceable document. These agreements are considered to be accurate and become mandatory for the parties and for workers employed or subsequently employed in the company to which the agreement relates, whether or not they are members of the union (section 17, IRA). The Industry Tribunal may refuse to recognize agreements that do not advance national economic interests. Some 379 collective agreements were made aware in 1991. It was not until 1995 and 1997 that this figure slightly exceeded 400. Since 2004, the number of collective agreements has increased from 369 in 2003 to 263 in 2005 (labour court figures, July 20, 2006).

Before a union can represent its members in collective bargaining, it must first be recognized by the employer. The unionization process is provided for in labour relations (recognition of a workers` union). For those who pass rewards to agreements, the Labor government has introduced a non-disadvantage test on agreements to ensure that agreements would not be used to reduce wages and conditions relative to bonuses. The awards were awarded as a safety net for business bargaining. The non-disadvantage test contained weaknesses from the start and was gradually watered down by Labour and coalition governments. In addition, the effectiveness of rewards as a safety net has been compromised by changes in the way they operate. Some of these changes have been indirect due to barriers to updating procurement rules and weakening enforcement mechanisms. However, others have been more direct and have been used to reduce the content of labour pricing standards. Under the Labor government, the AIRC had been encouraged to liberalize the rewards clauses, but the big change came in 1996 with the advent of the coalition government, which initiated a process of simplification of public procurement. This meant limiting the AIRC`s powers to 20 “authorized procurement issues.”