Should employers be worried about AI-drafted FWC complaints?

What the FWC case showed

In a recent decision, a general protections application was dismissed by the FWC after the applicant repeatedly relied on provisions of his contract and award that didn’t exist. It emerged that the applicant had used generative AI to help draft his submission – and that the AI had, in effect, invented evidence from his own contract.

The FWC noted the AI was used to extract information from the applicant’s contract, suggesting he wasn’t fully across the contractual agreements he’d entered into. The fabricated provisions were presented as real. They weren’t.

The case was dismissed. But the implications for employers go well beyond the outcome of one hearing.

The volume problem

The FWC has linked a 70 per cent rise in its workload over three years, in part, to employees using AI tools to lodge claims faster. That’s not a coincidence – it’s a structural shift in how workplace disputes are initiated.

The President of the FWC, Justice Adam Hatcher, put it plainly after conducting his own test with ChatGPT. He described providing basic facts about a dismissal scenario and receiving, in under 10 minutes, a completed application under section 365 of the Fair Work Act, a witness statement, and an estimated compensation range of $15,000 to $40,000 – for a case that, on the facts provided, had no reasonable prospects of success.

His concern wasn’t just the speed. It was what happens when AI tools invent facts to prop up a weak claim, or help someone who doesn’t meet the qualifying criteria for unfair dismissal pivot seamlessly to a general protections application instead.

What this means for employers

AI-drafted claims are still the claims of the employee. The fact that a tool generated the content doesn’t change who’s responsible for it, and it doesn’t make a weak claim automatically dismissible. Employers still need to respond, prepare, and engage the process – regardless of how the application was put together.

Citation Group’s Workforce Pulse Report puts it plainly. “Compliance claims and unfair dismissal are only part of the picture,” says Brittany Byrne, Partner at Citation Legal. “Access to information, whether legally grounded or not, gives people the confidence to challenge workplace decisions that impact them.”

That’s the practical reality. AI has lowered the barrier to lodging a complaint significantly. Employees don’t need to understand the Fair Work Act to file under it – they just need to describe their situation to a chatbot.

What employers should do now

This isn’t a reason to panic. It is a reason to make sure your documentation, contracts, and processes are in order before a claim arrives – not after.

Clear employment contracts, well-documented performance management, and sound termination processes remain the most effective defence against any complaint, AI-assisted or otherwise. If a claim does land, getting legal advice early matters. The sooner you understand what you’re dealing with, the better placed you are to respond.

If you’re unsure whether your current practices would hold up to scrutiny, now is a good time to find out.

Want the full picture on how AI is reshaping workplace risk?

The Workforce Pulse Report breaks down where employers are exposed – from AI-assisted claims to payroll, safety, and compliance gaps – and what to do about it before a claim lands on your desk.