Jess JohnsonWhen Zach Merrett told Essendon he wanted to play for Hawthorn, Australia stopped and watched. The former Bombers captain — one of the most decorated midfielders of his generation — had formally requested a trade to a rival club. Essendon flatly refused. The saga dragged across an entire off-season, ended Merrett's captaincy, and left millions of fans asking a question that resonates far beyond football: can your employer actually stop you from leaving for a better opportunity?
What the AFL's Trade Rules Actually Say
In the AFL, contracted players have virtually no unilateral right to move clubs if their originating club refuses. Under the AFL and AFLPA Collective Bargaining Agreement 2023–2027, a player under contract may request a trade — but the club holding that contract has complete authority to decline. Hawthorn's final offer for Merrett reportedly included Pick 10, Pick 22, a 2026 first-round pick, and Henry Hustwaite in exchange for Merrett and a 2027 third-round pick. Essendon stood firm. No trade. No move. Regardless of the player's wishes.
The only meaningful escape clause for a contracted AFL player is if the club agrees to the trade, or if the player serves out their contract and qualifies for free agency — typically requiring eight or more years of service at one club. Merrett is contracted until the end of 2027, and Essendon has since tabled a multi-year extension that would keep him at the club well into his mid-30s.
What makes this case particularly striking is the May 2026 revelation that then-coach Brad Scott had actually supported the trade internally — only to be overridden by club management. The player's manager wanted out. The coach agreed. The club said no. The contract held.
Why the Merrett Situation Mirrors Ordinary Australian Workplaces
The AFL's player contract system is an extreme version of something thousands of Australians encounter every year: signing a fixed-term agreement or restraint-of-trade clause that limits your ability to simply walk out the door and join a competitor.
Under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth), employees have robust baseline protections — but those protections do not automatically override a legitimately structured employment contract. Three specific mechanisms are commonly used by Australian employers to hold employees in place:
Fixed-term contracts bind both parties for an agreed duration. An employee who resigns early may be in breach, potentially exposing themselves to a damages claim calculated on the employer's actual loss — recruitment costs, project delays, and replacement training often combine to produce claims in the range of $25,000 to $100,000 for mid-to-senior roles.
Restraint of trade clauses — standard in senior corporate, finance, technology, and professional services roles — restrict which employers a departing employee can join, for how long, and within what geographic area. Typical restraints range from six to 24 months, and courts assess their enforceability using a reasonableness standard.
Garden leave provisions allow employers to pay out a notice period while requiring the employee to stay away from competitors during that time — effectively a paid holding pattern that prevents them from starting their new role for weeks or months.
AFL contracts sit at the most extreme end of this spectrum, but the underlying legal logic — that an employer can hold you to the terms you voluntarily signed — applies across virtually every Australian industry. As a legal expert would note, the fact that you want to leave does not entitle you to leave.
When the Contract Traps You: What Actually Happens
For readers who follow AFL news closely, the Merrett saga illustrates something most employment lawyers see regularly: the power asymmetry between employer and employee is most visible — and most consequential — the moment an employee wants to move to a direct competitor.
Merrett's situation also generated a secondary story that got less attention: the mental health and performance cost of being legally bound to a workplace you want to leave. Merrett's first match back in 2026 saw him record just 11 disposals as Essendon were defeated by 90 points against Brisbane — a performance interim coach Dean Solomon described diplomatically as a rare "off night." Whether the contractual limbo contributed to that performance is impossible to prove, but it raises a real question for workers in similar positions: what are the personal and professional costs of enforcing a contract against an unwilling party?
Legal experts working in employment law advise that employers often underestimate this cost when deciding whether to enforce a restraint or fixed-term obligation. Winning the legal argument can mean retaining a disengaged employee who drives down team morale and delivers reduced output for the duration of their remaining contract — exactly the dynamic AFL observers noted with Merrett through the early months of 2026.
Concrete Case: The Project Manager Offered a $95,000 Pay Rise With 14 Months Left on Her Contract
Consider this realistic scenario. A Brisbane-based project manager — call her Naomi — signed a two-year fixed-term contract with a construction firm in January 2025 at a salary of $135,000 per year. The contract includes a 12-month restraint covering "civil construction project management roles in Queensland."
In March 2026, a competing firm approaches Naomi with an offer of $230,000 — a jump of $95,000 annually. She has 14 months remaining on her current contract.
Naomi tells her employer she wants to leave. They refuse to release her.
If Naomi resigns and joins the new employer immediately: Her current employer has grounds to seek an injunction enforcing the restraint clause, which could prevent her from starting at the new firm for up to 12 months. They could also sue for breach of contract damages — typically assessed as the documented cost of replacing her, which for a senior PM role could run to $40,000–$75,000 in recruitment, onboarding, and project disruption costs.
If the restraint is challenged in court: Australian courts apply a proportionality test. A 12-month restraint on a project manager whose role is largely operational — and who does not have access to trade secrets or key client relationships — may be found excessive. Courts in Queensland have repeatedly narrowed or voided restraints where the employer could not demonstrate a genuine business interest proportionate to the restriction imposed.
The financial outcome: If the restraint is voided, Naomi may be able to join the new firm within weeks. If it holds, her $95,000 pay rise is effectively delayed by 12 months — costing her roughly $79,000 in lost income during the restraint period. Either way, the legal costs of reaching that outcome — without advice sought before signing or before resigning — routinely exceed $15,000.
The difference between Naomi's best and worst outcome often comes down to a single question: did she seek legal advice before signing the original contract in 2025?
For AFL players, the CBA provides collective bargaining protections negotiated by the AFLPA on behalf of all players. For individual workers in the private sector, that equivalent protection often doesn't exist unless it's been deliberately built into the contract — or defended in court.
What a Legal Expert Would Recommend Before You Sign — or Before You Walk
The Merrett case is a useful reminder that employment contracts have consequences that aren't always visible at the time of signing. A legal expert advising Australian workers in similar positions would typically recommend the following steps:
Before signing any fixed-term or senior employment contract, have an employment lawyer review restraint of trade clauses, fixed-term exit provisions, and any intellectual property assignment clauses. Negotiating these terms before signing is far cheaper than challenging them after a dispute arises.
If you're already under contract and want to leave, get advice on whether your restraint clause is likely to be enforceable. Australian courts do not automatically enforce all restraints — the geographic scope, duration, and relationship to genuine business interests are all contested. A clause that looks absolute on paper may be significantly narrowed or voided by a court.
Consider negotiating a mutual release. As with Essendon's eventual decision to offer Merrett a revised multi-year extension rather than continue the standoff, employers often prefer a negotiated resolution over expensive litigation against a disengaged employee. A well-timed, professionally worded request — ideally supported by legal advice — can sometimes unlock a commercial resolution that protects both parties.
Document everything. If your employer has behaved in a way that arguably constitutes constructive dismissal — making your working conditions so difficult that leaving becomes the only reasonable option — that changes the legal calculus significantly. Courts treat forced departures very differently from voluntary ones.
The Merrett saga will likely continue through the 2026 trade period. For football fans watching the saga unfold on the back pages, it offers something more broadly useful than a sports drama: a real-world case study in what happens when employment contracts are enforced against unwilling parties — and why getting legal advice early can be the difference between a manageable situation and an expensive one.
To explore your options around employment contracts, restraint of trade clauses, or fixed-term agreements, Expert Zoom connects you with qualified legal experts who can review your specific situation. See also what happened when another AFL player — Sam Switkowski — had his retirement entitlements come under scrutiny, in a case that revealed similar blind spots in understanding employment contract rights.
This article provides general information only and does not constitute legal advice. Employment contract disputes, restraint of trade clauses, and fixed-term contract obligations vary significantly depending on individual circumstances. Consult a qualified Australian employment lawyer before making decisions about your contract.
