See Fair Work Act s.387(b)
Notification of 'the reason' relates to the 'valid reason' for dismissal.
Notification of the valid reason to terminate must be given to the employee:
In Crozier v Palazzo Corporation Pty Ltd, the Full Bench established the following:
 As a matter of logic procedural fairness would require that an employee be notified of a valid reason for their termination before any decision is taken to terminate their employment in order to provide them with an opportunity to respond to the reason identified. Section 170CG (3)(b) and (c) would have very little (if any) practical effect if it was sufficient to notify employees and give them an opportunity to respond after a decision had been taken to terminate their employment. Much like shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted.
Although considering provisions in previous legislation, the principle in Crozier v Palazzo Corporation Pty Ltd remains unchanged and continues to apply.
 Chubb Security Australia Pty Ltd v Thomas, Print S2679 (AIRCFB, McIntyre VP, Marsh SDP, Larkin C, 2 February 2000) at para. 41.
 Crozier v Palazzo Corporation Pty Limited t/as Noble Park Storage and Transport, Print S5897 (AIRCFB, Ross VP, Acton SDP, Cribb C, 11 May 2000) at paras 70–73, [(2000) 98 IR 137].
 Previsic v Australian Quarantine Inspection Services, Print Q3730 (AIRC, Holmes C, 6 October 1998).
 Crozier v Palazzo Corporation Pty Limited t/as Noble Park Storage and Transport, Print S5897 (AIRCFB, Ross VP, Acton SDP, Cribb C, 11 May 2000) at para. 73, [(2000) 98 IR 137].
 See for example Gooch v Proware Pty Ltd T/A TSM (The Service Manager)  FWA 10626 (Cargill C, 20 December 2012).