Deakin University will face the Fair Work Commission on allegations it underpaid staff across its four campuses.
The National Tertiary Education Union (NETU) has applied to the wages referee to mediate the dispute. It was first raised with the university in June.
The union has alleged the university paid staff a piece rate per course, student or assessment, rather than hours worked.
NTEU Victorian division secretary Sarah Roberts said the university had left the union "no choice" but to apply to the watchdog.
"We've provided clear evidence of system wage theft only for them to refuse to pay back the money that is owed," Ms Roberts said.
The NTEU alleges casual workers are working up to two or three times more than the remuneration they are receiving.
"We know casual employment and wage theft go hand in hand, with people fearing for their precarious jobs at risk of exploitation," Ms Roberts said.
Deakin denies accusations
A spokesperson for Deakin University denied it had been underpaying sessional academic staff.
"We have been working extensively with the NETU and staff members to resolve these issues as a matter of priority," the spokesperson said.
"The NTEU has rejected several attempts at resolving the issue and, to date, the evidence presented by the NTEU does not support their claims."
New wage theft laws unlikely to apply
The allegations came to light on the same day the first charges were levelled under Victoria's new criminal wage theft laws.
Former president of the Law Institute of Victoria Mark Woods told ABC Regional Victorian Mornings the criminal laws strengthened existing civil rules.
"That's why the government decided to introduce these pretty revolutionary new laws in the first place, because if a worker had been underpaid, if that was proven, it was generally the response of the employer to say, 'Sorry, that was a miscalculation'," he said.
But Mr Woods said the rules were unlikely to apply to the Deakin University case.
"Because there's no argument that the university has committed a crime; they're not doing anything dishonestly," Mr Woods said.
"It's a pretty complicated civil dispute, as always exists between academics, but there's no suggestion anyone has been dishonest."
