There are a number of factors in determining whether a casual employee is engaged on a regular and systematic basis, as highlighted in the case of Greene v Floreat Hotel Pty Ltd [2020] FWCFB 609.
Ms Green was employed as a casual food and beverage attendant at the Floreat Hotel. She was allocated a basic roster each week and performed additional shifts as required. Ms Green was always given the first choice of hours and days, and effectively able to select when and for how long she worked each week.
The business decided to reduce its use of casuals due to increased staffing costs and offered Ms Green permanent employment. Initially she refused, but later accepted the offer after she was offered fewer casual shifts.
Shortly after Ms Green commenced permanent employment, she was stood down due to government directions around the closure of hospitality venues. She was later informed her position was redundant.
Ms Green’s unfair dismissal application was initially dismissed on the basis she had not worked the minimum employment period as a permanent employee to qualify for protection against unfair dismissal.
On appeal, a FWC Full Bench confirmed Ms Green did qualify for protection as her engagement as a casual employee was on a regular and systematic basis.
- Ms Green’s engagement was regular because she was consistently engaged to work substantial hours each weeks which averaged at approximately 36 hours per week.
- Her engagement was systematic because she worked in accordance with a roster and the rostered hours constituted the large majority of the hours she actually worked each week.
By including this engagement in the count toward her total period of employment, the Full Bench found she worked well over the minimum employment period required.
Ms Green’s unfair dismissal application has been referred back to the FWC for final determination.
