Login or become a Shortlist subscriber

Casuals ruling a "welcome" shift for employers

A finding that 14 months of weekly casual work wasn't "regular and systematic" signals a shift in the Fair Work Commission's reasoning that is good for employers, while it stands, a lawyer says.

Geraldton Fisherman's Co-Operative objected to the casual process attendant's unfair dismissal claim on the basis the employee, despite having worked for it for more than a year, hadn't satisfied the minimum employment period.

It said the employee didn't have six months' continuous service as she hadn't been employed on a regular and systematic basis, and that even if she had, she couldn't have had a reasonable expectation of ongoing employment.

The FWC heard that due to the nature of the employer's operations, it was impossible to forward plan production, and therefore it couldn't guarantee casual staff ongoing work. As a result, it maintained a pool of casuals who were offered shifts daily, depending on production needs.

The employee agreed that she was usually offered each shift the day before it started, but said she had worked every week over a 14-month period...