If a casual employee is unfairly dismissed by their employer during a period of casual engagement, the employee can bring an unjustified dismissal personal grievance. "Casual" does not mean "no rights".
Casual employees have the same rights as permanent employees. The Employment Relations Act 2000 does not distinguish a casual employee from a permanent employee which can cause confusion.
"Casual employment" is about the reality of the working relationship, not the label in the agreement. Casual employees still have the same minimum rights as permanent employees. The main difference is usually the work pattern - casual work is genuinely irregular and offered as needed.
Problems arise when an employer calls someone "casual" but in practice the person works regular shifts, is expected to be available, or is treated like a permanent part time employee. In those situations, the ERA may treat the relationship as ongoing employment, with the usual obligations around process, notice, holidays, and dismissal justification.
Casual employees are still employees. Minimum rights generally include:
The biggest legal risk is "casual in name only". Common indicators of an ongoing employment relationship include:
If the relationship has become ongoing, then reducing hours or ending the work may be treated as a termination that must be justified and procedurally fair. That is where employers get exposed to personal grievance claims.
In genuine casual work, a shift can end at the end of the shift and there may be no further shifts offered. But where work is regular and ongoing in reality, ending it without a fair process can become an unjustified dismissal claim.
If you want true casual arrangements, document and run them like true casual arrangements:
If you have been taken off the roster, dismissed from casual work, or you are unsure whether your "casual" role is really casual,
the fastest way is to submit the case form with your roster history, key documents, and a short timeline.
Employee Case Form
If a casual employee is unfairly dismissed by their employer during a period of casual engagement, the employee can bring an unjustified dismissal personal grievance. "Casual" does not mean "no rights".
Strict conditions must be met for an employer to pay an employee pay-as-you-go holiday pay in casual employment and fixed-term employment placements that exceed 12 months.
In Neil Armstrong v Surplus Brokers Ltd [2019] NZERA 235, the ERA found a casual employee was unjustifiably dismissed during a period of engagement. The Authority awarded $9,000 compensation (after 10% reduction for contributory conduct) and imposed a $1,000 penalty for failing to provide an intended employment agreement.