Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 07 DECEMBER 2016

Disharmony from within: casual confusion reigns

The recent Skene decision makes the definition of casual employee uncertain and unpredictable for business and employees.

AustraliaEmployment and HR

In 1936 the High Court of Australia described casual employment as intermittent or irregular work. It is fair to say that employment, and casual employment, has evolved since then; "Toto, I have a feeling we're not in Kansas anymore".

Employers breathed a sigh of relief when the Full Bench of the Fair Work Commission acknowledged as much.

In the decision of Telum Civil (Qld) Pty Ltd v Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union [2013] FWCFB 2434, the Full Bench found that a casual engaged and paid as such, who received the benefit of a casual loading to compensate them for entitlements otherwise applying to permanent employment, would be double dipping if they then sought to recover entitlements associated with permanent employment.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from