Casual redundancies: what are they?

Did you know that over 2.6 million Australians work as casual employees, making up nearly a quarter of the country’s workforce?

With economic uncertainty putting businesses under increasing financial strain, reducing workplace costs through redundancies can seem like an easy fix. But navigating casual redundancies without a fair and compliant process can lead to costly mistakes. For employers, it’s not just about balancing the books; it’s about getting it legally right.

Here, we explain what a casual redundancy is and break down the critical steps to ensure the redundancy process is handled compliantly.

What is a casual redundancy?

Termination of an employee’s employment is generally something businesses want to avoid; however, when they experience challenging times, budget cuts can be a necessity.

The Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (FW Act) defines genuine redundancy as:

1. a) the person’s employer no longer required the person’s job to be performed by anyone because of changes in the operational requirements of the employer’s enterprise; and
2. b) the employer has complied with any obligation in a modern award or enterprise agreement that applied to the employment to consult about the redundancy.

However, a dismissal will not be a case of genuine redundancy if it would have been reasonable in all the circumstances for the person to be redeployed within the employer’s enterprise or an associated enterprise.

Casual employees and unfair dismissal laws:

An employee will be considered a casual employee if the employment relationship has no firm advance commitment to ongoing work and the employee is entitled to a casual loading. A casual employee is paid a casual loading in lieu of receiving permanent entitlements such as paid personal and annual leave and notice of termination of employment. This means when an employee is engaged as a casual employee, they are not entitled to receive from their employer, nor are they obligated to give to their employer, notice of termination.

However, a casual employee, if deemed to be a regular and systematic casual employee who has a reasonable expectation of continuing employment on a regular and systematic basis, is eligible to make an unfair dismissal claim upon the termination of their employment. Guidance from case law suggests that the term ‘regular’ implies a repetitive pattern (not necessarily frequent or constant), and ‘systematic’ requires the engagement to be something that could fairly be called a system, method or plan.

Since regular and systematic employees have access to make an unfair dismissal claim, it is important advice be sought prior to proceeding to termination of employment.

Making casual employees redundant:

Most of the time, the reason why an employer will choose to end a casual employee’s employment is because the causal employee is surplus to the operational requirements of the business and the role is no longer required to be performed.

A common misconception is that employers can simply stop providing shifts to the casual employee and terminate their employment immediately.  While this is sometimes true, in the instance where a casual employee is defined as a regular and systematic casual employee, the employer is obligated to apply a procedurally fair termination process, as you would when terminating the employment of a permanent employee. In a situation where the casual employee’s role is no longer required to be performed due to operational changes within the business, employers must proceed with conducting a redundancy process, which involves:

1. consulting with the employee about the decision to make their role redundant (if the employee is award covered, this is an obligation, however, best practice is to consult with employees regardless of whether they’re award covered or not); and
2. consider whether there are any reasonable redeployment opportunities for redeployment and offer such opportunities to the affected employee for their consideration.

Failing to abide by a robust genuine redundancy process risks the casual employee applying to the Fair Work Commission (FWC) claiming unfair dismissal.

Hugh Mooney v Unite Resourcing, Jamie O’Regan [2025] FWC 165

In the recent case of Mooney, Mr Mooney was a casual labour hire worker who was advised by his employer, three days after commencing employment, that he was “no longer required to return to site”. Mr Mooney lodged an unfair dismissal application in the FWC claiming he had been unfairly dismissed, and his employer raised a jurisdictional objection claiming he wasn’t dismissed because he was a casual employee who had no reasonable expectation of ongoing employment.

The FWC in this case didn’t consider whether Mr Mooney was a regular and systematic employee eligible to pursue an unfair dismissal claim (this wasn’t an issue raised by the employer – the employer argued that Mr Mooney wasn’t dismissed by relying on the clause in Mr Mooney’s contract which stated he wasn’t guaranteed work and didn’t have any reasonable expectation of continuous work). Despite this, the FWC found that Mr Mooney was dismissed from his employment at the initiative of his employer (which was confirmed by his employer in submissions since it specifically stated that “the decision to terminate Mr Mooney’s employment was made based on operational requirements”).

Specifically, the FWC found that the clause in Mr Mooney’s contract that provided that casuals don’t have an advance commitment to continuing and indefinite work wasn’t “some loophole that means casuals cannot be dismissed. It simply means that there is no expectation of continuing work”.

Key takeaways:

Don’t be fooled – regular and systematic casual employees are eligible to make an unfair dismissal claim. Therefore, it’s important that when you have decided to terminate a casual employee’s employment, whether it’s due to conduct concerns or because you no longer require their role, you engage in a complaint termination process (as you would with respect to a permanent employee).

How Citation HR can help

It’s crucial that businesses proceed with caution when proposing redundancies. Redundancy can be tricky, but if you follow a fair and compliant process, there is no need to fear an employee making a successful unfair dismissal risk on the basis of the redundancy not being genuine. This is where Citation HR’s industry-leading HR Software and workplace relations specialists can guide you through the complexities of redundancies, helping ensure that you meet all provisions for redundancy and the requirements for consultation outlined in relevant modern awards or enterprise agreements. You can book a free consultation here to see how we help your business.

About our author

Ilana Kaye is a Workplace Relations Consultant at Citation HR and assists various clients via the HR Advice Line. She has a degree in Economics and Management (BSc), and is Level 7 CIPD (AHRI equivalent) qualified in Strategic People Management.