High Court Decides on Workpac v Rossato

Phil Brunner • Aug 16, 2021

On 4 August 2021, the High Court unanimously overturned the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia’s decision in Workpac Pty Ltd v Rossato [2020] FCAFC 84 and the precedent set in the Full Federal Court judgment of Skene v WorkPac Pty Ltd (2018) 264 FCR 536, being cases which dealt with the nature of casual employment. 

In WorkPac v Rossato & Ors [2021] HCA 23 (‘WorkPac v Rossato’), the High Court found that Mr Rossato was a casual employee for the purposes of WorkPac’s Enterprise Agreement and the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth), thus excluding Mr Rossato from entitlements, such as paid annual leave, that apply to permanent employees. 

To read more about the Federal Court decision, you can view our article here

Background

Mr Rossato was employed by WorkPac, a labour hire company, on a series of separate casual employment contracts between 2014 and 2018 and was recognised (and paid) as a casual employee under WorkPac’s 2012 Mining (Coal) Industry Enterprise Agreement.
After his last engagement with WorkPac had ended, Mr Rossato claimed he was a permanent employee rather than a casual and was therefore entitled to receive annual leave and personal leave entitlements. In particular, Mr Rossato claimed:
  • He had regular and ongoing employment, due to receiving a set roster a year in advance in addition to regular shift patterns;
  • His shift hours were standard and rarely deviated from his roster; and
  • WorkPac expected Mr Rossato would attend every shift.
Overall, the core issues before the High Court were whether Mr Rossato had a ‘firm advanced commitment’ that was an enforceable term of his contract, and whether the express terms of Mr Rossato’s written contracts of employment had primacy. 

High Court Decision

The majority of the High Court rejected the notion that the employment relationship between the parties was to be established by analysing ‘the real substance, practical reality and true nature of that relationship’. In considering whether Mr Rossato had any ‘firm advance commitment as to the duration of his employment’ the Court identified that the appropriate method to assess this question was to look to the employee’s several written employment contracts. 

In particular, the Court noted the express terms of Mr Rossato’s contracts, including:
  • Mr Rossato was engaged on several separate contracts for specified periods of time; 
  • Mr Rossato could accept or reject any offer of work; 
  • the contract could be terminated on one hour’s notice; 
  • Mr Rossato did receive a casual loading; and
  • the specification of daily working hours could be varied. 
Additionally, the High Court gave limited weight to two other factors which the Full Court of the Federal Court had deemed relevant:
  • WorkPac’s ability to terminate or vary Mr Rossato’s shifts and roster on one hour’s notice; and
  • Mr Rossato’s work obligations being consistent and organised well in advance in accordance with WorkPac’s rosters. 
The Court ultimately concluded that the express contractual terms agreed between Mr Rossato and WorkPac did not evidence a ‘firm advance commitment’ which Mr Rossato was able to enforce. Whilst the Court said that Mr Rossato may have had a reasonable expectation of continuing employment, this did not amount to an advance firm commitment to ongoing employment and was not an enforceable term of his contracts. 

Key Takeaways

The High Court’s decision reinforces the need for employers to have carefully constructed and drafted employment contracts. The Court gave primacy to the express terms of Mr Rossato’s written contracts and dispelled notions of “expectations” as enforceable contractual terms. 

We recommend that employers review their employment contracts and seek advice in relation to the engagement of casual employees in particular. 

To view the full decision please click here.

If you need assistance with your employment contracts, or seek further information in relation to your legal rights and responsibilities, please contact us on (08) 9321 5451 or by email at phil@bailiwicklegal.com.au.

The above information is a summary and overview of the matters discussed. This publication does not constitute legal advice and you should seek legal or other professional advice before acting or relying on this information.
05 Mar, 2024
Find out what we have been up to and recent events in our March 2024 newsletter .
20 Feb, 2024
The Human Rights Commission may take action against employers who fail to actively eliminate sexual harassment, discrimination and victimisation in the workplace, as part of a positive duty reform. While the reform itself was introduced under the Sex Discrimination Act in 2022, a change was put in place last December - and every employer, including those in the agricultural sector, is affected. This change has provided the commission with new powers to investigate and enforce compliance with positive duty and investigate organisations or businesses where it "reasonably suspects" non-compliance. What does this mean for shearing contractors, sheep producers and other primary producers? Speaking at the WA Shearing Industry Association (WASIA) general meeting last month, Bailiwick Legal solicitor Matilda Lloyd said the enforcement power involved inquiries and investigations similar to WorkSafe. She said a complaint did not have to be made for an inspector from the commission to visit and look over a workplace, and see if there is any kind of sexual harassment occurring. "The commission looks at policies and procedures, and essentially you need to be able to demonstrate that you're compliant with this positive duty. "When you think about it in the context of a shearing shed, it is the safety checklist you have in place for when people enter the shed. "Those are the things you need to consider with sexual harassment as well." Ms Lloyd said the commissioner never had the power to conduct an investigation before and, as such, practically how it was going to work was an unknown. "We don't know whether they're going to be coming out and doing regular inspections, what those inspections are going to look like in terms of time or how thorough they are going to be, " sh e said. "They need to be thought of the same way as a WorkSafe investigation, whereby it could happen at any point whether a complaint is made or not. "Investigators will expect employers to show that they are actively trying to eliminate this form of unlawful conduct." If an inquiry occurs, what will happen? If an employer wasn't taking the correct measures to stop sexual harassment, discrimination and victimisation from occurring, they could be issued a compliance notice. Ms Lloyd said if the notice wasn't adhered to and an inspector returned, they could apply to the Federal Court to have that positive duty enforced. What is positive duty? Ms Lloyd said a positive duty was a legal obligation on an employer or person conducting a business or undertaking to take reasonable and proportionate measures to eliminate unlawful behaviours in the context of work, workplaces and working relationships. In the case of shearing contractors, sheep producers and other primary producers, she said that obligation was on the employer and applied to all staff, workers, contractors, customers and people entering, for example, a shearing shed. She said the obligation was "very broad" and applied right across the board. "Enforcing positive duty is pretty straightforward in terms of the employer, but when we look at the other parties involved it is extensive, " Ms Lloyd said. "When we are talking about sexual harassment in the workplace we are talking in the shed and in a vehicle on the way to work or another shed. "It is also offsite, so if you are having work drinks at the quarters or wherever afterwards - that's also a workplace within the definitions of the act. "The obligation applies across the board in all of these circumstances. "And also applies to visitors, so if you have farmers and they bring their wives, it is anyone coming into that shed or environment." In the context of positive duty, what do contractors need to do? Firstly, employers need to understand what sexual harassment, sex-based harassment, discrimination and victimisation is. Ms Lloyd said employers were responsible for leading their team, so it was important to understand what the laws were and how they affected not only them, but their employees. "When we talk about sexual harassment we talk about unwelcome conduct that is of a sexual nature or requests for sexual favours, touching, requesting dates and so forth," she said. "Whereas sex-based harassment is harassment that is targeted at a particular sex. "This could be making sexist comments about a woman because she's a woman or making sexist comments about a man because he's a man. "Then victimisation is about targeting someone because they've made a complaint." Ms Lloyd said a conversation then needed to be had to educate employees, whether that be face-to-face, by Whatsapp or having it displayed in the shed. She said there were resources and guidelines available through the Human Rights Commission, which helped with this. "Have that conversation - as an employer understand what sexual harassment is but then talk to your employees and be serious about educating your employees, " Ms Lloyd said. "It is about actually having that conversation and then thinking about what material can be given to them. "The whole point is to make it easy, so people understand. "Then it goes into training and support - is there someone in your team people can talk to?" The seven standards The commission has released guidelines for complying with the positive duty under the Sex Discrimination Act 1984. The guidelines are centred around seven standards - leadership, culture, knowledge, risk management, support, reporting and response, and monitoring, evaluation and transparency. Examples of practical actions that organisations or businesses can take to meet each of the standards are set out in the guidelines. Ms Lloyd said, as each business is different, it depended on how big a team was, what was going to be practical and cost-effective in the workplace. She said the commission would look at the different standards if there was an investigation or inquiry. How often do employers need to talk to their team about this? Ms Lloyd said it should be looked at similarly to safety or work related issues, whether that be a toolbox or regular meeting once a week or every couple of days. She said if a contractor was starting a new job or visiting a place they hadn't been to before, it was about having that conversation upon arrival. "When everyone's preparing for their first break, sit down and have a chat about general safety as well, " Ms Lloyd said. "That's the first step, and then follow it up a month later when you start a new shed. "It is about consistently and actively taking measures to create a safe space. "It seems obvious that once you've gone through your checklist you then talk to the people coming into that environment, who are your workers, and alert them to what you have found. "Similarly, with positive duty, a checklist is proof that you are doing the right thing if you are audited." Does insurance cover sexual discrimination cases? Having insurance does not diminish positive duty, it just safeguards employers against potential damage and loss against their business if they are sued. Ms Lloyd said sexual discrimination cases, which travelled through the Federal Court, were not cheap and often have adverse outcomes from an award of damages perspective. "If we talk about Work Health and Safety, as you know, that is a serious issue you have to take onboard and consider, " she said, "And that's the way I think employers need to frame their conduct when talking about and implementing measures to prevent sexual harassment, discrimination and victimisation." Is an employer covered if they have put everything in place, but those rules are still broken? Ms Lloyd said an employer would be protected if they have been able to eliminate as much as they can with the resources available to them. She said it was important to remember sexual harassment and discrimination is unlawful conduct. "In terms of positive duty, by taking all reasonable steps and measures given the resources available to you, you will be able to mount a solid defence against any claim. "If you've done your duty positively and it can be demonstrated that you've exercised your role in appropriate fashion, then that will be solid defence." For more information on the positive duty reform and seven standards, go to humanrights.gov.au
14 Dec, 2023
See what's been happening and current topics of interest in our December 2023 newsletter .
Share by: