Mr Samuel Andriessen v National Workplace Safety Services Pty Ltd
Citation: [2026] FWC 1640
At a glance
- Employees affected
- 1
What happened
Samuel Andriessen commenced employment with National Workplace Safety Services Pty Ltd. He was classified as a regular casual employee. Mr Andriessen brought an unfair dismissal claim. The company objected to the jurisdiction of the Fair Work Commission, arguing that Mr Andriessen was not entitled to bring a claim because he was a casual employee who did not meet the minimum employment period requirement. The company argued he was not a ‘regular’ casual employee.
What was decided
The Fair Work Commission dismissed the company’s jurisdictional objection. The Commission found that Mr Andriessen was a regular casual employee, meeting the requirements for a claim. The Commission considered whether Mr Andriessen had a reasonable expectation of continuing employment. The Commission stated, 'the question is whether the employee had a reasonable expectation of continuing employment beyond the casual engagement.'
What it means for employers
Employers should carefully consider the classification of employees, particularly casuals. Ensure casual employees are genuinely casual, and that their employment arrangements do not create a reasonable expectation of ongoing work. Misclassifying employees can lead to jurisdictional challenges and potential claims.
What it means for employees
Employees classified as casuals may still be entitled to bring a claim to the Fair Work Commission if they meet the requirements for a regular casual employee. Understand your employment classification and rights.
Every statement above is drawn from the published decision. Read the original here:
https://www.fwc.gov.au/document-view/decisions/mr-samuel-andriessen-v-national-workplace-safety-services-pty-ltd-2026-fwcWant more cases like this?
FairWork Mate tracks Fair Work Ombudsman, Fair Work Commission and Federal Court decisions across Australia. The full dataset, with structured fields for awards cited, industry, penalty amounts and affected employee counts, is available through the Business API. FairWork Mate AI answers plain-English questions grounded on the full corpus.
Individual case summaries on this site are free. API + AI access is a paid product. Contact us for pricing or a 50% off first month.
Get notified on new Fair Work cases
Free email alerts when we publish new underpayment decisions, penalty orders, and workplace law updates.
Free forever. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
This summary was drafted by AI from the published decision and reviewed before publishing. It is general information, not legal advice. For your specific situation, speak to the Fair Work Ombudsman (13 13 94) or a qualified lawyer. About these summaries & corrections →