When you change a part-time roster, you might be “terminating” without realising it
Part-time employment is meant to be predictable. Yet in many SMEs, part-time rosters are treated like a flexible lever: “We’ll just move the days around”, “We’ll cut back for a few weeks”, or “Their contract says 15 hours minimum, so we’re covered.”
A recent Fair Work Commission decision is a timely reminder that—where a modern award applies—a part-time employee’s agreed pattern of work is not a casual arrangement you can unilaterally redesign. In some circumstances, a significant change to days/hours can even be characterised as ending the existing employment arrangement in substance, regardless of what the contract says.
This matters because roster changes are high-frequency, operational decisions. If your process is wrong, the exposure is not theoretical: it can lead to disputes, backpay, and reputational damage.
The case in brief: “minimum hours” didn’t override the agreed pattern
In Poynton v Davmat Investments Pty Ltd t/a Little Saints Early Learning [2026] FWC 157, the dispute centred on whether the employer could change a part-time employee’s hours and days without her agreement under the relevant award. The Commission focused heavily on the award’s requirement for a written agreement about the employee’s regular pattern of work, and how changes to that pattern can occur.
The key point for employers: a contractual “minimum hours” clause is not a blank cheque to reduce, reshuffle, or compress days and hours if an award requires a written, stable pattern.
The compliance trap: part-time is “predictable by design”
Many modern awards bake in the same principle:
At engagement, the employer and employee agree in writing on the regular pattern of work (days, hours, start/finish times).
Changes to that pattern generally require agreement in writing (including electronically).
Some awards include a limited mechanism to change days with notice where agreement can’t be reached—often with overtime consequences if notice isn’t met—so you must follow the clause precisely rather than improvising.
This is not limited to early learning. For example, Fair Work Ombudsman guidance for fast food states that part-time employees must have a written agreement covering days/hours/start/finish/meal breaks, and that changes must be agreed in writing (including electronic communication).
Practical reality: “we’ve always done it this way” is not a defence
Roster habits form quickly—especially in growing businesses. The risk tends to appear in predictable moments:
a downturn or staffing restructure
a new manager “optimising” the roster
a change in trading hours
operational pressure (absences, leave, ratios, busy periods)
a part-time employee requesting flexibility, and the business responding with a counter-proposal that materially reduces work
The Commission’s reasoning is a good reminder that operational convenience doesn’t automatically displace award protections around predictability.
The Winnchester approach: treat part-time roster changes like a mini-process
If your workforce is award-covered and you employ part-time staff, use this framework before you change anything.
Step 1: Confirm the industrial instrument
Is the employee covered by a modern award? (Most are.)
If yes, identify the part-time clause dealing with the agreed pattern and roster change mechanism.
If you’re not certain, start with the Fair Work Ombudsman’s guidance on part-time employees and rosters, then confirm the correct award and clause.
Step 2: Locate the “agreed pattern” record (and fix it if missing)
You are looking for something that sets out:
days of the week
start/finish times
ordinary hours (and, in some awards, meal break details)
This may be in the contract, onboarding letter, or a separate signed agreement. If the pattern is only “implied” by what’s happened historically, you’re already in a weak position—because many awards require the agreement in writing at engagement.
Step 3: Identify what is actually changing
Not all changes carry the same risk. The higher-risk changes include:
reducing days (e.g., 5 days to 2)
materially reducing weekly hours
moving work to different days (especially if it disrupts caring responsibilities or other stable commitments)
changing start/finish times (particularly where the award treats these as part of the agreed pattern)
Step 4: Use the correct pathway
Depending on the award wording, the compliant pathways are usually:
A) Agreement in writing
Put the proposed change in writing
Give the employee a reasonable opportunity to consider it
Confirm acceptance in writing (email/text can count in many awards, but keep it tidy and filed)
B) Notice-based change (only where the award permits it)
Some awards allow an employer to change days with a specified notice period if agreement can’t be reached, with overtime consequences where notice isn’t met. This is not “do whatever you want”—it is a strict mechanism you must follow.
Step 5: Don’t ignore consultation duties
Separate to the part-time pattern clause, many awards include consultation requirements when changing regular rosters/hours. The decision flags this issue directly as part of the dispute landscape.
A simple checklist you can copy into your SOP
Before changing a part-time roster, confirm:
✅ The award/industrial instrument covering the employee
✅ The written record of the agreed pattern (days + start/finish + hours)
✅ Whether the change requires written agreement (most do)
✅ Whether a notice-based mechanism exists (and the notice/overtime consequences)
✅ That consultation has occurred (and is documented)
✅ That the change won’t inadvertently create a “termination by roster cut” argument
Need a quick sanity-check before you change a part-time roster?
I can review the award clause, your current written pattern, and your proposed change and tell you the safest pathway.
Book a 15-minute call with Winnchester.
What to do if you’re already mid-problem
If a roster dispute is brewing, the best move is usually to pause and reset the process:
confirm the award clause
write down the current agreed pattern (with the employee)
propose the business change with reasons
invite agreement and offer options
document the outcome cleanly
This is exactly the kind of issue where a short, disciplined intervention prevents a long and expensive dispute.
General information only — not legal advice.
