HR leaders have been put on notice as Parliament launches a wide‑ranging review of Australia’s National Employment Standards (NES), with experts warning even “technical” tweaks could mean major work for contracts, policies and payroll in 2026
Speaking to HRD, King and Wood Mallesons partner, Cilla Robinson said HR teams should treat this year as a transition period to get ahead of changes that may flow from the inquiry into whether the 16‑year‑old NES remains “fit for purpose” in a rapidly evolving labour market.
What is being reviewed – and why now?
The House of Representatives Standing Committee on Employment, Workplace Relations, Skills and Training has commenced an inquiry into the operation and adequacy of the NES under the Fair Work Act 2009.
The review was a commitment from the 2022 Jobs and Skills Summit and is intended to test whether the NES still meets contemporary labour market needs and supports the modern bargaining system.
“Sixteen years after the NES commenced, Parliament is seeking evidence on effectiveness, application, and opportunities for technical improvements.” Robinson explained.
The inquiry will examine how the NES is operating, whether the standards are effective, and where technical refinements or clarifications may be needed.
NES: the non‑negotiable safety net
The NES operate as a statutory safety net that cannot be displaced by awards, enterprise agreements or contracts.
They currently cover maximum weekly hours, flexible working requests, casual employment, parental leave, annual leave, personal/carer’s leave, compassionate leave and paid family and domestic violence leave, community service leave, long service leave, public holidays, superannuation contributions, notice of termination and redundancy pay, as well as information statements that must be provided to employees.
These are the bedrock entitlements. Any shift in how they’re defined or applied can have flow‑on effects to enterprise agreements, award compliance, contract drafting and payroll configuration.
Recent developments HR cannot ignore
Robinson said the inquiry lands on top of several major developments in 2024–2025 that are already reshaping HR compliance.
First, superannuation is now embedded within the NES as a protected entitlement aligned with the superannuation guarantee, which means employees can use NES mechanisms to recover unpaid super. That, she noted, firmly embeds super compliance in the HR and payroll risk matrix.
Second, the casual employment framework has been overhauled to create an employee‑initiated pathway to permanent conversion, backed by prescriptive decision timelines and new dispute‑resolution powers for the Fair Work Commission (FWC). HR teams must now ensure they can identify eligible casual cohorts, manage requests on time and document any refusals carefully.
Finally, Robinson pointed to reforms that sit alongside the NES but still affect HR’s compliance, including the right to disconnect and the criminalisation of intentional wage theft.
These changes will influence how HR manages rostering, after‑hours contact, overtime expectations and payroll integrity, even though they are not strictly part of the core NES review.
What changes could the inquiry trigger?
The Committee has called for submissions on both the effectiveness of the NES and potential technical improvements, creating scope for detailed, practitioner‑driven proposals.
Robinson expects stakeholders to focus on clarifying how NES entitlements interact with awards and enterprise agreements, streamlining definitions and thresholds where ambiguity drives disputes, and tackling practical issues in leave administration.
She also anticipates close attention to termination and redundancy thresholds and processes, as well as the interface between NES standards, superannuation obligations and the provision of information statements.
Even a small change to wording in the Act can require a big effort in HR to realign contracts, policies, workflows and systems.
Impact on HR: contracts, policies, payroll and bargaining
For HR teams, the potential consequences span nearly every part of the employment lifecycle. Employment contracts that restate NES entitlements for matters such as notice, redundancy or particular leave types may need to be reviewed and updated if the underlying statutory provisions change.
Robinson warnws that outdated wording can leave employees and managers confused about whether they are relying on contractual or statutory rights.
Core HR policies and onboarding materials are also likely to require attention. Induction packs, leave and absence procedures, termination and redundancy guidelines, and record‑keeping protocols may all need revision to reflect any refinements to the NES.
On the systems side, the combination of NES‑linked superannuation protections, evolving casual conversion rules and heightened enforcement risk will demand a fresh stress test of payroll and HR controls.
Robinson said HR and payroll teams should be checking accrual settings, superannuation calculations and the workflows for moving employees from casual to permanent status, ensuring they align with statutory timeframes and dispute risks.
Enterprise bargaining will not be spared either. Because enterprise agreements must always meet the NES, any change to the standards may require employers to recalibrate their bargaining strategies.
Staff bargaining representatives will need to be kept informed of any NES changes to satisfy good faith bargaining obligations.
What should HR do now?
With submissions to the inquiry closing on Friday, 27 February 2026, Robinson said HR teams have a narrow window both to influence the process and to get their own houses in order.
Her first recommendation is that HR leaders map current policies, contracts and handbooks against the existing NES. This includes scrutinising superannuation terms and checking that every new employee receives the Fair Work Information Statement and that casuals are given the Casual Employment Information Statement (CEIS) at engagement. Any gaps, inconsistencies or outdated language should be identified now, rather than in the wake of legislative change.
Second, she urged HR to take a structured look at casual cohorts. Organisations should know who their casuals are, when they may become eligible for conversion, and how requests will be handled in practice. Clear internal timelines, decision‑making frameworks and documentation standards are critical, particularly where conversions are refused and could later be reviewed by the FWC.
Third, Robinson highlighted record‑keeping as a non‑negotiable focus area. Accurate and auditable records of hours worked, leave accruals and usage, public holidays and termination or redundancy calculations will be essential in demonstrating NES compliance.
Finally, she encouraged HR and payroll to stress test superannuation processes. This means not only confirming that superannuation is calculated correctly and paid in line with current obligations but also preparing for the Treasury‑driven “payday super” changes from 1 July 2026, which will require more frequent superannuation payments.
Robinson does not expect a radical rewrite of the NES. Instead, she anticipates targeted refinements aimed at improving clarity, consistency and practicality. Nonetheless, she warned that even modest legislative changes can entail a significant operational workload for HR.
Robinson’s message to HR is clear: treat 2026 as a transition year. Use it to harmonise employment frameworks with any NES amendments and to shore up compliance around the broader ecosystem of workplace reforms that now surround the NES.
