‘End of Assignment’ Is Not a Get Out of Jail Free Card

If you use labour hire, or you are a labour hire company, this case should be on your radar.

A Brisbane forklift operator worked 13 months at the same site, same shift, same hours. When his labour hire agency called to say he was no longer needed, they called it an ‘end of assignment’. He called it a dismissal.

The Fair Work Commission agreed with him. And the agency paid for it.

What happened in Meo v 360 Personnel

Aminiasi Meo was placed by 360 Personnel at Allied Pinnacle’s Tennyson warehouse in November 2024 as a high-reach forklift operator on permanent night shift. The role was advertised on Seek as ‘stable, ongoing work’ with ‘temp-to-perm opportunity’ and ‘consistent hours’. He worked an average of 37 hours a week for 13 months straight.

On 12 December 2025, he got a phone call. He was told he was no longer required, with references to attendance and performance concerns. The same day, 360 Personnel sent him a separation certificate, citing ‘end of assignment, no further work available’. The email confirming this was sent to the wrong address. He never received it.

He followed up. He asked for written confirmation. He asked for reasons. He got silence.

He also noticed something else: 360 Personnel had advertised his role on Seek the same day they let him go. Other labour hire workers on the same shift were still on site.

He lodged an unfair dismissal claim.

The first hurdle: was he even dismissed?

360 Personnel’s first defence was jurisdictional. They argued he was not dismissed at all. He was simply stood down from an assignment due to reduced workload at the host site. The employment relationship, they said, continued.

The Commissioner rejected this. The facts pointed one way:

• The role was site-specific and had run for 13 months
• It was advertised as ongoing and indefinite
• 360 Personnel made no genuine effort to redeploy him
• They issued a separation certificate on the day of the call
• They then went completely silent when he tried to make contact

The Commission has seen this argument before. Saying ‘we’ll keep you on our books’ or ‘we’ll look for other roles’ without actually doing it has been described in previous decisions as paying lip service. That is exactly what happened here.

The Commissioner found he was dismissed at the initiative of the respondent.

Then came the second problem: the dismissal was unfair

Once dismissal was established, the Commissioner worked through every criterion under section 387 of the Fair Work Act. 360 Personnel failed on almost all of them.

No valid reason

A client requesting removal from site is not, by itself, a valid reason for dismissal. 360 Personnel never investigated the alleged performance or attendance issues for themselves. They took Allied Pinnacle’s word for it, or at least that is what they claimed, and acted without any independent assessment.

The fact that the same role was advertised on Seek on the day of dismissal, and that other labour hire workers remained on the same shift, made the ‘no work available’ story hard to accept.

No notification of reason

The reasons shifted throughout the process. The phone call cited attendance and performance. The separation certificate said no work available. Neither was clearly communicated, and when Meo asked for clarification in writing, he received no reply.

No opportunity to respond

There was no meeting. No warning. No chance for him to respond to any of the concerns raised. Thirteen months of service, no prior disciplinary action, and he was removed via a phone call with no follow-up.

No warnings about performance

The Applicant had never been warned about unsatisfactory performance. If performance was genuinely a factor, there was no paper trail to support it.

Compensation ordered: $14,064.64 gross plus 12% superannuation, payable within 14 days.

What this means if you are a labour hire company

The phrase ‘end of assignment’ does not insulate you from an unfair dismissal claim. What matters is the substance of what happened, not the label you put on it.

When a placement ends, ask yourself:

• Has this worker been at one site for an extended period on a regular roster?
• Was the role advertised as ongoing or indefinite?
• Am I genuinely able to redeploy them, or am I just saying I will?
• Have I documented any performance or conduct concerns independently?
• Have I given them a clear, consistent reason for the end of placement?

If the answer to any of those questions puts you in murky territory, you need a proper process before you act. That means a conversation, clear reasons, an opportunity to respond, and genuine redeployment efforts with evidence to back it up.

Silence is not a strategy. In this case, not responding to the worker’s emails was treated as confirmation that the employment had ended and no alternative was coming.

What this means if you use labour hire

Host employers are not off the hook either. While the legal liability here sat with 360 Personnel, the Commission was clear: the contractual relationship between a labour hire company and a host cannot be used to defeat an employee’s rights.

If you ask a labour hire agency to remove someone from your site, be aware of what you are setting in motion. A well-run agency will ask questions before they act. If they do not, that is a red flag about who you are working with.

Practically, if you have concerns about a placed worker:

• Raise them with the agency early, in writing
• Be specific about what the issue is and when it occurred
• Do not frame it as ‘we don’t want them anymore’ without context
• Give the agency the information they need to run a fair process

The host employer in this case was never named in the finding. But the lack of any supporting witness statement from Allied Pinnacle, and the Commission’s observation that the site manager’s silence was notable, shows that how host employers behave in these situations matters.

The bottom line

Labour hire is not a loophole. It is a legitimate employment model with real obligations attached to it.

When a long-term, site-specific placement ends, the worker’s rights do not end with it. If you want to be protected, you need the same things every other employer needs: a clear reason, a fair process, and documentation that backs you up.

‘End of assignment’ is not a magic phrase. It is just words. What the Commission looks at is what actually happened.

Frequently Asked Questions

Not sure where you stand with your labour hire arrangements?

Whether you are a labour hire operator or a business that places workers through agencies, getting the process right matters. The HR Gurus Membership Club gives you access to practical HR support, templates and expert advice so you are not caught out when a placement ends badly.

Find out more at hrgurus.com.au/membership.