New Zealand’s 2026 election: guaranteed hours, casual work and sick leave

For a couple renting on variable rostered pay, the key issue is who carries the risk when your hours fall unexpectedly. Your rent and bills stay fixed, but your income may not.

There are three separate employment-policy questions worth comparing before the general election on 7 November 2026:

• Guaranteed hours: Can your employer reduce your shifts and pay without much notice, even if you usually work a predictable roster?
• Casual employment: Can an employer keep offering work on an irregular basis without committing to ongoing hours?
• Paid sick leave: If you or your partner becomes ill, how much paid leave would you receive, and how would it be calculated when your hours vary?

One important distinction: a party can support more flexible employment arrangements without necessarily supporting insecure work. The practical question is whether the proposed rules give you more predictable income, more flexibility to refuse shifts, or more protection when work disappears.

1. Which parties propose changing the rules?

The clearest documented split is over the new Employment Leave Act 2026. It has already been enacted, but does not take effect until 6 August 2028. The New Zealand Council of Trade Unions (NZCTU) has published a party scorecard on whether parties would repeal it. Policy scorecards for working people NZCTUEmployment Leave Act 2026

Party	Position on employment leave	What it means for your decision
Labour	Supports repealing the new Act before it takes effect.	Would retain the current leave framework unless replaced by another reform. Also proposes restoring Fair Pay Agreements and stronger protections for gig workers. Fairer WorkplacesPolicy scorecards for working people NZCTU
Green Party	Supports repeal.	Opposes the new leave calculation rules, with particular concern about workers on variable hours. Employment Leave BillPolicy scorecards for working people NZCTU
Te Pāti Māori	Supports repeal.	Opposes the new leave framework; also supports restoring stronger worker protections and sector-wide bargaining, according to the NZCTU scorecard. Policy scorecards for working people NZCTUPF009: Jobs and unemployment · AI election answers
National	Does not support repeal.	Supports retaining the new framework, which is designed to change how leave is calculated and simplify compliance for employers. Policy scorecards for working people NZCTUEmployment Leave Act 2026
ACT	Does not support repeal.	Supports retaining the new framework. The NZCTU notes that National and ACT did not answer its industrial-policy questions directly, so some positions are inferred from public statements and legislative history. Policy scorecards for working people NZCTU
New Zealand First	Does not support repeal.	Would retain the new leave framework rather than return to the current Holidays Act system. Policy scorecards for working people NZCTU
The Opportunities Party (TOP)	Does not support repeal, according to the scorecard.	Would retain the new leave framework. Check its wider employment proposals separately before drawing conclusions about guaranteed hours. Policy scorecards for working people NZCTU

These are positions on a specific law, not a complete ranking of each party's employment policies. Whether a party could implement its wider proposals would also depend on parliamentary support.

2. What changes could matter most to your household?

Guaranteed hours and roster security

A crucial distinction is whether your employment agreement actually guarantees a minimum number of paid hours. A roster that changes every week is not necessarily the same thing as a casual contract.

Under current Employment New Zealand guidance, casual employees generally have no guarantee of work and can turn down offered shifts. But if you have a regular pattern, are rostered in advance and are expected to keep working, the legal reality may differ from the label on your contract. Casual employment

Labour's published workplace policy proposes restoring Fair Pay Agreements, making collective agreements the default while allowing individual agreements, and reviewing employment law to improve job security. These measures could create avenues for negotiating better conditions, but they are not the same as a universal guarantee of weekly hours. Fairer Workplaces

For the other parties, the leave-repeal scorecard alone does not establish whether they would introduce a minimum-hours guarantee or restrict employers from cutting regular rosters. That needs to be assessed separately rather than assumed from their leave positions.

Casual work and insecure employment

The key trade-off is between flexibility and predictability.

• More worker protections: Rules that make it harder to classify ongoing rostered work as casual, or that strengthen employees' ability to challenge their employment status, can help workers seek more secure arrangements. Employers may have less flexibility to use genuinely intermittent arrangements.
• More employer flexibility: Keeping broader scope for casual arrangements can make it easier to offer work when demand changes. But if you rely on those shifts to pay rent, you may carry more of the financial risk.

Labour explicitly proposes rejecting the current contractor gateway test and improving protections for gig and platform workers. That is relevant to employment classification, although platform contractors are not necessarily in the same position as rostered employees. Fairer WorkplacesPF009: Jobs and unemployment · AI election answers

Paid sick leave: the most concrete difference

The current system generally gives eligible employees 10 days of paid sick leave a year, including for caring for a sick partner or dependent. Eligibility rules apply, including qualifying service or hours worked. Taking sick leaveCasual employment

The new Employment Leave Act changes how leave is earned and paid, including for employees with variable hours. The Government says the reform is intended to make the rules easier to understand and administer. Critics, including the Green Party and NZCTU, argue that some part-time and irregular-hours workers will receive less leave or less pay while on leave. Employment Leave Act 2026Employment Leave BillPolicy scorecards for working people NZCTU

For your household, the practical comparison is:

• Labour, Greens and Te Pāti Māori: want to repeal the new Act before it takes effect, preserving the current framework unless they introduce a replacement.
• National, ACT and NZ First: do not support repeal, so the new framework is scheduled to take effect in August 2028.

Reformulating leave entitlements could simplify payroll and make calculations more consistent, but that does not necessarily mean every worker will be better off. The effects depend on your work pattern, leave balance and the hours you would otherwise have worked.

3. Other employment policies worth checking

The NZCTU's October 2026 scorecard also records differences on related rules that can affect job security. Policy scorecards for working people NZCTU

Issue	Labour, Greens and Te Pāti Māori	National, ACT and NZ First
Fair Pay Agreements	Support restoring sector-wide bargaining.	Do not support restoration.
90-day trials	Support abolishing them.	Support retaining them.
Contractor classification	Support reversing the 2026 gateway-test changes.	Do not support reversing those changes.
Personal grievance protections	Support reversing the 2026 changes.	Do not support reversing those changes.

These positions are drawn from the NZCTU scorecard; National and ACT did not directly answer its industrial-policy questions, and the organisation used public statements and legislative history to record their positions. The scorecard is a union's assessment, so it is useful to read alongside the parties' own policy documents. Policy scorecards for working people NZCTU2026 Election Policy

The trade-off is broader than leave alone. Stronger job-security rules may give workers more protection against dismissal or insecure classification, while leaving employers with fewer options to change staffing arrangements. Retaining trial periods and the new contractor test preserves more of the current Government's approach to employer flexibility.

4. How to apply this to your own roster

Before deciding which policies matter most, it helps to distinguish three situations:

• Your contract guarantees 30 hours, but your employer regularly gives you 20: the issue is whether the employer is meeting the existing agreement and whether roster or availability provisions apply.
• Your contract guarantees no hours, but you regularly work 25–35 hours: the question is whether your actual working arrangement is genuinely casual and what protections apply.
• Your hours are genuinely irregular, and you can freely accept or decline shifts: the central issues may be income volatility and how leave is calculated, rather than a guaranteed-hours entitlement.

You can check the official guidance on casual employment and sick leave. Your written employment agreement is also important.

5. Questions to take into your election research

For a household whose essential expenses are fixed but earnings vary, these are useful questions to put to each party:

1. Would you require employers to guarantee minimum weekly hours for workers who regularly work a predictable pattern?
2. Would you require more notice of roster changes or compensation when a confirmed shift is cancelled?
3. Would you make it easier for workers to challenge being classified as casual or as independent contractors?
4. Would you retain the current sick-leave framework, and how would your preferred rules calculate leave for someone whose weekly hours fluctuate?
5. How would your proposals affect small employers' costs, staffing flexibility and willingness to offer shifts?

The final question matters because a policy can improve income security for an existing employee while also changing the way an employer chooses to hire or roster staff. Those possible effects should be assessed separately rather than assumed.

The key distinction for your vote: the documented party split is clearest on paid leave and wider employment protections. A promise to preserve sick leave does not automatically guarantee your weekly pay, and a promise of more flexible work does not necessarily protect you when shifts disappear. For your situation, look for explicit proposals on minimum hours, shift cancellations and leave calculations—not just general promises about jobs or workers' rights.