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

For your situation, the most important political distinction is between having flexibility over when you work and having security over how much you earn.

If your roster changes every week but your rent, power, groceries and other bills remain fixed, the rules around guaranteed hours and paid leave can make a substantial difference to your financial security.

The broad political divide in the 7 November 2026 election is:

• Labour, the Greens and Te Pāti Māori: generally favour stronger worker protections and reversing or changing the Government's employment and leave reforms.
• National, ACT and NZ First: supported the Government's employment reforms, including the new Employment Leave Act, and generally favour retaining more employer flexibility.

There are some important differences within each group, particularly around how far parties would go to guarantee hours.

1. The biggest change already passed: Employment Leave Act 2026

This is particularly important to understand before voting.

The National-led Government, with ACT and NZ First support, has passed the Employment Leave Act 2026. It replaces the Holidays Act, but the new rules do not begin until 6 August 2028.

Until then, the existing Holidays Act rules still apply. Employment Leave Act 2026Employment Leave Act 2026

Under the new framework, working hours are divided into categories including:

• Standard hours: the hours your employer is required to offer.
• Additional hours: extra hours you can refuse, with payment arrangements governed by the Act.
• Casual hours: work that the employer does not have to offer and you do not have to accept.

This distinction matters because your leave entitlements will be calculated differently depending on the type of hours you work.

Why this matters to you

If you regularly work variable hours, but your contract guarantees relatively few hours, you could find that some of your actual working time attracts different leave treatment.

The concern raised by Labour, the Greens and worker representatives is that people with variable hours, part-time work and casual arrangements could receive less paid leave or lower payments while taking leave.

The Government's argument is that the new system will be simpler, more predictable for payroll and easier for employers to administer.

Employment Leave Act 2026Employment Leave BillPolicy scorecards for working people NZCTU

2. What each party would do

New Zealand Labour Party

Proposed stronger worker protections

Labour has committed to rolling back employment changes made by the current Government.

Its relevant commitments include:

• Reinstating leave entitlements removed through the Holidays Act changes.
• Rejecting the new contractor gateway test, which affects whether workers can challenge their employment classification.
• Strengthening protections for gig and platform workers.
• Restoring collective bargaining and introducing Fair Pay Agreements.
• Reviewing employment law to improve worker security.

Labour has also explicitly committed to restoring leave entitlements, although its published policy does not yet set out a complete alternative system for guaranteed weekly hours.

What this could mean for you: More protection against losing entitlements through variable-hour arrangements, and potentially stronger bargaining power over your employment conditions.

Trade-off: More obligations for employers and potentially less flexibility in rostering and staffing. Labour would need to turn its broad commitments into detailed legislation to guarantee a particular minimum income.

Source: Labour – Fairer Workplaces. Release: Labour’s plan to deliver a fairer deal for workersFairer Workplaces

Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand

Strongest explicit worker-protection direction

The Greens have a particularly relevant employment platform for people in insecure work.

Their proposals include:

• Stronger protections for casual, contract and gig workers.
• Mandatory overtime pay or time off in lieu for hours worked beyond contracted hours.
• Increasing minimum annual leave from four to five weeks.
• Raising the minimum wage to the Living Wage.
• Removing trial periods.
• Stronger collective bargaining and union access.

The Greens opposed the Employment Leave Act, arguing that its treatment of part-time and variable-hour workers could leave people worse off.

What this could mean for you: If you have contracted hours but regularly work more, the proposed overtime protections could help ensure those extra hours are recognised and compensated.

It could also make it harder for employers to use insecure arrangements to avoid employment obligations.

Trade-off: Higher employment costs and more regulation for businesses. Some employers may respond by reducing overtime opportunities or being more cautious about hiring.

Source: Retail NZ – Employment election policy comparison. EmploymentEmployment Leave Bill

Te Pāti Māori

Supports reversing the leave reforms

Te Pāti Māori opposed the Employment Leave Act and other Government employment changes.

Its parliamentary position has included opposition to:

• Changes weakening collective bargaining.
• The contractor gateway test.
• Reductions in personal grievance protections.
• The replacement of the Holidays Act.

It supports stronger protections for workers, particularly those vulnerable to insecure employment.

What this could mean for you: Its voting record points towards retaining stronger worker entitlements and opposing changes that could disadvantage people with variable hours.

Trade-off: There is less detailed, published 2026 policy on exactly how it would redesign guaranteed-hours and casual-work rules. Its opposition to the current law should not be mistaken for a fully specified alternative.

EmploymentPolicy scorecards for working people NZCTU

National Party

Supports the existing reforms

National has supported the Employment Leave Act and the wider employment reforms introduced by the coalition.

Its approach prioritises:

• Lower compliance costs for employers.
• Greater flexibility in employment arrangements.
• Simpler leave calculations.
• Greater flexibility for businesses to manage staffing requirements.

National has not announced a specific commitment to introduce stronger guaranteed weekly hours for workers in your situation.

What this could mean for you: Employers may retain greater freedom to adjust staffing and offer additional work when demand changes.

Trade-off: That flexibility can benefit businesses, but it does not necessarily give workers the predictable minimum income they need to meet fixed expenses.

EmploymentPolicy scorecards for working people NZCTU

ACT New Zealand

Most strongly focused on employer flexibility

ACT has been a major supporter of the Employment Leave Act.

Its employment philosophy places emphasis on:

• Reducing employment regulation.
• Giving employers more flexibility.
• Making leave calculations easier for payroll.
• Reducing restrictions on employment arrangements.

ACT also supports freezing the adult minimum wage for three years and introducing a 12-month training wage for workers under 20.

What this could mean for you: Your employer would retain considerable flexibility in organising work and staffing.

Trade-off: There would be less emphasis on introducing additional statutory guarantees to protect people whose hours and income fluctuate.

EmploymentPolicy scorecards for working people NZCTU

New Zealand First

Supported the existing leave reforms

NZ First supported the Employment Leave Act as part of the governing coalition.

It is worth distinguishing NZ First from ACT: NZ First supports some worker-focused measures, including increasing the minimum wage above inflation over the next three years according to the NZCTU's election scorecard.

However, on the specific question of repealing the Employment Leave Act, NZ First's position is to retain it.

There is no clearly established separate 2026 commitment from NZ First to introduce substantially stronger guaranteed-hours protections.

What this could mean for you: Some support for wage increases, but no clear commitment to protect your minimum weekly income if your roster shrinks.

Policy scorecards for working people NZCTUPF012: Jobs and unemployment · AI election answers

3. Comparison at a glance

Party	Stronger guaranteed-hours protections	Casual-work protections	Reverse Employment Leave Act?
Labour	Supports stronger worker protections; details developing	Yes	Yes
Greens	Stronger contracted-hours protections	Yes	Yes
Te Pāti Māori	Supports stronger worker protections	Supports stronger protections	Yes
National	No major new commitment identified	Retains current framework	No
ACT	No major new commitment identified	Employer flexibility	No
NZ First	No major new commitment identified	No major separate reform identified	No

One important qualification: a party opposing the Employment Leave Act does not automatically mean it will introduce a guaranteed minimum number of weekly hours. These are separate policy questions.

EmploymentPolicy scorecards for working people NZCTUFairer Workplaces

4. Sick leave: an especially important difference

This is one of the biggest practical issues for someone whose income changes week to week.

Current rules (until August 2028):

• Eligible employees receive 10 days of paid sick leave annually.
• You generally become eligible after six months of continuous employment, subject to the alternative hours-worked test.
• The entitlement applies to eligible full-time, part-time and casual employees.
• Sick leave can cover you, your partner, children and other dependants.

Importantly, being part-time does not automatically mean you only receive half the current 10-day entitlement. Taking sick leaveEmployment Leave Act 2026

From August 2028 under the new Act:

Leave will operate through an hours-based system. This changes how entitlements are accumulated and paid.

Labour, the Greens and Te Pāti Māori want the legislation repealed before it takes effect. National, ACT and NZ First supported it and have indicated they will retain it.

For you, the crucial question is whether you accumulate enough paid sick leave to protect your income when you or your partner becomes unwell.

A person working fewer hours or with irregular shifts could be particularly affected by the new calculations.

5. Guaranteed hours: arguably your biggest financial issue

I would actually put guaranteed hours ahead of sick leave when considering your particular circumstances.

Consider this example:

Illustrative weekly income

Assume your contract guarantees 20 hours at $28 per hour.

Guaranteed weekly gross pay

$560

20 hours × $28

If roster drops to 12 hours

$336

12 hours × $28

Weekly income lost

-$224

Illustrative figures before tax, assuming no other contractual payments or compensation.

Even if your employer needs fewer workers that week, your rent and bills do not decrease by $224.

There are three employment protections worth looking at:

1. Guaranteed minimum hours: Your employer must pay you for your contracted hours, even if they don't provide enough work.
2. Availability provisions: If your employer requires you to be available beyond guaranteed hours, a valid availability provision generally needs reasonable compensation.
3. Shift cancellation protections: Your employment agreement must contain reasonable notice and compensation provisions for cancelling shifts.

These protections are important because changing rosters do not automatically mean your employer can reduce your guaranteed contractual hours.

I would like to emphasise that none of the six major parties has provided a sufficiently clear, comprehensive election commitment to guarantee every variable-hours worker a stable minimum weekly income.

6. What are the trade-offs for someone renting?

Here is how I would evaluate the different approaches against your household's financial priorities.

Your priority	Policies most aligned with it
Predictable minimum weekly income	Stronger guaranteed-hours legislation
Protection against casualisation	Greens, Labour, Te Pāti Māori
Maintaining sick leave entitlements	Labour, Greens, Te Pāti Māori
Higher minimum wage	Labour, Greens, NZ First, Te Pāti Māori
Employer flexibility to change rosters	National, ACT, NZ First
Simpler payroll and leave administration	National, ACT, NZ First

There are genuine economic trade-offs.

• Stronger guaranteed-hours rules could make household income more predictable, but might lead employers to reduce guaranteed positions or offer fewer additional shifts.
• Stronger casual-work protections could discourage employers from using casual contracts to avoid ongoing obligations, but could make short-term staffing more expensive.
• More generous sick leave provides better income protection, but increases employment costs.
• Greater employer flexibility can help businesses respond to changing demand, but leaves more income uncertainty with workers.

The important distinction is that flexibility is not necessarily bad. The question is who carries the financial risk when business demand falls.

With insecure rosters, that risk often falls on the worker.

7. Where I would concentrate your voting research

For your circumstances, I would put the following three questions at the centre of your decision:

1. Will the party guarantee that employers cannot reduce your contracted weekly hours without your agreement?
2. Will it prevent employers from using casual arrangements for people who actually work regular, ongoing patterns?
3. Will it protect paid sick leave for part-time and variable-hours employees, rather than reducing entitlements according to hours worked?

The NZ Council of Trade Unions has published a useful election comparison, including which parties support repealing the Employment Leave Act.

NZCTU – 2026 Policy Scorecards for Working People

For a separate overview of the parties' employment policies, see Retail NZ – 2026 Employment Election Hub.

My overall assessment

Based on the policies and parliamentary voting records available as at 1 November 2026:

• The Greens have some of the clearest proposals for stronger protections around contracted hours, overtime and insecure work.
• Labour offers a broader programme to reverse employment changes and restore leave entitlements, although its guaranteed-hours proposals need more detail.
• Te Pāti Māori has consistently opposed the relevant reductions in worker protections, but has less detailed published policy on the precise arrangements you are asking about.
• National, ACT and NZ First are more likely to retain the current Government's direction on employment flexibility and the new leave system.

I wouldn't base your decision solely on which party promises the biggest minimum-wage increase. If your employer can reduce your weekly hours substantially, a higher hourly rate might not compensate for the lost income.

For a renting household with variable wages, the most valuable protection may be a reliable minimum amount of paid work each week, rather than simply a higher hourly wage.

One additional thing I would recommend: check whether your current employment agreement specifies guaranteed hours, availability requirements and shift-cancellation compensation. Those details can make a difference to your rights even before the election changes anything.