rabsody

Grow up! OP is just trying to get an idea of the working conditions here FFS! If you have nothing constructive to add, then don't bother.

Sally Simpson

Well said!

My brother, here in UK, is employed as a sub-contractor & he can be let go at any time etc. It seems to be the way it often is in his trade (welder) and I know that the law has recently changed with regard to casual employees (after the cockle pickers disaster), I am not sure how much reall added protection from exploitation this group really have.

Was just reading stuckinblighty's update & one of his main downsides of life in Aus was the amount of casual employment.

Loch Lomond

Here's my tuppence worth.

I run two companies, both very diverse from one another. I own a restaurant, which is an industry notorious for staff being transient, and I own an oilfield consulting company.
In the restaurant all but two of the staff are casuals. All the staff are Australians, and are very open about the fact that if something better comes along they will move on. As this industry is transient Mrs LL and me need to accept this and are continually advertising for staff. I have spoken to 5 of the casual staff about becoming full time, but they are not interested as they will then need to work set hours each week and also get a lower rate of pay. Even the head chef who is full time has mentioned that the work hours we have are the reason he stays...I keep him as he runs the kitchen so efficiently it is not real.
The oilfield consulting company is different, it has only 4 staff, 2 contractors and 2 full time (both non Australians).
My view is that Australians are used to being treated as a commodity and as such treat their employers as someone who pays them today...but tomorrow it may be someone else. There is no expected loyalty on either side. I tried to bring in a new approach in the restaurant, but eventually gave up as none of the staff wanted (or believed I would come through with) a better way of working. So Australia continues on with a way of working seen years ago in the UK, and as employer I struggle to get my staff to want to change.
As I said, just my tuppence worth.

DrWho

My 3c...

I employ 12 people in the trades. There appears to be no such thing as employee protection here... my lawyers assure me that I can get rid of someone by just giving them the required notice. I have done this twice now with a third coming up this week. Having come from a situation in the UK where I had 48 people it is strange to be in a situation like this, but then I think of the amount of crap (and cost) I had to go through before to get rid of someone who's a blatant rogue and then I think I like the straight forwardness of the way over here.

The employees know that they can be let go at any time, but they also know they are free to move on at will. This inevitably happens when apprentices qualify anyway if you don't have an opening for a full tradesman at the time.

We also have contractors who get paid anything up to 2.5 times the rate of the top earning employees... These are casuals and there's no great loyalty... They'll take work from us when it suits, but there's no chance they'd turn down direct work just because we can run them x number of days a week all year...

Isn't this casual system pretty much how a lot of employment works in the US...? and isn't it pretty easy to get rid of people over there as well even if they are classed as being in full time employment...? If so perhaps we shouldn't be looking to change too much over here if this is the system that has produced the wealthiest nation on Earth...

kiwinow

That's a good point Dr Who. It can be a mission to get rid of staff in NZ too.
In my place of work in NZ, we employ casuals and permanent staff. Mostly the casuals take the permanent when it comes up, but often go back to being casual after a few weeks as they realise they got more work and higher pay as casuals. As someone stated, if you're offered casual employment that usually puts you on a higher rate than the permanent staff because it incorporates the holiday and sick pay. It sounds like casual employment is much more common in Oz though, and all I can say is read the contract first.

To the original poster, I hope things work out with your husband's employee. Hopefully you can prove he wasn't employed as a contractor, which may be the loophole he's aiming for. My husband works for a company in NZ as a builder but all the builders are employed on a contract basis. Therefore they put their money through their own business and pay their own PAYE, ACC etc. and get no holiday pay because they get paid on a set hourly rate for each job completed, plus travel etc. If there's no work or the weather is shite they don't get paid. This is quite common. It doesn't sound like that was the deal offered to your husband in the first place though, and sounds like he's been treated unfairly so good luck with your case.

calNgary

Hi when i first got to oz i got a casual job for 3 mth they called it a trail, i thought about this as you have no job security, after the trail they wanted to drop my crap wage & for me to go permanent, i refused as with casual it works bothways sometimes if i wanted to do something with family ect, i just told them i wouldnt be in. But after a couple of weeks it came to a head every one in the office to sought the pom out. I was told i had to come in 5 days a week, was to be early & clean up after hours with no pay. Couldnt help my self i went off give them a speech for 15mins on keeping good employes, told them i wanted a rise,fuel allowance,ute & so on. Silence nobody spoke we were just sitting there so i got up & went home without cleaning up in my time, always good to mention all the other jobs out there. The outcome of the meeting was a rise/ute/fuel but the other workers had still to do the old shit, so back in i went, now we are treated the same as in the uk, they have not lost an employe since that day & now they can see it works. Since then i have gone to 4 days a week on the same pay. The problem is they are years behind uk help them move forward & when they see it works everyone is happy, i have a good relationship with my boss & work mates. WORDS TO USE IN METTINGS***** off/the mines/your having a f**king laugh/iam off/u havent got a clue/let me help you/why cant you keep employes/$25 ive been offered $30 else were/how many sick days do i get & so on. GARY

sonlymewalter

First, there seems to be a mix up with terminology. There is part time and full time and permanent and casual [temp] labour. In general terms

Full time = 39 hrs per week
Part time = less than 39 hrs per week
Permanent = ongoing employee / employer relationship
Casual = short term employee/ employer relationship

Like many people I have been in the various situations mentioned above and until it was forced upon me [as in legal terms] I too found it easy to blame lazy, non loyal workers for how I [and fellow management] mismanaged the workforce using casual labour.

It was much easier for me to recruit and get rid off staff at a whim on casual contracts than it was to plan ahead for ongoing peaks and troughs. It was only when the law changed in UK that I [and other fellow managers] were forced to reassess how we should plan ahead without creating major headaches in terms of additional overheads associated with over staffing.

Without going into boring detail, this can be achieved. Ironically by employing permanent labour [as opposed to casual] we achieved increased loyalty, lower ongoing recruitment and training costs [created with high staff turnover] higher productivity and lower absence levels. Not to mention higher motivation within the workforce.

I'm not saying it was easy, in fact as management team we were held far more accountable in terms of managing internal resourcing much more efficiently. We couldn't just "turn off the tap" of casual labour like we did when we had disposable labour a our hands.

As for USA being held as an example of "how to do good things round here" - that's laughable Whilst there are a lot of fantastic things about America, their labour laws are the most laughable. They have the least holiday entitlement, no provision of health cover, their response to low productivity is put more people on the job and generally the workforce is treated like cattle i.e ship them in, slaughter them, and get rid. Is that really what we'd like Aus to look like

I accept there are some industries that are more prone to casual labour than others but what we are talking about here is abuse of the workforce long term i.e a cop out within the system. If anyone needs someone longer than 12/18 months then let's face it, they're not casual

Whilst there is definitely a need to ensure casual labour is still available, it is the abuse of casual labour that is prevalent here. And that's why the law needs to be changed to stop this continuation of abuse within the economy

sonlymewalter

Agree. If the economy stops seeing people as disposable assets and starts holding all parties equally responsibile, then it can work far better

The problem is it's the unknown. Once business sees the improvements, and staff and management start understanding and abiding by their own rules, and everyone sees and *feels* the benefits - until then it's the unknown.

Masadal

Exactly,casual labour can work for both parties but there are major abuses of the long term casual worker on a large scale.

DrWho

Pretty much already does... Not sure I'd agree that a system that has clearly been very successful is laughable... guess it might be if you're some loony lefty commie, but coming from 20 years as an employer in the UK it's quite nice to see the playing field leveled out a bit...

Now, where did I put my asbestos suit...?

DrWho

Does seem that way... certainly a couple of people I've had conversations with have told how long it's taken them to get permanent positions... and that was within the health service...

Masadal

It,s a real shame because a fair percentge of casuals would be very hard working permanent employees if given the chance.

The Bloke

Unfortunately since the introduction of Work Choice legislation by the Liberal Federal gov't, it has become far easier for employers to hire and fire employees on their (the employers) own terms, and it is legal. Since the election of the ALP to the gov't nearly a year ago, as far as I know this law has not been repealled, although if it has, I will stand corrected.
Someone can work for the same company for years and still be employed on a casual basis. This has happened long before Work Choices.
.

The Bloke

Any Government department can be like that unless you are:
A) very lucky or;
B)know/related to someone on the panel.
The OH took nearly 3 years of temporary work before she became permanent in the Qld public service.

The Bloke

Exaggerated by the introduction of Work Choices legislation.