19
January 2018
PDF version [375KB]
Geoff
Gilfillan
Statistics and Mapping Section
Executive
summary
There were just under 2.5 million casual employees (those without
access to paid leave entitlements) in Australia in August 2016 and around 7.4
million permanent employees (those with access to paid leave entitlements).
The use of casual employees in Australia grew most strongly from
the early 1980s to the mid-1990s. During this time the casual share of all
employees increased from around 13 per cent to 24 per cent.
The rate of growth in employees with and without paid leave
entitlements in the past two decades has been more balanced with the casual
employee share of total employees increasing marginally from 24 per cent in
1996 to 25 per cent in 2016.
A significant feature of the labour market in the past two
decades has been the strong growth in permanent part-time employment for both
men and women, and strong growth in casual part-time employment for men.
Young workers aged 15 to 24 years are much more likely to be
contracted on a casual basis compared with people aged 25 to 64 years.
Some industries such as hospitality and retail trade have
very high concentrations of casual workers while others such as the finance
sector have much lower rates.
The occupation groups that recorded the highest prevalence
of casual employees were hospitality workers (79 per cent of all
workers) and food preparation assistants (75 per cent).
Casual employment is not necessarily temporary employment. Around
81 per cent of casual employees in August 2016 expected to be with their
current employer in 12 months compared with around 93 per cent of permanent
employees.
Casual workers are much more likely to face irregular and
insufficient hours of work and fluctuations in earnings, with around 53 per
cent experiencing variable earnings from one pay period to another in August
2016, compared with only 15 per cent of permanent employees. Just under a third
(31 per cent) of casual workers preferred more hours of work per week compared
with 10 per cent of permanent employees.
Smaller firms are more likely to hire casual workers than
larger firms.
Casual workers are much less likely than permanent employees
to have access to on-the-job training.
Contents
Executive
summary
Introduction
Growth in casual employment
1982 to 1992
1992 onwards
Figure 1: employees with and without paid leave entitlements (excluding owner managers), 1992 to 2016
Figure 2: casual employee share of
all employees (excluding owner managers), 1992 to 2016
Prevalence of casual employees by
state and territory
Figure 3: casual share of total
employees for each state and territory, August 2017
Table 1: trends in casual share of
total employees by state and territory, various years
Characteristics of casual employees
Age
Figure 4: casual share of total
employees by age, August 2016
Gender
Figure 5: casual share of total male
and female employees, 1992 to 2016
Table 2: growth in employee types for
men and women, August 1996 to August 2016
Household characteristics
Table 3: household characteristics of
employees with and without paid leave entitlements, August 2016
Industry
Table 4: casual employee share of all
employees by industry, August 2016
Occupation
Table 5: casual employee share of all
employees by occupation, August 2016
Access to training
Firm size
Table 6: distribution of employee
types by contract type by firm size, 2015
Method of setting pay
Table 7: method of setting pay for
different employee types, 2015
Employee attitudes on job security,
hours, earnings and job satisfaction
Job security
Working hours and earnings
Job satisfaction
Table 8: job satisfaction of casual
employees and other workers, 2015
Preference for more hours of work
Table 9: employee preferences for
hours of work, August 2016
Conclusion
Introduction
Casual workers are defined as employees
without access to paid leave entitlements. Under awards and enterprise agreements,
casual workers are paid a loading on top of their hourly wage rate—usually set
at 25 per cent—to provide financial compensation for the lack of access to paid leave
entitlements such as annual leave, sick pay and carer’s leave. Arrangements associated
with casual employment contracts may suit particular workers such as students and
parents with caring responsibilities who are seeking higher remuneration for
the small number of hours they are available for work. However, some casual
workers—particularly those seeking regular hours of work—may prefer more
certainty about their weekly hours of work and more predictable earnings than
their current circumstances provides.
For many workers, experience with casual employment is a
relatively temporary state that provides income in the short term before
transitioning to more stable ongoing or permanent employment. For others, casual
employment can be a more persistent state. Researchers at the Melbourne
Institute examined data from a number of waves of the Household Income and Labour
Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) survey and found that between 28 and 32 per cent
of casual employees had found non-casual employment within a year and between
46 and 49 per cent of casual employees had found a non-casual job within four
years. It is unclear what proportion of workers still engaged in casual work
after four years were satisfied with their employment arrangements and what
proportion were unsatisfied but unable to find alternative forms of work. [1]
There has been some discussion and concern expressed by some
organisations about the growth of casual employment in Australia over the past
few decades with suggestions it is an insecure, precarious and a non-preferred
form of employment.
Among the reasons offered for casual employment being
inferior include:
- it provides irregular hours from week to week which leads to
variable and unpredictable earnings
-
it is much more insecure relative to permanent employment.
Different data sources shed light on whether these concerns
are justified. The data confirms casual workers are much more likely to
experience variable hours and earnings than other workers and many would prefer
more hours of work per week. This may impact upon their ability to pay bills
including weekly rent and other housing costs and may limit their capacity to secure
a mortgage for a house or an apartment. Financial institutions want to avoid
risk when lending and require evidence from casual workers they have been in
their position for a number of months and expect to have reliable ongoing employment
in the foreseeable future.
The evidence for casual work contributing to greater job
insecurity is less convincing. The ACTU reported that over half of casual
employees were “permanent casuals” who have a history of long-term, ongoing and
regular employment. [2]
This analysis sheds further light on whether preferences of casual workers are
being met.
Growth in
casual employment
There have been a number of drivers of growth in casual
employment over the past three decades including:
- demand factors such as employer preferences for a more flexible
workforce that can be adjusted quickly in response to change in operational
needs
- supply factors including the greater labour force participation
of women who may require part-time work to supplement household income and
students who desire part-time work to assist them with their costs of living
while undertaking study
- strong growth in employment in service industries that are more
likely to use casual workers such as hospitality, retail trade and health care
and social assistance. There is also evidence of greater use of casual
employment among industries that traditionally did not use this form of labour
(such as the male dominated industries of manufacturing, construction and
mining).
A possible reason for stronger growth in casual employees in
the 1990s was employers sought to hire employees who could be shed quickly in
preference to hiring permanent employees in the tentative economic recovery
following the recession of the early 1990s. However, there is also evidence of
a growing shift towards the use of casual labour prior to the recession in the
mid to late 1980s which was more likely to have been driven by the
de-regulation of the labour market and opening up of the Australian economy to
international competition.
It is difficult to put a long time series of data together
for casual employees due to definitional differences used for different
statistical collections by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). However, it
is evident that the most rapid growth in the use of casual employees in
Australia occurred from the early 1980s to the mid-1990s. ABS employee estimates
from the early 1980s to the early 1990s are complicated by the inclusion of
owner managers of incorporated enterprises in the estimates of employees
without paid leave entitlements. Owners of enterprises often pay themselves a wage
as an employee of the company but do not take sick or annual leave. As a
consequence they were included in estimates of employees without paid leave
entitlements. Their inclusion inflates the estimates for workers we would be considered
as casual employees under a stricter definition.
1982 to
1992
ABS data from a number of sources shows employees without paid leave entitlements in Australia (including owner managers) grew by 610,000 or
89 per cent from May 1982 to August 1989 while employees with paid leave
entitlements grew by 706,000 or 16 per cent.[3]
In 1982 employees without paid leave entitlements accounted for 13 per cent
of all employees.
Between August 1989 and August 1992, the number of employees
with paid leave entitlements fell by 280,000 or 5 per cent, mainly due to labour
shedding after the recession, while the number of employees without paid leave
entitlements (including owner managers) increased by 117,000 or 9 per cent. This
data provides evidence of substitution of casual employees for permanent
employees during this period. By 1992, casual employees accounted for 22 per
cent of all employees.[4]
1992
onwards
The ABS has also released a data series from 1992 for
employees with and without paid leave entitlements excluding owner managers which
could be regarded as a better measure of ‘true’ casual employees. This data
shows more balanced growth in employees with and without paid leave entitlements in
the past two decades. Employees without paid leave entitlements grew by 834,000 or 51
per cent between 1996 and 2016 while employees with paid leave entitlements grew by 2,318,000
or 46 per cent.
Figure 1: employees
with and without paid leave entitlements (excluding owner managers), 1992 to 2016
Source: ABS, Australian Labour Market Statistics,
cat. no. 6105.0 (estimates for 1992 to 2004): ABS, Characteristics of
Employment, cat. no. 6333.0, (estimates for 2005 to 2016)
After a relatively steep rise from 1992 to 1996, the casual
employee share of both employees and employment has been relatively stable
since—increasing slightly from 24 per cent in 1996 to 25 per cent in 2016.
Figure 2: casual
employee share of all employees (excluding owner managers), 1992 to 2016
Source: ABS, Australian Labour Market Statistics,
cat. no. 6105.0 (estimates for 1992 to 2004): ABS, Characteristics of
Employment, cat. no. 6333.0, (estimates for 2005 to 2016)
Prevalence
of casual employees by state and territory
Queensland and South Australia have the highest rates of
prevalence of casual employees (or casual shares of all employees). The use of
casual employment in each jurisdiction is influenced by differences in their
industry and occupational mix of employment. Queensland has much higher casual
employee shares than the national average in industries such as Construction
(39 per cent), Transport (30 per cent), and Administrative and support services
(40 per cent). South Australia and Tasmania have larger shares of their
workforce employed in industries which are more likely to hire casual workers
such as Retail, Administrative and support services and Health care and social
assistance.
Figure 3: casual
share of total employees for each state and territory, August 2017
Source: ABS, Labour Force Survey, cat. no. 6202.0
In contrast, the ACT has a much higher share of its
workforce in Public administration and safety which is less likely to hire
casual workers.[5]
The following table shows Queensland and South Australia have historically had
much higher rates of use of casual employees than other states and territories.
Table 1: trends
in casual share of total employees by state and territory, various years
| Casual share
of total employees (%) |
1992 |
2000 |
2010 |
2017 |
| New South Wales |
20.1 |
22.9 |
24.5 |
23.8 |
| Victoria |
18.6 |
23.4 |
22.8 |
23.3 |
| Queensland |
26.8 |
30.2 |
26.0 |
29.2 |
| South Australia |
26.2 |
29.3 |
29.0 |
27.6 |
| Western Australia |
19.5 |
26.0 |
22.1 |
25.1 |
| Tasmania |
25.2 |
26.3 |
25.8 |
24.5 |
| Northern Territory |
21.7 |
23.6 |
20.7 |
23.7 |
| Australian Capital Territory |
20.8 |
22.1 |
19.4 |
20.4 |
| AUSTRALIA |
21.5 |
25.2 |
24.3 |
25.1 |
Source: ABS, Australian Labour Markets, cat. 6105.0,
Table 2
Characteristics
of casual employees
The following section sheds light on the characteristics of
casual employees by age, gender, relationship in households, industry and
occupation, the size of firms in which they work and how they are paid.
Age
Prevalence of casual employees is much higher for people in
younger age groups. Around 76 per cent of employees aged 15 to 19 years and 41 per
cent of employees aged 20 to 24 years were casual employees in 2016—well above
the all age average of 25 per cent. Prevalence of casual employees is much
lower than the average for those aged 35 to 44 years and 45 to 54 years (at 17 per cent
and 16 per cent respectively) but higher for those aged 65 years and over (36 per cent).
People in the oldest age group may be more likely to be seeking casual
employment to supplement their retirement income.
Figure 4: casual
share of total employees by age, August 2016
Source: ABS, Characteristics of Employment, cat. no.
6333.0, using TableBuilder
Gender
In the early 1990s casual workers tended to be characterised
as either young people or women with caring responsibilities. However, it is
evident that men are much more likely to be casual workers today than they were
two decades ago. Around 23 per cent of male employees were employed on a casual
basis in 2016 compared with 14 per cent in 1992. In contrast, casual employee prevalence
among female employees has gradually fallen from 30 per cent to 27 per cent
over this period. The male share of all casual employees has increased from 36
per cent in 1992 to 47 per cent in 2016.
Figure 5: casual
share of total male and female employees, 1992 to 2016
Source: ABS, Australian Labour Market Statistics,
cat. no. 6105.0 (estimates for 1992 to 2004): ABS, Characteristics of
Employment, cat. no. 6333.0, (estimates for 2005 to 2016)
The following table shows trends in growth in male and
female permanent and casual full-time and part-time employees in the twenty
years to 2016 and composition of employees in 1996 and 2016.
Table 2:
growth in employee types for men and women, August 1996 to August 2016
| |
1996 |
2016 |
Change—1996 to 2016 |
Share of all male and
female employees
(%) |
| ‘000 |
‘000 |
‘000 |
% |
1996 |
2016 |
| Male |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Permanent full-time |
2853.3 |
3553.1 |
699.8 |
25 |
79 |
71 |
| Permanent part-time |
74.7 |
300.4 |
225.7 |
302 |
2 |
6 |
| Casual full-time |
339.7 |
503 |
163.3 |
48 |
9 |
10 |
| Casual part-time |
337.7 |
663.4 |
325.7 |
96 |
9 |
13 |
| TOTAL |
3605.4 |
5019.9 |
1414.5 |
39 |
100 |
100 |
| Female |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Permanent full-time |
1614.9 |
2300.2 |
685.3 |
42 |
53 |
49 |
| Permanent part-time |
492.7 |
1196.7 |
704 |
143 |
16 |
25 |
| Casual full-time |
177.1 |
231.9 |
54.8 |
31 |
6 |
5 |
| Casual part-time |
772.2 |
1059 |
286.8 |
37 |
25 |
22 |
| TOTAL |
3056.9 |
4787.8 |
1730.9 |
57 |
100 |
100 |
Source: ABS, Australian Labour Market Statistics,
cat. no. 6105.0 (estimates for 1992 to 2004): ABS, Characteristics of
Employment, cat. no. 6333.0, (estimates for 2005 to 2016)
For both men and women there has been a surge in permanent
part-time employment in the past twenty years—more than quadrupling for men and
more than doubling for women. Casual part-time employment also grew strongly
for men—up by 326,000 or 96 per cent.
The permanent full-time share of total employees for men
fell from 79 per cent in 1996 to 71 per cent in 2016, while the permanent
part-time share of total employees for women increased from 16 per cent to 25
per cent.
Household
characteristics
A relatively large proportion of casual workers are young
people who are either students dependent on their parents or non-dependent
children. Women and men with parental responsibilities also accounted for a
significant share of casual workers. ABS data for August 2016 shows:
- just under a third of casual workers were either dependent
students or non-dependent children
- a further 27 per cent of casual workers were women in partnered
relationships or lone parents
- men in partnered relationships or lone parents accounted for 19
per cent of all casual workers.
Table 3:
household characteristics of employees with and without paid leave entitlements, August
2016
| Relationship
in household |
Gender |
Access to leave entitlements |
Total |
With paid leave
entitlements |
Without paid leave
entitlements |
| Husband, wife
or partner |
Male |
36 |
19 |
32 |
| Female |
31 |
23 |
29 |
| Lone parent |
Male |
1 |
1 |
1 |
| Female |
4 |
4 |
4 |
| Dependent
student |
Male |
1 |
8 |
2 |
| Female |
1 |
11 |
3 |
| Non-dependent
child |
Male |
6 |
8 |
6 |
| Female |
4 |
6 |
4 |
| Other family
person |
Male |
1 |
2 |
1 |
| Female |
1 |
1 |
1 |
| Non-family
member or person living alone |
Male |
8 |
8 |
8 |
| Female |
7 |
7 |
7 |
| Relationship
not determined |
Male |
1 |
1 |
1 |
| Female |
0 |
1 |
1 |
| |
TOTAL |
100 |
100 |
100 |
Source: ABS, Characteristics of Employment, cat. no.
6333.0, using TableBuilder
Industry
Some industries use casual employees more than others. For
example, just under two-thirds of employees in the hospitality industry (or Accommodation
and food services) were casual employees in 2016. Other big users of casual
employees were Agriculture, forestry and fishing (43 per cent of all employees),
Arts and recreations services (42 per cent), Retail trade (36 per
cent) and Administrative and support services (34 per cent).
Employers in industries such as retail and hospitality tend
to use casual part-time employees to service peaks in customer demand. Demand
for casual labour among agricultural enterprises tends to be driven by seasonal
factors such as harvesting and picking. Employees working in retail and
hospitality need to be flexible in the hours and shifts they work but these
circumstances may suit groups such as students who are seeking a small number
of hours per week.
Only seven per cent of employees in the Financial and
insurance services sector were employed on a casual basis. Other industries to
record relatively small casual shares of total employment included Electricity,
gas, water and waste services (9 per cent) and Public administration and safety
(10 per cent).
Table 4: casual
employee share of all employees by industry, August 2016
| Industry |
Casual share of
total employees in
each industry(%) |
Industry share of
total casual
employees (%) |
| Agriculture,
forestry and fishing |
43 |
2 |
| Mining |
16 |
1 |
| Manufacturing |
19 |
6 |
| Electricity,
gas, water and waste services |
9 |
0 |
| Construction |
25 |
7 |
| Wholesale trade |
16 |
2 |
| Retail trade |
36 |
15 |
| Accommodation
and food services |
65 |
20 |
| Transport,
postal and warehousing |
27 |
5 |
| Information,
media and telecommunications |
19 |
1 |
| Financial and
insurance services |
7 |
1 |
| Rental, hiring
and real estate services |
21 |
1 |
| Professional,
scientific and technical services |
14 |
4 |
| Administrative
and support services |
34 |
4 |
| Public
administration and safety |
10 |
3 |
| Education and
training |
18 |
7 |
| Health care and
social assistance |
21 |
12 |
| Arts and
recreation services |
42 |
3 |
| Other services |
26 |
4 |
| TOTAL |
25 |
100 |
Source: ABS, Characteristics of Employment, cat. no.
6333.0, using TableBuilder
Accommodation and food services (or hospitality) accounted
for 20 per cent of all casual workers employed in Australia in 2016 while the
retail sector accounted for 15 per cent. Other industries to contribute larger
shares of total casual employment included Health care and social assistance
(12 per cent), Education and training and Construction (both 7 per cent) and
Manufacturing (6 per cent).
Occupation
Some occupations have much higher shares of casual employees
than others. The occupation groups with the highest casual shares are Hospitality
workers (79 per cent of all employees) and Food preparation assistants (75 per
cent). Other occupations with high concentrations of casual workers include Labourers
(58 per cent), Sales support workers (56 per cent), Sports and personal service
workers and Farm, forestry and garden workers (both 55 per cent). Managerial or
professional occupations have the lowest casual shares.
Table 5: casual
employee share of all employees by occupation, August 2016
| Occupation group |
Casual share of
total
employees in each
occupation (%) |
| Hospitality workers |
79 |
| Food preparation
assistants |
75 |
| Labourers nfd |
58 |
| Sales support workers |
56 |
| Sports and personal
service workers |
55 |
| Farm, forestry
and garden workers |
55 |
| Sales assistants
and salespersons |
48 |
| Other labourers |
48 |
| Cleaners and laundry
workers |
45 |
| Construction
and mining labourers |
45 |
| Clerical and office
support workers |
36 |
| Road and rail drivers |
35 |
| Factory process
workers |
33 |
| Carers and aides |
32 |
| Food trades workers |
31 |
| Storepersons |
30 |
| Construction trades
workers |
29 |
| Skilled animal
and horticultural workers |
29 |
| Mobile plant operators |
28 |
| Inquiry clerks
and receptionists |
27 |
| Farmers and farm
managers |
27 |
| Other technicians
and trades workers |
27 |
| Technicians and
trades workers nfd |
25 |
| TOTAL |
25 |
Source: ABS, Characteristics of Employment, cat. no.
6333.0, using TableBuilder
Note: nfd is not further defined. Occupation were only
included in the table if their casual prevalence was higher than the average
for all occupations of 25 per cent.
Access to
training
HILDA data shows 22 per cent of casual employees in 2015 had
engaged in work-related training in the previous 12 months. This compares with
38 per cent of permanent employees.
Firm size
The HILDA survey sheds light on the types of employees hired
by small, medium and larger enterprises. It should be noted that the firm size
range definitions used in the HILDA survey differ from those used by the ABS.
The definition of small business is the same for both (firms employing between
1 and 19 employees) but HILDA uses 20 to 99 employees for medium sized firms
and 100 employees or more for larger firms. In contrast, the ABS defines a
medium sized business as one employing between 20 and 199 employees and a large
business is defined as one employing 200 employees plus.[6]
HILDA data shows casual workers are more likely to be hired
by smaller firms (employing up to 19 people) than they are by larger firms (employing
100 people or more).
- Around 51 per cent of all casual employees worked in smaller
firms in 2015. This share is much higher than the small business share of all
employees (34 per cent in 2015).
- In contrast only 18 per cent of casuals are found in larger firms,
which is much lower than the larger firm share of total employment (34 per cent
in 2015).
A third of all people employed by smaller firms were casual
employees which is higher than the average for all employed people of 22 per
cent in 2015. In contrast, 21 per cent of people employed by medium sized firms
(employing 20 to 99 people) were casuals, while the casual share of all
employees for larger firms was much smaller at only 12 per cent.
Over three-quarters of employees in larger firms were
permanent employees compared with around 60 per cent of employees of smaller
firms. This finding suggests that small firms require workers who are more
flexible in terms of the number of hours and shifts they work whereas larger
firms appear to want a more stable workforce.
The HILDA survey also uses a slightly different definition
of employees by including those on fixed-term contracts as a separate category to
casual and permanent employees. HILDA data shows employees on fixed-term
contracts accounted for 10 per cent of all employees in 2015. By comparison ABS
data show around five per cent of all employees had a set completion date in
2015.
Table 6: distribution
of employee types by contract type by firm size, 2015
| Distribution of all employees on particular contract
types among small, medium and larger sized firms |
Firm size (number
of employees) |
Fixed-term
contract (%) |
Casual employees
(%) |
Permanent
employees (%) |
Total employees
(%) |
| 1 to 19 |
25.4 |
51.4 |
30.1 |
34.3 |
| 20 to 99 |
31.5 |
30.7 |
31.9 |
31.6 |
| 100 plus |
43.1 |
17.9 |
38.0 |
34.1 |
| TOTAL |
100.0 |
100.0 |
100.0 |
100.0 |
| Composition of employees working in small, medium and larger
sized firms by contract type |
Firm size (number
of employees) |
Fixed-term
contract (%) |
Casual employees
(%) |
Permanent
employees (%) |
Total employees
(%) |
| 1 to 19 |
7.1 |
33.0 |
59.9 |
100.0 |
| 20 to 99 |
9.6 |
21.4 |
69.0 |
100.0 |
| 100 plus |
12.1 |
11.6 |
76.3 |
100.0 |
| TOTAL |
9.6 |
22.1 |
68.4 |
100.0 |
Source: Household Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia
(HILDA), 2015
Note: Table only includes responses from employees who knew
how their pay was set.
Method of
setting pay
HILDA data shows there are some differences in how different
types of employees have their pay set. Casual employees are more likely to be
on an award or Australian Fair Pay and Conditions Standard (APCS)[7]
rather than being covered by a collective or individual agreement. Approximately
47 per cent of casual employees in 2015 were on an award compared with 19 per
cent of permanent employees and 20 per cent of employees on fixed term
contracts. Only 17 per cent of casual employees were covered by collective
agreements and 28 per cent had an individual agreement or contract with their
employer. Around 6 per cent of casual employees did not know under what
arrangements their pay was set.
HILDA survey responses also show for those people on awards in
2015, 41 per cent were casual employees, 51 per cent were permanent employees
and 8 per cent were employees on fixed-term contracts.
Table 7: method
of setting pay for different employee types, 2015
| Composition of employees covered by different methods
of setting pay by contract type |
| Method of setting pay |
Fixed-term
contract (%) |
Casual employees
(%) |
Permanent
employees (%) |
Total employees
(%) |
| Collective Agreement (CA) |
10.3 |
11.6 |
78.0 |
100.0 |
| Individual agreement or contract |
10.4 |
17.6 |
72.0 |
100.0 |
| Combination of CA and individual agreement |
9.0 |
12.8 |
78.1 |
100.0 |
| Award (or APCS) rate |
7.5 |
41.3 |
51.2 |
100.0 |
| Other |
2.2 |
43.5 |
54.3 |
100.0 |
| Don’t know |
11.2 |
52.6 |
36.2 |
100.0 |
| TOTAL |
9.6 |
22.6 |
67.9 |
100.0 |
| Distribution of all employees on particular contract
types by method of setting pay |
| Method of setting pay |
Fixed-term
contract (%) |
Casual employees
(%) |
Permanent
employees (%) |
Total employees |
| Collective Agreement (CA) |
34.6 |
16.5 |
36.8 |
32.0 |
| Individual agreement or contract |
38.2 |
27.5 |
37.3 |
35.2 |
| Combination of CA and individual agreement |
4.0 |
2.4 |
4.9 |
4.2 |
| Award (or APCS) rate |
20.2 |
46.9 |
19.3 |
25.6 |
| Other |
0.1 |
0.9 |
0.4 |
0.5 |
| Don’t know |
2.9 |
5.8 |
1.3 |
2.5 |
| TOTAL |
100.0 |
100.0 |
100.0 |
100.0 |
Source: Household Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia
(HILDA), 2015
Employee
attitudes on job security, hours, earnings and job satisfaction
This section examines how employee attitudes vary on
elements of job satisfaction including perceptions about job security,
earnings, and hours worked.
Job
security
ABS and HILDA data show casual employment is not necessarily
temporary employment. While the contract of a casual employee can be terminated
immediately, ABS data shows around 81 per cent of casual employees in August
2016 expected to be with their current employer in 12 months. This compares
with around 93 per cent of permanent employees. HILDA data shows similar
findings, with just under three-quarters (73 per cent) of casual employees
interviewed in 2015 reporting they were working for the same employer in 2014.
This compares with 89 per cent of permanent employees.
ABS data shows there was very little difference in the
proportion of casual and permanent employees with a set completion date—six per
cent compared with five per cent in August 2016. ABS data also shows while just
under 42 per cent of casual workers had been with their current employer for 12
months or less a similar proportion had been with their current employer for
two years or more. These findings give the impression that casual workers
expect to remain with their current employer and the security of their
employment is not as precarious as may have been expected.
Working hours and earnings
Perhaps the major disadvantage of a casual employment
contract is the greater likelihood of facing irregular hours of work and
fluctuations in earnings. ABS data for August 2016 shows casual employees are:
-
much more likely to experience variable earnings from one pay
period to another compared with permanent employees—53 per cent and 15 per cent
respectively
- much less likely to be given a guaranteed minimum hours per week
than permanent employees—42 per cent and 93 per cent respectively
- less likely than permanent employees to usually work the same
number of hours per week—61 per cent and 85 per cent respectively
-
three times more likely to want more hours per week than
permanent employees—31 per cent and 10 per cent respectively.
Job
satisfaction
HILDA data shows casual workers are slightly more satisfied
with their pay than permanent employees but less satisfied with their job
security and hours worked. Casual workers are more likely to consider they are paid
fairly for the tasks they perform in their job but are less likely to be
satisfied with their use of skills and abilities. Casual workers have a higher
rate of satisfaction with flexibility available in their jobs than other
workers.
Table 8: job
satisfaction of casual employees and other workers, 2015
| |
Employee type (average rating out of 10) |
| Satisfaction with: |
Fixed-term
contract |
Casuals |
Permanent
employees |
Total |
| Total pay |
7.3 |
7.2 |
7.1 |
7.2 |
| Job security |
7.2 |
7.4 |
8.0 |
7.8 |
| Current hours worked |
7.4 |
7.0 |
7.4 |
7.3 |
| Overall job |
7.7 |
7.0 |
7.4 |
7.3 |
| |
Employee type (average rating out of 7) |
| Opinions about job: |
Fixed-term
contract |
Casuals |
Permanent
employees |
Total |
| I get paid fairly for the things I do in my job |
4.7 |
5.0 |
4.6 |
4.7 |
| I worry about the future of my job |
3.5 |
3.0 |
3.0 |
3.1 |
| I have a secure future in my job |
4.5 |
4.3 |
5.2 |
4.9 |
| I use my skills and abilities in my job |
5.6 |
4.9 |
5.5 |
5.4 |
| My working times can be flexible |
3.9 |
4.4 |
3.9 |
4.0 |
Source: Household Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia
(HILDA), 2015
Note: Satisfaction with pay, job security and current hours
worked are included in the table but overall job satisfaction also takes into
consideration flexibility to balance work and non-work commitments and
satisfaction with the type of work performed.
Another measure of job dissatisfaction is whether workers
are looking for alternative employment. HILDA data for 2015 shows casual
workers were almost twice as likely as permanent workers to have looked for
another job in the previous four weeks—26 per cent and 14 per cent respectively.
Researchers at the Melbourne Institute undertook analysis of
a pooled group of respondents to the HILDA survey from 2001 to 2011 and found job
satisfaction for male casual employees was slightly lower than male permanent
employees. Job satisfaction among female casual and permanent employees was found
to be similar. Male casual employees aged 25 to 54 years recorded much lower
job satisfaction than female casual employees of the same age. Job satisfaction
tends to be similar for all types of employees 55 years and over.[8]
The results of regression analysis showed male casual
employees were between five and seven percentage points less likely to report
high levels of job satisfaction than permanent employees and between one and three
percentage points more likely to report very low levels of job satisfaction.[9]
Preference
for more hours of work
ABS data shows casual employees are just over three times
more likely than permanent employees to want more hours of work per week—31 per
cent compared with 10 per cent in August 2016. The data shows 36 per cent of
casual part-time workers want more hours of work compared with 20 per cent of permanent
part-time workers. The data also shows 17 per cent of casual employees working full-time
wanted extra hours per work despite already working full-time hours. By
comparison only seven per cent of permanent employees working full-time wanted
more hours of work.
Table 9: employee
preferences for hours of work, August 2016
|
|
Employees with paid leave entitlements |
Employees without paid leave entitlements |
| Full-time |
Part-time |
Total |
Full-time |
Part-time |
Total |
| Preferences
for hours of work |
(‘000) |
(‘000) |
(‘000) |
(‘000) |
(‘000) |
(‘000) |
| Want more hours |
429.6 |
291.9 |
721.5 |
124.7 |
628.3 |
753.0 |
| Don't want more
hours |
5425.9 |
1203.8 |
6629.7 |
611.9 |
1096.4 |
1708.3 |
| Total employees |
5855.5 |
1495.7 |
7351.2 |
736.6 |
1724.7 |
2461.3 |
| Share of
total that want and don’t want more hours |
% |
% |
% |
% |
% |
% |
| Don't want more
hours |
93 |
80 |
90 |
83 |
64 |
69 |
| Want more hours |
7 |
20 |
10 |
17 |
36 |
31 |
| How many extra
hours wanted per week |
% |
% |
|
% |
% |
|
| Want fewer than
10 hours extra per week |
4 |
9 |
5 |
9 |
13 |
12 |
| Want extra 10–19
hours per week |
3 |
8 |
4 |
6 |
14 |
12 |
| Want extra 20–29
hours per week |
0 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
7 |
5 |
| Want 30 hours
or more extra per week |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
2 |
Source: ABS, Characteristics of Employment, cat. no.
6333.0
While a large proportion of casual workers were
underemployed they are by no means a homogenous group. Some wanted a few
additional hours per week while others wanted substantially more. Of those
casual workers who wanted more hours of work per week, 39 per cent wanted between
one and 10 hours more, 39 per cent wanted between 10 and 19 additional hours
per week, 17 per cent wanted an additional 20 to 29 hours and five per cent
wanted an additional 30 hours or more.
Conclusion
The use of casual employees in Australia grew strongly from
the early 1980s to the mid-1990s as the Australian economy experienced labour
market de-regulation and became more exposed to international competition. The
composition of employment growth has been more balanced over the past 20 years
with growth in use of casual employees only slightly higher than growth in use
of permanent employees. The prevalence of casual employees has remained
relatively stable during this period with casual employees consistently
accounting for around a quarter of all employees.
ABS and HILDA data confirm that casual employees are
slightly more concerned about their job security than permanent employees and
employees on fixed term contracts. While the nature of casual work would appear
to be less secure and more likely to be terminated than other forms of
employment, a substantial proportion expect to be with the same employer in 12
months.
Casual employees appear to be reasonably satisfied with the
pay they receive and the flexibility this form of work offers. But they are far
less satisfied with the number and regularity of hours of work they receive and
the use of skills they have acquired. Variable hours is directly associated with
variable pay which can affect the ability to repay debts and service loans. The
data shows casual employees are far more likely than permanent employees to
want more hours of work per week.
Less is known about the proportion of casual employees who choose
voluntarily to remain in this form of work and the proportion who take casual
jobs as these are the only types of jobs they can find. Many casual workers
transition quickly to other non-casual jobs but others remain in casual work
either through necessity or by choice. Some casual workers may choose to remain
in casual jobs as they are attracted to the cash loading offered in
compensation for lack of entitlement to a number of paid leave entitlements. This is
particularly the case for young people balancing study and work. But others may
be seeking more certainty about the hours of work they receive. More research
is necessary to establish the characteristics of the group seeking to escape
casual work and what barriers prevent them from transitioning to other forms of
work.
[1]
Buddelmeyer, H., Wooden, M. and Ghantous, S., Transitions from Casual
Employment in Australia, Project 09/05 (December 2006)
[2]
ACTU, Lives on Hold: Unlocking the potential of Australia’s workforce
(2012)
[3]
Dawkins, P. and Norris, K., Casual employment in Australia, Australian
Bulletin of Labour (Vol. 16, Issue 2, pp. 156–173) using data from ABS,
Alternative Working Arrangements, cat. no. 6341.0 and ABS, Employment Benefits,
cat. no. 6334.0
[4]
ABS, Employee Earnings, Benefits and Trade Union Membership, cat.
no. 63010.0, various issues
[5]
ABS, Characteristics of Employment, cat. no. 6333.0, August 2016
[6]
ABS, Australian Industry, 2015-16, cat. no. 8155.0
[7]
The APCS is a legislated set of key minimum entitlements of employment
for employees in the national workplace relations system introduced by the Workplace
Relations Amendment (Work Choices) Act 2005. The Australian Fair Pay and
Conditions Standard (except for wages) ceased to apply on 31 December 2009.
[8]
Melbourne Institute, Families Income and Jobs, Volume 9, pp. 61–64
[9]
Buddelmeyer, H., McVicar, D., and Wooden, M., Non-Standard ‘Contingent’
Employment and Job Satisfaction: A Panel Data Analysis
For copyright reasons some linked items are only available to members of Parliament.
© Commonwealth of Australia
Creative Commons
In essence, you are free to copy and communicate this work in its current form for all non-commercial purposes, as long as you attribute the work to the author and abide by the other licence terms. The work cannot be adapted or modified in any way. Content from this publication should be attributed in the following way: Author(s), Title of publication, Series Name and No, Publisher, Date.
To the extent that copyright subsists in third party quotes it remains with the original owner and permission may be required to reuse the material.
Inquiries regarding the licence and any use of the publication are welcome to webmanager@aph.gov.au.
This work has been prepared to support the work of the Australian Parliament using information available at the time of production. The views expressed do not reflect an official position of the Parliamentary Library, nor do they constitute professional legal opinion.
Any concerns or complaints should be directed to the Parliamentary Librarian. Parliamentary Library staff are available to discuss the contents of publications with Senators and Members and their staff. To access this service, clients may contact the author or the Library‘s Central Enquiry Point for referral.