Casual and Part-Time Workers in Australia - Coursework Example

Human Resources Management [Name of the Student] [Name of the University] Human Resources Management During the past thirty years, the world has witnessed major social and economic changes. This has been much more intense in the industrialised nations, like Australia. In Australia, the sudden growth of the economy introduced new forms of employment opportunities and arrangements (Esposto, 2008). This resulted in an inequality in the earning capacity of individuals. The number of casual and part-time workers in Australia has increased during the past two decades. Casual labour is increasing in several industries, like the retail industry, hospitality, manufacturing, and communications. Other industries, such as finance and insurance are also employing a large number of casual and part-time workers. Research studies have disclosed that casual employment is linked to training at a low – level and insignificant career opportunities. (Watson, Contented workers in Inferior Jobs? Re-Assessing Casual Employment in Australia, 2005, p. 372). Moreover, the workplace environment will not be satisfactory for casual workers; and such workers are subjected to adverse occupational health and safety outcomes. The increase of such workers was at its height in the 1990s. Thereafter, the number of casual workers showed a constant increase. During the decade 1990 to 2000, the number of casuals increased from 19% to 27%. However, during the same period, the number of regular and full-time workers had increased from 6% to 12%. In the manufacturing field, the number of casual employees had doubled during the period from 1985 to 2002. The corresponding increase was three times in communications, finance, and insurance (Watson, Contented workers in Inferior Jobs? Re-Assessing Casual Employment in Australia, 2005, p. 372). Casual workers are the most disadvantaged group in the workforce, and they cannot secure long-term employment. Companies change such workers frequently, who therefore, do not enjoy job security. Such workers are not allowed to participate in the decision-making process. They constitute the most marginalised group of employees in the Australian workforce. This is due to the ineffectiveness of the Labour law system of Australia. Businesses are undergoing dynamic change, from the past twenty years. Most of the companies are reducing their overhead costs by removing non-profitable and non-important aspects in their businesses. Many companies are getting rid of non-core aspects. This process is termed as vertical disintegration, and it brings about changes to the existing employment arrangements (Arup, 2006, p.542). It is essential for a low cost producer to focus on issues, such as overheads, components and raw materials, services and outsourcing, research and development, investment strategies, human resources and identification of services and main products (Reducing Costs to Boost Profits).Outsourcing is one such transformation. Companies outsource non-core aspects to other companies, and business is conducted through the outsourced companies. These outsourcing companies form a component of supply chains and franchisees. The changes in business cause an increase in unemployment, as a significant number of workers lose their jobs. New forms of employment arrangements gain importance, and workers are engaged in alternative ways, such as part-time employees. Many of the workers are employed under independent employment contracts (Arup, 2006, p.542). Some of the workers have established their own independent businesses. As such, the optimal utilisation of working capital has enabled several corporate treasuries to ensure cost efficiency (Finance and Treasury Management Navigating the way, 2008). This situation gives rise to several outcomes, and these new employment arrangements do not provide job security to the employees under the employment legislation, which no longer addresses their rights. In addition, these companies are able to avoid their legitimate responsibilities towards their employees. They are no longer under an obligation to look after the safety and welfare of their workers, in these new employment arrangements (Arup, 2006, p.542). Finding employment opportunities is a difficult task in Australia. Employers engage highly skilled workers. This situation is unfavourable to young low skilled workers. As a result, the rate of unemployment among the youth is significantly higher than that of skilled and experienced workers. Moreover, they do not receive occupational benefits, as compared with skilled workers (Argy, 2003, p.3). As such, young unemployed people cannot form autonomous households due to lack of employment opportunities. Unemployment, per se, among the youth of Australia is on the increase, and it has reached an alarming level. This unemployment has been attributed to reduction in jobs and demand for workers in this age category. Since the year 1995, there has been a 6.9% reduction in full time jobs for teenagers. The corresponding reduction for young adults was seen to be 15.2% (Muir, Maguire, Slack – Smith, & Murray, 2003). The outcome has been disheartening at the very least. This unwelcome development has compelled a substantial number of young people to take up part time or casual work. Consequently, these people were unable to garner work experience, and this in turn, further reduced their chances of gaining full time employment. Another related development was the reduction in the number of apprenticeship opportunities for the youth (Muir, Maguire, Slack – Smith, & Murray, 2003). In the area of full-time employment, young people in the age group of 15 to 19 years are the most disadvantaged group of people. The individuals in this group do not have access to full – time work. Unlike many industrialised countries, the labour market in Australia is not favourable towards the youth. It does not offer creative work environments and coordinated work arrangements, such as school to work systems, which are well entrenched in other countries (Argy, 2003, p.3). More than 15% of the youth are facing an unemployment problem, due to the existing labour market policies. This proportion of the populace has remained, more or less constant, for the past 15 years. At the same time, it is an established fact that the labour market in Australia does not offer full-time jobs to the new entrants in the market. Between the years 1990 and 2000, there was an increase in employment opportunities. However, the rate of full – time jobs had decreased by more than 17 % during that period (Argy, 2003, p. 4). This indicates the behaviour of Australian labour market. The deregulation of labour markets commenced in the late 1980s. This was accompanied by economic reforms, and these reforms had a profound impact on the labour markets and the employment sector. They were responsible for increased unemployment and for the inequality in the earnings of workers (Mitchell, 2003). Employees were compelled to seek employment opportunities with fewer earnings and decreased job security. As such, in Australia, the poverty rate increased as a result of these new reforms. This was conjoined with a change in the indicators of poverty. For instance, in the 1970s, only the elderly people had suffered from lack of home ownership, and this group was considered as the most vulnerable. However, this situation changed, subsequent to the introduction of economic reforms. At present, young people with low skills, the unemployed, the underemployed, and the low-paid workers in the service sector, are deemed to be the most vulnerable groups. There has been a trend to force the older workers to take premature retirement on the grounds of disability (Mitchell, 2003). This group is also at risk, due to reduced employment opportunities. Many countries, like Australia, Austria, Finland, Poland and the UK provide disability benefits under retirement schemes, as a matter of course. The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development conducted a study on sickness, disability and work. This study indicates that there is an increasing dependence on disability and sickness benefits among the members of the working age population, in these countries (Gurria, 2008). The economists have provided a number of reasons, in order to establish a connexion betwixt unemployment and inequality of earnings. The increasing sophistication of technology demands highly skilled workers. As such, workers with low skills may not find good job opportunities. Moreover, the better skilled workers receive higher wages, in comparison to the lower skilled workers (Mitchell, 2003). The low-skilled and unskilled people have to choose low level employment. In addition to the reforms, manufacturing companies are facing heavy competition from low-wage paying countries in Asia. The Australian companies are not in a position to meet this competition. As a result, they are compelled to reduce the wages in order to reduce expenditure. This change has also affected workers in the service sector. The reforms have also caused changes in industrial relations (Mitchell, 2003). As a result, the wage fixing processes have changed, and this has proved to be disadvantageous to the low-skilled and low – paid workers. Moreover, in Australia, the emergence of a regime of individual agreements has badly affected the earnings of full-time employees. Collective agreements tend to favour the full time employees, but this is slowly being supplanted by individual agreements, which entail a significantly lower wage. Employees in receipt of awards only, are being paid comparatively lower wages (Mitchell, 2003).Thus; the changes in the labour market have principally targeted the low-skilled workers, by providing them with less employment opportunities. In the present labour market, only workers with high-skills remain in employment. Low – skilled and under qualified workers do not find any opportunity in the existing labour market. Therefore, in order to secure employment in the Australian labour market, one has to have a high-level of skill and knowledge of modern technology (Mitchell, 2003). The traditional employment areas, no longer offer job opportunities to the lower skilled or unskilled workers. In Australia, the percentage of wages in the total cost was 54.4 %, during the period 2002 – 2003. This was 61.5% during the years 1974 – 1975. The share in profits was 25% in the period 2002 – 2003, which was the highest, since 1959 – 1960. These changes were contrived by the Labour Government in Australia, with the active support of the trade unions. Furthermore, the Labour Government, via its Accord with the Australian Council of Trade Unions, was seized with lowering the wages to workers. In return, the Government offered tax and social benefits to the workers (Conley). Thus social outcomes proved to be dependent on the policies of the government. In respect of employment legislation, the Workplace Relations Act concedes the existence of a legitimate role for the trade unions and employer associations. The laws relating to freedom of association prevent employers from dismissing employees on the grounds that they are either a member or not a member of some union. The extant legislation provides statutory safeguards to employees against the violation of freedom of association. An employee is entitled to seek these remedies, if the employer breaches these provisions. The Act also provides employees with the right to initiate legal action against the employer, for violations of the workplace agreement (Workplace relations in Australia, 2008). The circumstances, under which union officials obtain a right to enter the workplace, in order to inspect the conditions prevailing there, is specified by the Workplace Relations Act. This Act empowers the Australian Industrial Relations Commission to ensure such right to entry, and to address any misuse of this right to entry mechanism (Workplace relations in Australia, 2008). In addition, both the employers and the employees are permitted to undertake protected industrial actions, under certain circumstances, which are stipulated in the Act. Employees or their unions are not liable for commencing protected industrial actions, unless such action entails defamation, personal injury or damage to the property of the employer (Workplace relations in Australia, 2008). However, several statutory requirements have to be fulfilled to initiate protected industrial action. If the action involves the negotiation of a collective agreement, it has to be authorised through a secret ballot. The employer should not offer any payments to the employee for the period of industrial action. Similarly, the employee should not accept any payment, in this regard (Workplace relations in Australia, 2008). Doing so will be in breach of the Workplace Relations Act. The Trade Practices Act 1974 prohibits secondary boycotts, as also union boycotts, if such acts are intended to cause considerable loss or damage. A boycott is termed as a secondary boycott, if the industrial action is initiated against a third party. The Workplace Relations Act provides certain safeguards to resolve disputes between different trade unions if the disputes cause damage to the business. It also protects employees from unfair dismissals and unlawful terminations from service (Workplace relations in Australia, 2008). The very purpose for which trade unions are formed is to protect workers from unfair conditions of employment. Trade unions play a significant role in the wage determination of workers. Capitalism arises during periods of economic expansion, which creates labour market. Capitalism directly relates to competition and the latter influences the behaviour of labour markets. In instances, wherein trade unions came to the fore in competitive and tight labour markets, initial success promoted economic orientation. However, even the trade unions, with minimal demands and a limited brief, require rights and recognition under the law. Trade unions, in the beginning had the capacity to regulate the labour markets (Ellem, Markey, & Shields, 2004, p. 13). This capability was related to the actions and responses of politicians and economic elites. Trade unions in their formative years faced widespread opposition from employers. The movements organised by unions were brutally suppressed by the government. However, such opposition to trade unionism had a major effect on the politics that came to fore, with regard to national trade union movements. Trade unionism proved to be a juggernaut that nothing could stop (Ellem, Markey, & Shields, 2004, p.13). Thus, there was a gradual change in the attitude of the government, towards this movement, and this was reflected in governmental policies towards trade unionism. Governments that exerted extremely repressive measures on the trade union movement suffered much more drastic consequences in their nations. Some union movements were transformed into national movements. Countries like Germany, Austria, Russia, France, Spain, and Italy had severely restricted the right to combine in the labour market (Ellem, Markey, & Shields, 2004, p.13). The outcome of these measures was that the trade unions in these countries became active in politics. Consequently, trade unions have become political institutions. The unions entered into politics and decided to change the political power distribution within the state. This move enabled them to wield power in the state, and helped them to exert their power in the labour markets. As the trade unions become more powerful, the employer opposition and the state’s repression subsided. This was to the benefit of the workers, and the latter were provided with improved conditions in their workplace (Ellem, Markey, & Shields, 2004, p. 13). It also benefitted privileged workers, such as the skilled groups to improve their employment opportunities. Prior to the emergence of organised trade unions, there were strong radical organisations to protect employees from unfair treatment such as the denial of fundamental rights. The democratic reforms that transpired during that time had left their impact on trade unionism. These reforms coincided with the national movements aimed at procuring various rights such as universal suffrage (Ellem, Markey, & Shields, 2004, p.14). The working classes organised these movements to influence political organisations. The national working classes successfully moved the governments and achieved voting rights and political power. The success of their movements encouraged working classes to become politically conscious (Ellem, Markey, & Shields, 2004, p.14). From this success, labour movements headed in the reformist direction. There is quite a bit of legislation relating to the process of collective bargaining between employees and their employers. Such industrial legislation has developed over a period of time. The granting of a general exemption to small businesses, would dispense with the checks and balances that constitute an integral component of collective bargaining, as provided for in industrial law (Dawson, Segal, & Rendall, 2003). Collective barganing through consultative structures is a tremendous achievement of the trade unions. Employees can influence the decision making process in their organisations through consultations. This is a radical change that can regulate the autonomy and management systems in the organisations. (Gollan, 2002, p.58). Several organisations have established effective consultative arrangements. In such organisation, the employees are involved in the decision making processes, regarding operational issues within the orgnaisations. However, this consultative process has significantly less influence on the autonomy of the management, with regard to strategic issues in the organisation(Gollan, 2002, p.58). Moreover, there is no evidence that consultative committees have joint control over the workplace.In most of the cases, the management of objectives controls the workplace. In addition, the socio-technical systems approach has been eliminated in most workplaces, and it has been supplanted by management teams. The appraoch of managed teams has proven to be the best in most organisations(Gollan, 2002, p. 59). As such, the consultative arrangements have little or no control over the issues relating to employment. Although, the Australian government has claimed that the Work Choices would be of great help in generating jobs, it has benefited the employer by making individualised contracts with the employee. The following discussion reveals the real effect of work choices on the employment benifits received by the employees. The Government of Australia introduced Work Choices on the 27th of March 2006. The objective of this legislation is to establish a national workplace relations system. It develops the workplace relations system that can be applied throughout Australia and to encompass each and every employer and employee in the country (Costa, 1997, p.70). The government drafted this legislation on the basis of the corporations power. In New South Wales v Commonwealth, the Australian High Court ruled on the basis of the provisions of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth) as amended by the Work Choices legislation. In this case, the plaintiff challenged the constitutional validity of the Work Choices legislation (Costa, 1997, p.70). The High Court rejected this contention and upheld the validity of the legislation. It also opined that the law could be applied to the functions and activities of constitutional businesses. The law also covered the business relationships of the corporations. Industrial relations include the rights and obligations of employees and corporations. As such, the Work Relations Act as amended by the Work Choices would be the applicable law, and this would be based on corporation’s power. The Australian Council of Trade Unions controls trade unions in Australia. The new legislation is aimed at reducing the active role of the ACTU in workplace relationships. This Act decentralised the industrial relation system, and promoted collective bargaining at the corporation level (Costa, 1997, p.221). In this manner, the Act reduced the role of the ACTU in industries and corporations. However, the ACTU retains its role in organising industrial campaigns and dispute resolution in a majority of the industries. The ACTU depends on its State branches and labour councils for this purpose. Labour councils are closer to their constituents than the ACTU (Costa, 1997, p. 221). Moreover, they have considerable experience and greater resources for bargaining. The Australian Prime Minister John Howard’s Work Choices initiative is characterised by the following features. First, the protectin afforded to employes, in companies with a work force of less than a hundred workers has been expunged. If the reason for dismissal is stated as operational or to address decreasing profits, then dismissal is not governed by the size of the workforce, in that company. Second, employers can enter into individual contracts, which are termed as Australian Workplace Agreements, with employees. In addition, employers have been benefitted enormously, as they need not enter into any collective bargaining agreement.Third, award conditions have been drastically pruned, so that employers can curb penalty rates, overtime pay, public holidays, work allowances and redundancy pay. A fairness test had been established to protect employees from the exploitative behaviour of their employers. (Key elements of John Howard’s Work Choices, 2007). This new initiative by Howard, effectively neutralises this important protection to workers. Fourth, many of the normal activities of the unions have been declared illegal. Moreover, the unions have been permitted very limited leeway to negotiate on behalf of the employees and thereby protect them from Australian Work Agreements. Fifth, the Industrial Relations Commission has been emasculated, and it no longer functions as an independent refree. The powers of this commission have been transferred to specially created government agencies and private institutions. Finally, the Fair Pay Commission was established by the Howard government, in order to suitably the manner in which minimum wages were to be determined (Key elements of John Howard’s Work Choices, 2007). This enabled the employers to drastically reduce the minimum wage. The Australian government has claimed that the Work Choices would be of great help in creating jobs. Some of the possible measures that this could involve, are curbing the rate of growth of the expenditure incurred on account of wages and curtailing labour costs that are unrelated to wages. An important factor is the effects of change in the institutions that determine the minimum wage. Another such determinant is effecting a reduction in the costs involved in dismissing an employee. (Wooden, 2006). These costs arise on account of the changes effected to the unfair dismissal legislation, Work Choices are expected to influence award wages for some employees. Employers, are benefitted to a great extent, as they can enter into individual agreements with employees, and thereby provide a lower wage and lesser benefits. This would have been difficult in collective agreements with employees (Wooden, 2006). Thus, workers stand to lose, as their wages will be reduced and in addition, the working conditions will deteriorate. An important facet of the Work Choices is that minimum wages are to be established by the Australian Fair Pay Commission. This entity reports directly to the Minister, and operates in a more or less autonomous manner. The Australian Fair Pay Commission will enforce a significantly lower rate of wage increase, which in turn will increase employment among the low paid class of workers (Wooden, 2006). This will reduce unemployment, in this category of workers. Part time work in Australia has grown by leaps and bounds over the past four decades. Thus, there is considerable diversity in the number of hours for which people now work. In the past, most of the members of the workforce were employed on a full time basis. This no longer holds good, and the type of work available admits of a great deal of flexibility. Such developments have the potential to bring in considerable amount of positive change. (Watson, 2003, p. 203). However, this holds good, only if these new ways of working are left to the choice of the worker and satisfy the needs of that person.However, this has been accompanied by a few undesirable developments. Some of these are the continuation of unemployment. This is a setback that entials quite a bit of intricacy. Unemployment, per se, is much more than just the problems associated with people who are not employed. A major problem in this genre is posed by casual work, and 25% of the labour force is employed on a casual basis (Watson, 2003, p. 203). There is much more to this, and some of its subsidiary categories are precarious employment and under employment. Those who are employed on a casual basis experience tremendous insecurity. The majority of such workers desire regular employment. The fact that most of the workers prefer flexibility in their work cannot be gainsaid; however, instead of flexibility these people are presented with insecurity. The labour system is governed by intricate legal instruments and legislation. There are a number of lacunae in the conventional labour law system. It adopts a biased approach towards certain actors, in as much as it promotes their interests to the detriment of the others (Murray, 2006, p.365). It neither respects the individual rights of the workers nor does it uphold the rights of minority groups. In addition, the new legislation Work Choices failed to significantly, alter this situation. Its chief intervention was to get rid of crucial institutions that were seized with promoting the public interest. With the removal of these institutions, there is now great difficulty in redressing employee grievances. Thus, it can be concluded that the novel choices made available in respect of employment are to the disadvantage of the workers. Moreover, it would be incorrect to assume that only the casual workers, the unemployed and those paid low wages are affected. The negative effects of these new employment choices affect each and every worker. There is a significant increase in the amount of work, and as is to be anticipated the frustration levels of the workers have increased enormously. As such, the Work Choices legislation has proved to be disadvantageous to the workers. List of References New South Wales v Commonwealth , HCA 52 (2006). Work Choices. (2006). Australia. Key elements of John Howard’s Work Choices. (2007). Retrieved September 16, 2010, from http://www.aeufederal.org.au/Publications/TATT/Spr07p20-21.pdf Finance and Treasury Management Navigating the way. (2008). Retrieved October 5, 2010, from KPMG: http://www.kpmg.ch/docs/20080101_Finance_and_Treasury_Management_-_Navigating_the_way.pdf Workplace relations in Australia. (2008, August). Retrieved September 14, 2010, from http://www.dfat.gov.au/facts/workplace_relations.html Argy, F. (2003). Where to from here?: Australian egalitarianism under threat. Allen & Unwin. Arup, C. (2006). Labour law and labour market regulation: essays on the construction. Federation Press. Conley, T. (n.d.). Globalisation and rising inequality in Australia: Is increasing inequality inevitable in Australia? Retrieved September 14, 2010, from http://www.adelaide.edu.au/apsa/docs_papers/Others/Conley.pdf Costa , M., & Lloyd Ross Forum. (1997). Reforming Australia's unions. Federation Press. Dawson, D., Segal, J., & Rendall, C. (2003, January 31). Review of the Competition Provisions of the Trade Practices Act. Chapter 7. Retrieved October 5, 2010, from Global Competition Forum: http://www.globalcompetitionforum.org/regions/Oceania/Australia/Chpt7.pdf Ellem, B., Markey, R., & Shields, J. (2004). Peak unions in Australia: origins, purpose, power, agency. Federation Press. Esposto, A. S. (2008, January 4). Dimensions of Earnings Inequality in Australia. Retrieved September 13, 2010, from http://eprints.vu.edu.au/554/ Gollan, P. (2002). Works councils in Australia: future prospects and possibilities. Federation Press. Gurria, A. (2008, November 1). Living Longer, Working Longer. Retrieved October 5, 2010, from AARP International: http://www.aarpinternational.org/resourcelibrary/resourcelibrary_show.htm?doc_id=727357 Mitchell, W. (2003, October 6). Unemployment, inequality and public responsibility. Retrieved September 14, 2010, from The University of Newcastle: http://e1.newcastle.edu.au/coffee/pubs/oped/unemployment_and_inequality.pdf Muir, K., Maguire, A., Slack – Smith, D., & Murray, M. (2003, November). Youth Unemployment in Australia: a contextual, governmental and organisational perspective. Retrieved October 5, 2010, from thesmithfamily: http://www.thesmithfamily.com.au/webdata/resources/files/Youth_unemployment_AMP_Report_November03.pdf Murray, J. (2006). Work Choices and the Radical Revision of the Public Realm of Australian Statutory Labour Law. Industrial Law Journal, 35(4): 343 – 366. Reducing Costs to Boost Profits. (n.d.). Retrieved October 5, 2010, from hawkesburyaustralia: http://www.hawkesburyaustralia.com.au/businessInfo/news.asp?pid=16&id=93 Trade Practices Act 1974. (n.d.). Australia. Watson, I. (2003). Fragmented futures: new challenges in working life. Federation Press. Watson, I. (2005). Contented workers in Inferior Jobs? Re-Assessing Casual Employment in Australia. The Journal of Industrial Relations, 47(4): 371—392. Wooden, M. (2006). Implications of Work Choices Legislation. Retrieved September 16, 2010, from http://epress.anu.edu.au/agenda/013/02/13-2-A-1.pdf Workplace Relations Act 1996. (n.d.). Australia. Read More