Thread: for many Americans, temp work becomes permanent

Yep, and if the big end of town and the pollies have their way, it will be like that here too.

Yep, and if the big end of town and the pollies have their way, it will be like that here too.

Labor hire has been here for a very long time. I am one of those that has been seduced by the dark side of casual/ temp employment. Way back in the 1980`s it was a good wage and there was always the alternative of going full time as there was plenty of full time work. Now the full time work is rare as a land rover that doesn`t leak oil. Manufacturing has woken up to the fact that the full time work is far between and is screwing the rates. I have of late been taking trade assistant jobs to get by which is a $8 per hour cut in my wage or $304 a week less and no travel which is another $125 less. Might have start looking at trailer park brochures if work keeps going this way. Better get in soon as I believe that there will be queue soon enough.
Cheers Hall

This is reminiscent of the 70's early 80's in the motor industry, Temporary/Casual an easy way to get staff,normal wage +% but no holiday loading,sick pay,and instant dismissal,employers and manufacturers loved it

If done properly this can work well to everyone's advantage. One place I used to work for knew exactly how many staff it required to operate in the slow season. These were perm all others were temp. Each year as the up turn came on they would increase head count with temp staff. Would offer first to those who had worked there before as were already trained and knew their way around. Regular Temps were even brought in to do training as required during their down time to ensure they could operate at full speed from the day they came back. This was a German owned company who considered the staff to be more important to their future than the machines.

Remember the article is about the US here casuals generally get paid a fair bit more than permanent staff because sick and holiday pay are included in the hourly rate also if you earn more than $450 per month your employer (the labour hire company) has to pay super for you.

Originally Posted by THE BOOGER

Remember the article is about the US here casuals generally get paid a fair bit more than permanent staff because sick and holiday pay are included in the hourly rate also if you earn more than $450 per month your employer (the labour hire company) has to pay super for you.

I bet a lot of temps here are kept below that amount per month.

Originally Posted by Ausfree

[/B]
I bet a lot of temps here are kept below that amount per month.

Depends which Award they fall under.

In the smallest or worst off case, a temp or contract worker will get 25% loading added to their rate. This makes up for them missing paid sick leave/holiday leave etc etc

No contractors/temps in Aus are worse off for pay in any role that is the same as their permanent counterpart, if they are it is and will be against employment law.

All temps/contracts have super remitted on their behalf, and in almost all cases I see are paid significantly more and are often regarded as more safe in their job than permanent employees as their skills are usually far greater, more diverse and are more sought after in the I.T and Finance space.

Is the $450 a month thing from the US or was it referred to for Aus?

And when you think about it, some I.T contractors are on over 2000 per day, when their permanent counterparts are paid 120k a year to do the same job. Think about that for a second.

I read that about 40% of the Aussie workforce is now casual or part-time (that doesn't include people on fixed term contracts incidentally), so its certainly happening here.
It can have serious effects. I was casual for a while and you could not plan ahead while knowing your work could dry up the next day. Because of that it was difficult to get a mortgage, a car loan or consumer credit. You also tightened right up on spending.
So the employers who cut costs by increasing the number of temps. are actually hitting retail sales, housing, the automotive and other industries by reducing their customer base.
It amuses me when we hear economists puzzling about why consumers are being tight with their money when one of the major reasons is right out there - the increasing casualization of the workforce.