Although women hold the majority of part time employment, males’ holding of the part time employment sector is slowly rising. In 1970 women held the majority of part time employment at 26.9%, compared to males holding only 3.1% at that time. By 2000 women held 43.8% of the part time employment sector and males held only 13.1%. In 1991 354,300 females were engaged in part time and casual employment. By 1997 this figure rose to 463,200, which is an increase of 31% (ABS, 1997). The biggest increase for males occurred in the casual employment sector from 5,600 in 1991 to 53,100 in 1997 (ABS, 1997). Although male casual employees increased at a high rate from 9.4 % to 20.9% between the years 1984 and 1997, female casual employees still dominated the casual sector from 25.7% to 31.7% between 1984 and 1997.
To explain the growth in part time and casual employment the supply side and the demand side of the labour market must be examined. The supply side factors supported growth, but the major force came from the demand side (Romeyn, 1992). Intensification of competitiveness, together with special demand and working conditions and introduction of new technology have seen the services sector, in particular, turn increasingly to part time and casual employment (Romeyn, 1992). Strategies of employers and preferences of employees could account for the increase in part time and casual work. There is some evidence that employers have played an active role in the growth of part time jobs (Balnave, 2003 cited Deery et al 2001). A number of employers substituted part time labour for full time labour, particularly in the retail industry (Balnave, 2003 cited Deery et al 2001). In utilising part time labour employers appear to have two objectives. The first one is reducing working hours by scheduling work around peaks in trading activity and second to minimise wage costs through the abolition of over time or penalty rates of pay (Balnave, 2003 cited Deery et al 2001). The recession of 1990 had a significant impact on the levels of full time employment, and in turn increasing part time jobs. Approximately 350 000 full time jobs were cut down during the recession at the beginning of 1990 (Balnave, 2003 cited Deery et al 2001). The industries that were affected by the job cut were from manufacturing and construction of Victoria and New South Wales (Balnave, 2003 cited Deery et al 2001).
Employers in particular industries used casual labour as a way of balancing peaks and troughs in workloads. For example, ABS showed that 62% of casual employees had variable earnings from month to month compared to 34% of all employed persons and only 14% of all full time employees with leave entitlements (Balnave, 2003 cited Deery et al 2001). The high proportion of casuals with variable earnings does suggest casual work is a flexible form of employment for employees and employers.
Casual workers provide enterprises with both functional and numerical flexibility (Burgess, 1996). Casual employment allows enterprises to utilise specific skills that are specific task assigned and are outside of the employing enterprises internal labour market (Burgess, 1996). In context of recession, product mark uncertainty, and growing deregulation of economy, many enterprises may prefer casual working arrangements (Burgess, 1996). Taking on casual workers in uncertain product market context has potential cost advantages over employing permanent workers (Burgess, 1996). This applies especially to industries where product demand is inter-temporally uneven on daily, weekly, and or seasonal basis (Burgess, 1996). Relative productivity of casual labour will thus vary across firms and industries (Wooden, 1998). Factors that are likely to influence these differences include the importance of training and skills, importance of labour flexibility in responding to changes in output demand, way in which work is organised (Wooden, 1998). These factors impact on relative demand for casual workers (Wooden, 1998). Jobs that require high skill levels, such as formal education and training, then casual labour will not appeal to employers (Wooden, 1998). Firms facing market characteristics which involve high degree of variability in demand over the course of the day/week/year, for example retail trade or restaurants, casual labour will be highly wanted by employers (Wooden, 1998). The use of permanent labour in these situations, for example, involves hoarding labour, at considerable cost during low season (Wooden, 1998). In contrast, casual labour can be hired to work only during times of peak demand (Wooden, 1998). Tendency of employers to convert full time jobs to part time jobs is not a trend peculiar to Australia (Balnave, 2003 cited Deery et al 2001).
The rise in casual and part time employment is not entirely based on the employers’ strategies. For a range of reasons many employees prefer to work casual rather than permanent. Some prefer the casual loading rather than have entitlements, such as, future sick and or holiday leave thereby maximising their earnings whilst in paid employment (Reith, 2000). Full time students want additional income to assist in supporting themselves (Reith, 2000). Families want second income to pay bills or add to savings (Reith, 2000). Some reasons as to why people prefer casual/part time work are that it allows employees to combine paid work with family responsibilities (caring for young children, aged relatives, and housework), employees are able to combine paid work with study and leisure time, it slowly eases employees out of the workforce into retirement, provide work for those whose health, age, disability would make full time work hard (Romeyn, 1992).
From AWIRS casual employment is higher in non union workplaces and smallest in complete or near complete union coverage (Wooden, 1998). It is apparent that there is a decline in unionisation levels and important contributing factor is the increase in casual employment. Wooden (1998, p.8) mentions that a characteristic of casual employees is that they “are much less likely to be members of a trade union”. Trade union densities are declining through the growth in casual employment (Burgess, 1996). Casuals are more difficult to organise, arrange fees collection, and are reluctant to belong to trade unions if they are excluded form non wage benefits and have no employment security (Burgess, 1996). Traditionally most unions opposed the introduction of part time work because it was seen as a threat to full time employment (Romeyn, 1992). In response to this tribunals have allowed part time work provisions only where such provisions have been judged to be desirable to meet particular needs of industry and not have a detrimental effect to full time employment (Romeyn, 1992). All unions have one objective, which is to protect employees from being mistreating. So generally there are no different perspectives within the union stakeholder.
Employers and employees view casual and part time employment on the same level, which are its efficiency advantages. For example, employers use casuals as “the “just-in-time” worker “(Horin2002). When the employer has reached its peak season they will call in more workers and dismiss them as the low season approaches. For some employees, such as full time students, and mothers, casual employment allows them to earn an income as well as attend to the responsibilities in their life, such as study commitments, housework, family matters et cetera
The employers and union don’t look eye to eye on casual and part time employment. As discussed earlier it can be seen that casual labour has high advantages and is in demand in most industries and part time labour is in demand in some industries. For the union, casual work has been the contributing factor to the decline of unionisation levels. This is because casuals are much harder to keep up with and keep track, which is why the union is not in favour of casual labour. As for part time employment the union was well against it but part time employees is accounted for in retail trade, health and community services, and property and business services.
The union and employees have no great disagreements because they both have different needs and or wants. For example, most employees want to be able to earn an income but still be able to keep attending to their responsibilities, where as the union has a great interest in protecting employees rights.
In analysing the different perspective with the employer stakeholder it must be noted that each industry has different characteristics, such as, different way of functioning, different needs and objectives. Due to these characteristics some industries favour part time employment more than others and vice versa. For example, retail trade and restaurants are involved in high degree of variability in demand so casual employment will be the chosen work arrangement by those employers. Casual employment density is highest in accommodation, cafes and restaurants, agriculture, forestry and fishing, cultural recreational services and retail trade, where as part time employment is only accounted by three industries which are retail trade, health and community services, and property and business services.
Each employee has different needs and wants, therefore their work arrangements must suit this. The different reasons for employees choosing part time or casual work reflect the perspective that each employee has of non-standard employment. For example, ABS (1997) stated that women preferred part time or casual work because of personal reasons (44%, employment reasons (28%), and family reasons (25%). It can be see each employee views non-standard employment differently in a way how it benefits them.
The increase in non-standard employment shows the demand for greater flexibility by employers. The three main stakeholders have similar and different perspectives and in some cases, such as the employer and employee stakeholder, the perspectives are different within the group.
