Source: ABS, Employee Earnings, Benefits and Trade Union Membership, cat 6310, 2014. Females make up the majority of casual employees (54.4 per cent of all casual workers and 64.1 per cent of part-time casual workers). A clear majority (69.4 per cent) of all full-time casuals are male. 59 per cent of all casual workers are aged between 25 and 64. The 15-19 year-old age group has the highest casual density (70.7% of employees in that group are casual employees) and the 55-59 year-old age group have the lowest density (15.1%). Remarkably, the mean employment tenure for casual employees is now 4.1 years, including 4.9 years for full-time casuals and 4.0 years for part-time casuals. In manufacturing, the mean employment tenure for casuals is 5.6 years and 7.7 years in wholesale trade. The mean weekly earnings of casual employees are lower than permanent workers ($1,181 per week versus $1,412 per week). Just over one third of part-time casual employees earn less than $200 per week. Women consistently earn less than men, in casual full-time, casual part-time, permanent part-time and permanent fulltime employment. Labour hire employees are more likely to be casual (76% of labour hire employees) and make up at least 2 percent of the workforce, with some reason to believe the true figure may be higher. The rise in casual employment has been at the expense of permanent full-time jobs: permanent full-time employment has fallen from 77.8 per cent of employees in 1988 to
subcontractors and a multitude of smaller players. Hence, a labour hire employee may be negotiating through various layers of inter-corporate subcontracting arrangements as well as the commercial arrangements between the labour hire and host. The case reported in Matthew Reid v Broadspectrum Australia Pty Ltd identifies some of the practical difficulties that this can present: namely complying with the practice and procedure at one's workplace can lead to one being terminated by one's employer – who is not at one's workplace. The Howe Inquiry heard many personal accounts from workers engaged in labour hire arrangements. The inquiry's report relevantly contains the following: “The weight of evidence we heard about the effects this has on workers was overwhelming. We heard of cases of: Workplaces where the entire workforce was employed as casuals through a labour hire firm. Employees were expected to be available for a full-working week, and were notified by text message around 4pm each day of whether and when they were required to turn up the next day – but without any information about how long their shift would be; Employers using labour hire in the workplace to foster divisions among their ongoing staff and temporary workers, weakening workers’ bargaining power and leading to lower rates of pay and lesser entitlements; Indirect discrimination on the basis of union activity, age and other grounds being tacitly applied by simply not offering certain workers any more shifts; Labour hire workers feeling unable to report bullying, injuries suffered in the workplace, or occupational health and safety risks for the fear that exercising their rights would lead to censure, the loss of shifts or the loss of a job altogether; and Labour hire workers finding themselves unable to secure a home loan or a car loan because of their lack of job security.” Labour hire is not a new phenomenon in Australia. What is exceptional about it is that has been allowed to continue so untouched by mainstream regulation. It has surpassed its initial object of supplementing existing workforces and is now used also to replace them. At the extreme end, some labour hire agencies in fact recruit workers from overseas to