Comment

Comment on Labor to give casuals new rights to full-time employment in move to improve job security

thisisnotcoincedence@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

Please may someone explain this a little bit more for me? My understanding has been that casuals are a temporary solution to fill gaps in the various sectors of employment.

Why would we need a plan to make them permanent? Would the onus not be on the employer to decide to ask if they would want full time work if they had the ability to do so? Or is this purely a means to prevent employers from extorting casuals?

source

Sort:hotnew top

maniacalmanicmania@aussie.zone ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
In some sectors such as universities where my partner works casualisation is quite clearly a permanent solution.

source
abhibeckert@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
Full time employees are entitled to 6 weeks of paid leave (combination sick pay and holiday) every year.

Casual employees who work “full time” are not entitled to any paid leave at all.

As far as I know that is basically the only difference between the two. Another commonly cited reason is it’s easier to fire a casual employee but that’s only really true if the casual employee is not working regular hours. If they’re rostered on at regular hours they get the same protections as a full time employee.

The other difference is hourly wages are (or at least should be) higher for casual employees, but your annual pay is (or should be) exactly the same if you take six weeks of “unpaid” leave.

My employer gave me a choice, and I chose casual. I like the extra hourly pay - six weeks is a lot of money and it earns quite a bit of interest (especially these days!) in a savings account waiting for my next holiday.

source
- Echinoderm@aussie.zone ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
  The 25% casual loading is calculated to take in notice of termination and redundancy pay too. Lots of people resign and fewer are made redundant, so wouldn’t get notice or redundancy pay anyway. That means in most circumstances, employees are better off in a pure money sense as casuals.
  
  The big downside is if things are quiet at work you aren’t guaranteed any hours. As you mention, that also creates a hurdle when applying for loans.
  
  source
- Mountaineer@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
  To extend on this, which is accurate, there’s a few extra things that are worth mentioning.
  Unless you’ve signed a contract that specifically changes these (and which you would need to be compensated for to make the contract legal):
  Full time employees get long service leave, which only kicks in for full time employees after several years.
  Certain industries in South Australia such as Electricians, Plumbers etc have transferrable long service leave (it carries across employers in what is effectively a gig job).
  Full time employees are paid for public holidays, which they are not obliged to work.
  A full time employee basically cannot be fired without cause - only made redundant.
  If you are made redundant, you will be paid a settlement.
  This is why it’s easier to get loans etc by the way, the bank has reason to believe you’ll continue your employment.
  
  As an aside, the paid sick leave is pretty important.
  If I get sick, I don’t go to work and therefore don’t spread that illness to my coworkers, and I can still pay my rent and buy food.
  A casual employee has to decide if they are sick enough to forgo income for one or more days.
  
  Unscrupulous individuals taking “mental health days”, where they’re not sick, has been a big part in the movement to causalising the workforce (in my opinion).
  
  source
  - abhibeckert@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
    
    A full time employee basically cannot be fired without cause - only made redundant.
    
    That’s generally true for casual employees as well. It’s just that one of the “causes” might be “we don’t have a shift for you this week”.
    
    That “cause” doesn’t always apply though - it depends on the industry.
    
    source
  - Taleya@aussie.zone ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
    
    Unscrupulous individuals taking “mental health days”, where they’re not sick, has been a big part in the movement to casualising the workforce (in my opinion).
    
    yeah that’s the point you lost me.
    
    10 days off, they don’t roll over. They’re owed me per year. Be it for my mental health or physical I am owed those days
    
    A business that penalises its workforce because said business doesn’t like the fact owed leave is being utilised need to be shot in the face.
    
    source
    Mountaineer@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
    So the system should be changed so that you can take the days with notice. 🤷
    
    The problem is people taking days off without notice, regularly.
    
    As currently implemented, you feel ripped off.
    If you just don’t turn up on a day leaving me short staffed, you’re letting me down (my targets won’t be met), you’re letting your co-workers down (they end up picking up your slack or getting called in on their day off at the last minute).
    
    FFS, let me know ahead of time (psst, I’m going to take a “sick” day on Friday) and maybe I won’t be grumpy.
    
    source
- thisisnotcoincedence@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
  Thanks for the detailed breakdown, it makes sense about what you’ve just been saying. It stands to reason that government should put in more protections for casuals rather than just being offered a full time position by an employer for those that choose to stay casual.
  
  source