Contented Workers in Inferior Jobs?Re-Assessing Casual Employment in Australia
This paper has benefited considerably from the comments of John Buchanan, Alison Preston, Iain Campbell, Jan O'Leary and Humphrey McQueen. Useful feedback was also provided by my colleagues as ACIRRT and the participants at the RMIT Centre for Applied Social Research Workshop on ‘The Quality of Part-time Work’ held in July 2004.
Abstract
The increased number of casuals in the Australian workforce has generated considerable concern about a proliferation of inferior jobs in the labour market. Critics of casualisation have pointed to poor outcomes associated with casual work: job insecurity, lack of training and career paths, marginalisation in the workplace and so forth. Those who defend casualisation argue that non-standard employment provides greater choice within the labour market, and that casual employees are no less dissatisfied with their jobs than permanent employees. In this paper, I re-assess this debate by examining a recent analysis of job satisfaction among casual employees by Wooden and Warren in 2004. I argue that findings of contentment among casual employees are subject to both methodological and philosophical weaknesses. In place of subjective measures of job satisfaction, I argue that the quality of jobs should be directly assessed by objective criteria like remuneration. Following this, I fit earnings equations to the HILDA data and find that part-time casual employees earn only a modest premium over permanent full-time employees. When the loadings, which casuals are paid, are taken into account, I find that part-time casual employees are actually penalised by virtue of working as casuals. I conclude that casual jobs are inferior jobs, irrespective of the satisfaction levels of their incumbents.