In the present globalized and competitive commercialized environment, casual
employment has been substantially recognized in the service industry, whereby different
companies employ workers on a temporary basis for their own convenience in fulfilling
important necessitates. Though casualisation has especially helped ‘small-scale’
hospitality businesses in minimizing ‘labor costs’ with enhancing ‘productivity’ by
employers hiring individuals mostly during ‘peak periods’ and providing them with
maximal ‘flexibility’, nevertheless, since organizations can even lose casual employees
to other competitors, who continuously face severe ‘job insecurities’ in meeting their
‘financial’ commitments and are ultimately ‘dismissed’ at a given time period, casual
work can be considered either a ‘benediction’ or ‘nemesis’ in approach (Brennan 2015 &
Adonis 2011). Therefore, this paper will briefly discuss casualisation through the
Australian workforce with its associated advantages and disadvantages from the
employer and employee perspectives and lastly, the guidelines in establishing stronger
employer-employee relations for retaining employees in the workplace.
The term ‘casualisation’ refers to the ‘operations’ by which staff-members within a
‘workforce’ are selected 'casually', wherein employees are subjected to working
‘unpredictable timings’ without having any total ‘warranted’ operating hours, entitled to
‘casual loadings’ as a ‘recompense’ for covering the part/full time employee benefits
{‘holiday’ and ‘sick-leave’ payments} and ‘terminate’ engagements without ‘notifications’
until expected by the ‘registered’ accord (May, Campbell and Burgess 2005 & Fair Work
2016). In Australia alone, greater than ‘two-million’ citizens are recruited ‘casually’,
accounting for largely women and ‘forty-percent’ casuals aged between ‘15-24’ years
old, which following Spain is known to have the ‘second’ biggest casualised workforce
worldwide (Australian Unions 2015 & ANZ 2004). Furthermore, Jericho (2014) states
that there is nothing to worry about the Australian’s ‘increasing’ casual workforce since
research indicates that it is a ‘growing’ trend where individuals, including ‘older workers’
are intelligibly opting to work with their own choice, which is ‘energizing’ in creating
opportunities for learning something ‘special’ everyday, showing uttermost ‘control’ in
achieving the ‘work-life’ balance.
In the Australian Hospitality Industry, approximately ‘70%’ of the workforce are casually
employed along an ‘on-required’ functionality, which is completely ‘standardized’ and
‘acknowledged’ as a significant scheme for companies in having the ‘numerical’ flexibility
for equating the employee’s ‘supply’ to the required organizational ‘demands’,
completely based upon the busy ‘seasonality’ (Tourism Accommodation Australia 2013
& Green, Maxwell and Watson 2002). For example, the ‘Shangri-La’ property in Sydney,
unlike all their other properties worldwide, includes a ‘heavy’ figure of ‘casual’ workers,
which would have ‘strong’ entailments for ‘adapting’ to the ‘ethnical’ variations with the
required employee 'training' and 'motivation' (Heffernan n.d.). Moreover, having the
hospitality industry being very broad and subjective in its nature, there are several
common advantages and disadvantages for the employers and casual employees in
different circumstances.
The major two advantages for the casual workers in the workplace are firstly, being paid
in 'wages' on an 'hourly basis' with the available 'penalty rates' which is higher than the
'permanent' employees since they are not 'eligible' for any 'paid' leaves without enjoying
'employee-benefits' and secondly, possessing the 'tractability' of working wherever they
, would prefer with their available time, that is exceedingly useful for people bearing
'child-care' obligations alongside with 'older people' and 'university students' for earning
extra 'income' and 'gaining' some experience in an 'interested' particular field (Dawson
2003). Some other advantages include an area of 'socially interacting' with other
employees in the workplace for developing new 'networks' and 'sustaining' one's 'skills'
from getting 'outdated' (Maklak 2013). On the other hand, some disadvantages for
casual employees includes: ineligibility to 'paid' leaves, 'inaccessibility' to the staff
'rostering' without having the 'awareness' in the changes brought by the management
and making it harder for 'predicting' the 'work patterns', not knowing the 'regularity' of the
total 'working hours' that brings 'financial' instability for generating a 'steady' income,
problems in 'securing' the job and being 'undefended' from getting sacked and lastly,
restricted 'staff' training' for a substantive career 'foundation' with slight/no 'knowledge'
about the workplace that directly impacts the job performance (NSW Government
Industrial Relations 2016).
For the employers, the advantage of hiring casualised employees in the workforce
includes: 'reduced labor' expenses since casuals are not reserved for any
company-benefits forming part of the 'peripheral' working group under the 'Atkinson's
flexibility model' and being paid in wages with getting 're-scheduled' at any given period,
maintaining enough 'flexibility' and 'calling' them as and when required, especially during
the busy 'weekends' for matching the company's 'expectations' (Kokemuller 2016 &
Nankervis, Baird, Coffey and Shields 2014). Furthermore, Schaefer (n.d.) states the
major reason why businesses employ 'casuals' temporarily is for balancing the
'fluctuating' workforce mainly due to 'employee absentee-isms' or short-term 'demanding'
workloads, where casuals can be utilized effectively in saving 'time' and therefore, will
simultaneously maintain healthy, electropositive 'relationships' with every 'staffing
agencies' for long-term constancy.
Having casualisation providing relief on a short-term basis itself, there are even few
disadvantages associated with employers when hiring casuals. Firstly, since these
employees have minimal 'presence' in the organizational environment, they will definitely
lack the 'knowledge' in the 'services' along with their individualistic 'commitments'
towards the organization, and thus cannot be very 'heavily dependable' by companies in
the 'long-term' circumstances (Kokemuller 2016). Secondly, those casual workers
provided with absolutely no 'training' might be partially 'de-skilled' in their performances,
definitely 'lowering' any company's 'quality' standards, which can be extremely
'de-motivating' for employees and might eventually move to another company with time,
ensuing with 'higher' staff turnover (Maklak 2013).
Moreover, the impact of staff turnover can have disastrous implications on the
organizational 'productivity', resulting in the company's overall 'allegiance' and 'brand'
deprivation, losing on the 'invested' capital/time and therefore, employers should
carefully manage their long-term 'jeopardies' by carefully 'recruiting' and 'train' casuals
within the workplace along with perpetually 'innovating' them with an organization's
'incorporated' knowledge and rewarding them in maintaining the organization's' cultural
environment (Emerald Group Publishing Limited 2015 & My Small Business 2013).
Lastly, it is extremely important that employers cautiously understand a casual's
'entitlements', that can be carelessly 'misinterpreted' by companies and therefore, can
employment has been substantially recognized in the service industry, whereby different
companies employ workers on a temporary basis for their own convenience in fulfilling
important necessitates. Though casualisation has especially helped ‘small-scale’
hospitality businesses in minimizing ‘labor costs’ with enhancing ‘productivity’ by
employers hiring individuals mostly during ‘peak periods’ and providing them with
maximal ‘flexibility’, nevertheless, since organizations can even lose casual employees
to other competitors, who continuously face severe ‘job insecurities’ in meeting their
‘financial’ commitments and are ultimately ‘dismissed’ at a given time period, casual
work can be considered either a ‘benediction’ or ‘nemesis’ in approach (Brennan 2015 &
Adonis 2011). Therefore, this paper will briefly discuss casualisation through the
Australian workforce with its associated advantages and disadvantages from the
employer and employee perspectives and lastly, the guidelines in establishing stronger
employer-employee relations for retaining employees in the workplace.
The term ‘casualisation’ refers to the ‘operations’ by which staff-members within a
‘workforce’ are selected 'casually', wherein employees are subjected to working
‘unpredictable timings’ without having any total ‘warranted’ operating hours, entitled to
‘casual loadings’ as a ‘recompense’ for covering the part/full time employee benefits
{‘holiday’ and ‘sick-leave’ payments} and ‘terminate’ engagements without ‘notifications’
until expected by the ‘registered’ accord (May, Campbell and Burgess 2005 & Fair Work
2016). In Australia alone, greater than ‘two-million’ citizens are recruited ‘casually’,
accounting for largely women and ‘forty-percent’ casuals aged between ‘15-24’ years
old, which following Spain is known to have the ‘second’ biggest casualised workforce
worldwide (Australian Unions 2015 & ANZ 2004). Furthermore, Jericho (2014) states
that there is nothing to worry about the Australian’s ‘increasing’ casual workforce since
research indicates that it is a ‘growing’ trend where individuals, including ‘older workers’
are intelligibly opting to work with their own choice, which is ‘energizing’ in creating
opportunities for learning something ‘special’ everyday, showing uttermost ‘control’ in
achieving the ‘work-life’ balance.
In the Australian Hospitality Industry, approximately ‘70%’ of the workforce are casually
employed along an ‘on-required’ functionality, which is completely ‘standardized’ and
‘acknowledged’ as a significant scheme for companies in having the ‘numerical’ flexibility
for equating the employee’s ‘supply’ to the required organizational ‘demands’,
completely based upon the busy ‘seasonality’ (Tourism Accommodation Australia 2013
& Green, Maxwell and Watson 2002). For example, the ‘Shangri-La’ property in Sydney,
unlike all their other properties worldwide, includes a ‘heavy’ figure of ‘casual’ workers,
which would have ‘strong’ entailments for ‘adapting’ to the ‘ethnical’ variations with the
required employee 'training' and 'motivation' (Heffernan n.d.). Moreover, having the
hospitality industry being very broad and subjective in its nature, there are several
common advantages and disadvantages for the employers and casual employees in
different circumstances.
The major two advantages for the casual workers in the workplace are firstly, being paid
in 'wages' on an 'hourly basis' with the available 'penalty rates' which is higher than the
'permanent' employees since they are not 'eligible' for any 'paid' leaves without enjoying
'employee-benefits' and secondly, possessing the 'tractability' of working wherever they
, would prefer with their available time, that is exceedingly useful for people bearing
'child-care' obligations alongside with 'older people' and 'university students' for earning
extra 'income' and 'gaining' some experience in an 'interested' particular field (Dawson
2003). Some other advantages include an area of 'socially interacting' with other
employees in the workplace for developing new 'networks' and 'sustaining' one's 'skills'
from getting 'outdated' (Maklak 2013). On the other hand, some disadvantages for
casual employees includes: ineligibility to 'paid' leaves, 'inaccessibility' to the staff
'rostering' without having the 'awareness' in the changes brought by the management
and making it harder for 'predicting' the 'work patterns', not knowing the 'regularity' of the
total 'working hours' that brings 'financial' instability for generating a 'steady' income,
problems in 'securing' the job and being 'undefended' from getting sacked and lastly,
restricted 'staff' training' for a substantive career 'foundation' with slight/no 'knowledge'
about the workplace that directly impacts the job performance (NSW Government
Industrial Relations 2016).
For the employers, the advantage of hiring casualised employees in the workforce
includes: 'reduced labor' expenses since casuals are not reserved for any
company-benefits forming part of the 'peripheral' working group under the 'Atkinson's
flexibility model' and being paid in wages with getting 're-scheduled' at any given period,
maintaining enough 'flexibility' and 'calling' them as and when required, especially during
the busy 'weekends' for matching the company's 'expectations' (Kokemuller 2016 &
Nankervis, Baird, Coffey and Shields 2014). Furthermore, Schaefer (n.d.) states the
major reason why businesses employ 'casuals' temporarily is for balancing the
'fluctuating' workforce mainly due to 'employee absentee-isms' or short-term 'demanding'
workloads, where casuals can be utilized effectively in saving 'time' and therefore, will
simultaneously maintain healthy, electropositive 'relationships' with every 'staffing
agencies' for long-term constancy.
Having casualisation providing relief on a short-term basis itself, there are even few
disadvantages associated with employers when hiring casuals. Firstly, since these
employees have minimal 'presence' in the organizational environment, they will definitely
lack the 'knowledge' in the 'services' along with their individualistic 'commitments'
towards the organization, and thus cannot be very 'heavily dependable' by companies in
the 'long-term' circumstances (Kokemuller 2016). Secondly, those casual workers
provided with absolutely no 'training' might be partially 'de-skilled' in their performances,
definitely 'lowering' any company's 'quality' standards, which can be extremely
'de-motivating' for employees and might eventually move to another company with time,
ensuing with 'higher' staff turnover (Maklak 2013).
Moreover, the impact of staff turnover can have disastrous implications on the
organizational 'productivity', resulting in the company's overall 'allegiance' and 'brand'
deprivation, losing on the 'invested' capital/time and therefore, employers should
carefully manage their long-term 'jeopardies' by carefully 'recruiting' and 'train' casuals
within the workplace along with perpetually 'innovating' them with an organization's
'incorporated' knowledge and rewarding them in maintaining the organization's' cultural
environment (Emerald Group Publishing Limited 2015 & My Small Business 2013).
Lastly, it is extremely important that employers cautiously understand a casual's
'entitlements', that can be carelessly 'misinterpreted' by companies and therefore, can
