The Conditions Associated with Peripheral Employment in Australia. An Empirical Analysis
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/01425459410073924 |
| Date | 01 December 1994 |
| Published date | 01 December 1994 |
| Pages | 19-31 |
| Author | Bill Harley |
| Subject Matter | HR & organizational behaviour |
Peripheral
Employment in
Australia
19
The Conditions Associated
with Peripheral Employment
in Australia
An Empirical Analysis
Bill Harley
The University of Queensland, Australia
One of the most striking features of the Australian labour market over the past
two decades has been the growth of part-time, casual, temporary and contract
work. These forms of work have been collectively referred to as “peripheral”,
“contingent”, “atypical” or “irregular” employment[1]. While there are numerous
factors contributing to the growth of these kinds of work, a common argument
is that “peripheral” employment has been encouraged by many managers as a
means to enhance flexibility in the deployment of labour and thus to reduce labour
costs. It has also frequently been argued that the result of employment strategies
which encourage the use of peripheral employees is the creation of a disadvantaged
segment of the labour market which is composed disproportionately of women,
and characterized by poor working conditions, low pay and a lack of job security.
The aim of this article is to assess the extent to which peripheral employment is
associated with poor conditions of employment, by analysing data drawn from
The Australian Workplace Industrial Relations Survey[2] (AWIRS), as a means
to assess the general applicability of this claim as it relates to Australian industry.
Background and Research Problems
Recent debates about the alleged emergence of a “peripheral” segment of the
workforce have raised numerous problematic issues. However, in the Australian
context three related claims are particularly noteworthy. The first is that there
has been a striking growth of peripheral employment in Australia over the past
two decades. The second is that these jobs are predominantly filled by women.
The final claim is that such work is consistently associated with less desirable
employment conditions than are more regular forms of employment. If each of
these claims is true, then the existence of a peripheral wo rkforce in Australia can
be expected to contribute to the reinforcement or exacerbation of patterns of
gender inequality in the workplace, since the negative consequences of peripheral
employment fall disproportionately on women.
An earlier version of this article was delivered to the National Social Policy Conference at the
University of New South Wales, July 1993. I would like to thank Paul Boreham for his helpful
comments on the article.
Employee Relations, Vol. 16 No. 8,
1994, pp. 19-31. © MCBUniversity
Press, 0142-5455
To continue reading
Request your trial