Temporary agency work and HRM in Australia

The topic of skilled migrants has gained importance in the past decade as they are increasingly becoming one of the main drivers for labor supply in developed countries like Australia. Although there is research on skilled migrants, most have been studied from the perspectives of (un)employment, wage and over-education. Some evidence suggests that skilled migrants are often less satisfied with their job compared to their local counterparts, yet little is known about why these differences exist. Using a nationally representative sample of Australian workers, we examine how two important job characteristics, job security and skill utilization, exert their differential interaction effect on job satisfaction for skilled migrants and Australian born workers. We found a differential moderation effect between job security and skill utilization for skilled migrants and Australian born workers. For skilled migrants, high job security did not lead to positive reaction (i.e., job satisfaction), as this effect was dependent on their skill utilization; while such moderation effect was not present for Australian born workers. This study highlights the need to take a more fine-tuned approach by understanding target sample groups (e.g., skilled migrants) when study the relationship between key job characteristics and job satisfaction. Furthermore, it highlights the importance for organizations to revisit their human resource management strategies and policies to recognize the needs for enhancing skill utilization for skilled migrants.

Precarious employment has been associated with adverse occupational health and safety (OHS) outcomes across a range of studies. Temporary agency workers are particularly vulnerable, with studies showing they experience a higher incidence of workplace injury, and a greater likelihood of more severe injuries than all other employment types. Explanations for agency workers’ higher risk of injury have, to date, been impeded by data limitations associated with researching temporary employment. This article seeks to begin filling this gap through analyzing the experience of agency workers based upon two data sources. The first is a unique qualitative and quantitative data set developed from investigated temporary agency and directly hired workers’ compensation files; the second is focus groups of agency workers conducted in the State of Victoria, Australia. Quinlan and Bohle’s (2004) Pressures, Disorganization and Regulatory Failure (PDR) model, developed to explain the greater OHS vulnerability of precarious workers, provides the framework for analyzing the data. After explaining the key concepts in the PDR Model, the article analyses the data to test for evidence of economic pressures, disorganization at the workplace, and regulatory failure impacting upon temporary agency workers’ health and safety. The analysis supports the relevance of the PDR model, and provides an understanding of additional and unique risk factors which contribute to agency workers’ higher risk of injury. Temporary agency workers experience economic pressures in common with other types of precarious workers. However, these appear more acute amongst agency workers. They also confront disorganization risks, extending to mismatched placements; lack of familiarity with host workplaces; and more complex fractured communication. These contribute to workplace risks and create barriers to improving their experience. Many of these outcomes are a result of, or contribute to regulatory failure. The analysis finds strong support for the explanatory value of the PDR model as a tool for understanding how precariousness contributes to temporary agency workers’ adverse health and safety outcomes. It also suggests the complexities of the triangular employment relationship create additional economic insecurities and disorganization problems beyond those experienced by other types of workers, which the regulatory environment has yet to address.

The increasing use of temporary agency work in Germany has implications for the nature of the employment relationship. The notion of a clearly defined employer-employee relationship becomes difficult to uphold in triangular relationships like in the case of temporary agency work where the agencies employees are working at the site of the client company. The blurring of the boundaries of organisations and of the employment relationship leads to ambiguities that affect Human Resource Management. Given the dominance of new institutional economic approaches in the analysis of temporary agency work, it is not surprising that the ambiguities and the effects and consequences of the use of temporary agency workers on the Human Resource Management of client companies have been underestimated and not been explored in detail. This paper wants to close that gap by adding a Human Resource Management perspective to the current debate in order to gain insight on the role of Human Resource Management in triangular relationships. By building on theoretical discussions and empirical studies the implications of the use of temporary agency workers for the Human Resource Management of client companies are analyzed with a special regard to commitment and identification with the client company. Different suggestions how to organize Human Resource Management instruments for temporary agency workers are presented to illustrate the value of a diverse Human Resource Management for different groups of the workforce. Key words: Temporary Agency Work, Employment Relationship, New Institutional Economics 1. Temporary agency work as an example of non-standard employment relations The notion of a clearly defined employment relationship becomes difficult to uphold as changes in the organization of work facilitated by technological improvements have blurred the boundaries between standard and non-standard employment relations. Consequently, non-standard employment relations such as temporary agency work have become increasingly prominent ways of organizing work in recent years (Nienhuser/Matiaske 2003: 467; Bothfeld/Kaiser 2003: 489; Jahn/Rudolph 2002: 1ff.). There are many different terms used in the literature to describe non-standard employment relations (Kalleberg 2000). For example, non-standard employment relations have been referred to as flexible staffing arrangements (Abraham 1988, Houseman 2001), market-mediated arrangements (Abraham 1990), flexible working practices (Brewster et al 1997) or more generally as atypical employment (Delsen 1995; De Grip et al 1997; Cordova 1986). However all definitions imply that non-standard employment departs from the standard work arrangement. Standard work arrangements are generally associated with full-time positions that are based on an indefinite contract and are performed at the employer's site under the employer's direction (Muckenberger 1985: 429; Bosch 1986: 165; Talos 1999: 417/418; Rogowski/Schomann 1996: 224ff). Though, global economic changes, increased competition and uncertainty among companies put greater pressure on them to push for greater profits and more flexible work arrangements, non-standard employment relations are not new. There have always been employment relations that did not fit the standard model of full-time work (Peck 1996). This is also true for temporary agency work that first emerged in the United States after the second World War (Mitlacher 2004: 9). As an example of a non-standard employment relation, temporary agency work involves the externalisation of administrative control and responsibility (Pfeffer/Baron 1988). Temporary work agencies employ workers and hire them out to a client company where they work at the client's premises and direction while the agency charges a fee for this service (Kalleberg 2000: 346). This creates a triangular relationship where a worker establishes connections with different companies (Bronstein 1991; Vosko 1997). The following section illustrates the recent development of the temporary work industry in Germany. …

This chapter discusses job quality in terms of job security and employability in workplaces using temporary agency workers. The general picture from previous research is that temporary agency workers have lower job quality due to a more insecure position compared to workers in other types of employment relations. Most studies are done in contexts where the agency workers have temporary contracts lasting for the time of the assignment or lack the rights to pay in-between assignments. This study fills this gap and investigates job security and employability for temporary agency workers when their working conditions are equal to that of user firm employees. The aim is to elucidate and explain how job quality expressed as job security and employability is perceived in workplaces using temporary agency workers. We have selected a ‘best case’ situation involving temporary agency workers who share the same work tasks as user firm employees and who are highly integrated within the work organization. Our analysis shows no difference concerning perceived employability. However, they differ in job security. The most important explanation for temporary agency workers’ lack of job security is the lack of skill development offered by their employer, i.e. the temporary work agency.

Globally, the demand for temporary workers is rising across organizations and sectors, driven by benefits of lower cost and workforce flexibility. Flexibility for organizations, however, means job insecurity for the temporary worker. This study focuses on understanding how the Indian IT sector’s temporary agency workers (TAWs), that is, temporary workers recruited by staffing agencies to work with client organizations, cope with their job insecurity. Grounded theory-based analysis of 36 interviews revealed that TAWs rely on enhancing their employability as the primary strategy to combat job insecurity. In addition, to enhance employability, TAWs make proactive efforts to perform consistently and upskill continuously. TAWs also expect support, largely in the form of learning and development opportunities, from the staffing agency and client to augment employability. The findings and recommendations in this article to help TAWs improve employability hold significance for TAWs, staffing agencies as well as clients. With enhanced employability, TAWs overcome job insecurity—an impediment to job performance, which is of direct relevance to the worker and the client—and also affects the staffing agency’s long-term relationship with the client.

Many temporary agency workers receive poorer pay and employment conditions than workers performing similar tasks under traditional, direct hire arrangements. This is due to a number of factors, especially the failure in practice of employment regulation developed for standard employee—employer employment arrangements to be fully applicable in such indirect employment arrangements. This paper examines agency workers’ employment rights both against the standards of the International Labour Organization’s core labour rights, and in relation to occupational health and safety performance. The analysis demonstrates how a third party, the host employer, can influence the employment conditions of agency employees, yet bear limited responsibility for whether they satisfy minimum standards. These remain duties of the agency employer. The paper identifies a need to reconsider the legal responsibility of hosts and agency employers towards agency workers. Sharing responsibilities between hosts and agency employers may improve the likelihood of closing the gap between agency and direct hire workers’ employment conditions.

Recent research suggests that the relationship between job insecurity and psychological outcomes is more negative among permanent compared with temporary workers. We investigate possible interaction effects between job insecurity and type of contract (temporary versus permanent) for various psychological outcomes (job satisfaction, organizational commitment, life satisfaction, and self-rated performance), some of which have received little attention. We aim to explain these interaction effects, while taking into account the heterogeneous nature of temporary workers in terms of tenure, employment prospects, and wish to do temporary employment. We argue that permanent workers expect higher levels of job security; job insecurity breaches permanent workers’ but not temporary workers’ expectations. This may relate to unfavourable outcomes. Similarly, the heterogeneous nature of temporary workers may relate to job security expectations and thus to reactions to job insecurity. This study was conducted on a sample of 477 temporary and permanent workers from various occupational sectors in Belgium. The results suggested that the interaction effect between job insecurity and contract type may be limited to job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Furthermore, permanent workers had higher expectations about job security. Breach of these expectations furthermore mediated the relationship between job insecurity and all outcomes, except for self-rated performance. However, the heterogeneity indicators were found to be unrelated to job security expectations.

PurposeThis study aims to analyze the effects of the type of agency contract on the relationship between agency workers' organizational commitment and perceived organizational support.Design/methodology/approachThe authors extend a previously developed model considering organizational support and affective commitment by including also continuance commitment in the Italian employment agency industry. The authors use a probabilistic stratified sampling method on a sample of 8,283 agency workers. Data were analyzed with structural equation modelling (SEM) and multiple group analyses.FindingsThe findings confirm the positive relationship between perceived organizational support from both the agency and the client organization and agency workers' affective commitment to them. The authors also find that agency workers develop a mutually related dual commitment in response to the support they receive from both organizations.Originality/valueThe paper contributes to the literature on agency workers and suggests useful managerial and policy makers interventions for both temporary work agencies and client organizations for the development of the agency industry as well as the well-being of workers.

Employability is one of the leading challenges of the contemporary organizational environment. While much is known about the positive effects of job crafting on employees’ employability in general, little is known about its effects when employment contacts are different. Differentiating between temporary and permanent workers, in this article we investigate how in the environment of psychological safety, these two types of employees engage in job crafting, and how job crafting is related to their perceived employability. Data were collected among two samples, consisting of temporary agency workers (N = 527), and permanent employees (N = 796). Structural equation modeling (SEM) analyses indicated a different pattern of results for the two groups: for permanent employees, increasing challenging job demands was positively, and decreasing hindering job demands was negatively related to perceived employability. Moreover, psychological safety was related to all job crafting dimensions. For agency workers, only increasing structural job resources was related to employability, while psychological safety was negatively associated with crafting hindrances. These findings suggest that a climate of psychological safety is particularly effective for permanent employees in fostering job crafting and employability.

This paper analyses the effects of Temporary Help Agencies (THA) on occupational mobility by performing an empirical comparison of the job‐to‐job upgrading chances of agency and regular (non‐agency) workers in Spain. We estimate a switching regression model to allow for self‐selection into agency work because of, for instance, more motivated workers being more likely to search for jobs through a THA. We find evidence in favour of the existence of self‐selection in all qualification groups considered. Concerning mobility, we find that agency workers in intermediate qualification levels are less likely to experience demotions than regular workers. THA increase the probability of high‐skilled workers achieving a permanent contract in Spain.

Abstract. Cluster analysis and the classification tree technique are applied to investigate the relationship between the individual characteristics of Italian temporary help agency (THA) workers and their probability of achieving a temporary job. The application aims to show some advantages of these techniques with respect to traditional econometric tools. Sketches of the most common profiles among Italian THA workers are obtained as a result. Besides the typical THA worker pointed out by previous studies (young male workers, with a medium–high level of education, living in the Northern regions), two new profiles have been identified: the first comprising male manual workers with previous job experience, whose average age is over 30 and whose educational level is low; the second comprising young female workers with a medium–high level of education, working in the service sector or in the public sector. The results are compared with the more usual logit analysis and show their robustness.

The UK has one of the largest1 and most sophisticated temporary agency workers’ industries in the world. The flexibility attached to this type of working has attractions to business and to some workers, not least of which is the avoidance of employee status. The industry is regulated under the Employment Agencies Act 1973 and the Conduct of Employment Agencies and Employment Businesses Regulations 2003 and most employers using agency labour have operated on the assumption that the agency worker was not their employee. The case law on temporary agency workers has however, since the case of Franks v Reuters in 20032 developed an approach suggesting that an agency worker may have an implied contract with the client or end-user rather than with the agency. Recent Court of Appeal judgments have developed this concept to the extent of overriding the express wishes of the parties and even ignoring...

The article examines local union approaches toward temporary agency work in Belgium and Germany. Heterogeneous plant-level use of temporary work is explained by differences in collective bargaining, together with representation structures and rights for agency workers. Specifically, within a context providing effective rights for representation, the Belgian unions responded to firms’ economic difficulties by improving the working conditions of agency workers through negotiating plant-level agreements that contributed to fostering equality between agency workers and regular workers. In contrast, agency work became instrumental in safeguarding the core workforce’s employment in the German workplaces, where the representation rights were absent. As a result, the status of agency workers remained vulnerable.

The number of agency workers in the PTS had increased rapidly since 2008, while a total of around 200 agency workers represented 20% of the PTS employees during recent years. However, most of agency works in the PTS were “long-term core jobs” rather than “temporary peripheral jobs,” and the recruitment, remuneration and benefits of agency workers were actually decided by the user enterprise, the PTS, rather than the employment agency. The agency employment in the PTS, therefore, had become the “in-house agency work” which broke the rules of related employment laws. According to the findings based on the questionnaire survey and in-depth interviews, the PTS agency workers were relatively young and high-educated, but most of them suffered from job insecurity and wage discrimination. Most interviewees were discontent with poor working conditions while highly evaluated and identified with the public interests that the PTS pursued. In 2013, the PTS agency employees established a union and urged the management for a transition to standard employment. Nevertheless, the standard employees and their union (the PTS union) spoke out against the“total transition plan,” and forced the employer laid off 6 agency workers while a total of 130 agency workers were successfully transited. The union movement of the PTS agency workers is unique for its two characteristics, including the internalization of public interests among the PTS members, and the young generation’s disobedience to the capitalism under the crisis of pauperization of work.

Agency work is more prevalent in the UK than in most other European countries. Agency workers make up around 5% of the total UK workforce, compared to 2.5% in the Netherlands, just over 2% in France, and less than 0.5% in Denmark. 1 This may, in part at least, reflect the fact that the UK has not traditionally regulated the use of agency work to any great extent. The Directive on Temporary Agency Work requires the UK to offer a greater degree of protection to agency workers, but as this article will seek to demonstrate, agency workers will remain vulnerable in certain important respects even after the Directive has been implemented. 2 This article will give a brief account of the emergence of the Directive and of English law's current position on agency work, before exploring in some detail a selection of key issues arising out of the Agency Workers Regulations 2010, the UK's implementation measure. 3