The " Permanency " Issue !

One of the main differences between the unions and employer groups is the issue of " casual  workers".  A casual worker is insulated from the benefits enjoyed by a permanent employee, who gets annual leave, sick leave and in todays's world - carer leave.   In compensation for that loss, the casual gets a pay loading which is usually twenty-five percenr higher than the wage for a permanent employee.

Unfortunately, that distinction between "permanent " and " casual " has a direct bearing on how workers progress in our society.  The banks are more likely to grant a loan to a permanent employee and most casuals find it hard to negotiate a mortgage on a home they wish to buy.

The employer is more inclined to use casuals because firing a permanent worker if the business cycle slows can see the matter go to a court hearing.  The finding can be unexpected and the employer left seriously out of pocket.  Terminating a casual avoids that danger.

That is the situation that sees many jobs filled on a " casual " basis when exactly the same person performs the same work, day after day, creating the term "permanent/casual ".   Employers were recently shocked when a court decreed that such people have the right to annual leave, sick leave and carer leave despite their pay having a loading for the loss of that benefit.

The unions plead a rational case that casual workers lead a stressful life because their employer can sack them at a moments notice.  It is this uncertainty in their employment record that influences banks and credit agencies to have a higher regard for opermanent employees over casuals when approving loans.

This issue comes at a critical time with the economy starting to come out of isolation from the coronavirus. It raises the question of whether that loading should still apply if casuals with a degree of permanency are also able to claim annual holidays and both sick and carer paid leave.  Many casuals have that loading built into their financial budgets and its removal would leave them bereft.

This is building to a confrontation between the government and two of the biggest uniions.  The Australian Workers Union and the mining division of the Construction, Forestry, Mining, Maritine and Energy union will argue that giving more casual workers the right to ask for permanent employment is not ernough to compensat for not having secure empoyment.

A way out of this recession and a return to full employmentprobably hinges on some sort of compromise that meets both sdes part way !