2005Unpublished venueRequires access

John Burgess, Julia Connell, Erling Rasmussen * Temporary Agency Work and Precarious Employment: A Review of the Current Situation in Australia and New Zealand **

John Burgess, Erling Rasmussen

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

This paper reviews three key issues associated with temporary agency work (referred to as agency work herewith) by drawing on Australian and New Zealand trends and experiences. First, the authors contend that it is surprising, in light of its high flexibility, that agency work constitutes a relatively small proportion of total employment in both countries. This article presents several reasons which can provide an explanation for employers’ relatively limited use of agency employment. These reasons also show that agency work must be seen as part of the wider expansion of atypical employment arrangements. Second, the paradoxical mix of glamour and precariousness often associated with agency work is discussed. While labour flexibility is often associated with insecurity and precariousness, there are also advantageous forms of agency employment for all parties concerned. Consequently, this article provides an overview of recent research findings. It is evident from the research literature on agency work that there is either an emphasis on its precarious nature or on the individual preferences and choices of the temps themselves. In many countries, extensive regulatory arrangements exist that govern both the agency sector and the agency employment contract. This is not the case, however, in Australia and New Zealand and the effects of this unregulated approach are discussed as is the possibility of regulatory interventions that could be introduced at a future date.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

This paper reviews three key issues associated with temporary agency work (referred to as agency work herewith) by drawing on Australian and New Zealand trends and experiences. First, the authors contend that it is surprising, in light of its high flexibility, that agency work constitutes a relatively small proportion of total employment in both countries. This article presents several reasons which can provide an explanation for employers’ relatively limited use of agency employment. These reasons also show that agency work must be seen as part of the wider expansion of atypical employment arrangements. Second, the paradoxical mix of glamour and precariousness often associated with agency work is discussed. While labour flexibility is often associated with insecurity and precariousness, there are also advantageous forms of agency employment for all parties concerned. Consequently, this article provides an overview of recent research findings. It is evident from the research literature on agency work that there is either an emphasis on its precarious nature or on the individual preferences and choices of the temps themselves. In many countries, extensive regulatory arrangements exist that govern both the agency sector and the agency employment contract. This is not the case, however, in Australia and New Zealand and the effects of this unregulated approach are discussed as is the possibility of regulatory interventions that could be introduced at a future date.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

This paper reviews three key issues associated with temporary agency work (referred to as agency work herewith) by drawing on Australian and New Zealand trends and experiences. First, the authors contend that it is surprising, in light of its high flexibility, that agency work constitutes a relatively small proportion of total employment in both countries. This article presents several reasons which can provide an explanation for employers’ relatively limited use of agency employment. These reasons also show that agency work must be seen as part of the wider expansion of atypical employment arrangements. Second, the paradoxical mix of glamour and precariousness often associated with agency work is discussed. While labour flexibility is often associated with insecurity and precariousness, there are also advantageous forms of agency employment for all parties concerned. Consequently, this article provides an overview of recent research findings. It is evident from the research literature on agency work that there is either an emphasis on its precarious nature or on the individual preferences and choices of the temps themselves. In many countries, extensive regulatory arrangements exist that govern both the agency sector and the agency employment contract. This is not the case, however, in Australia and New Zealand and the effects of this unregulated approach are discussed as is the possibility of regulatory interventions that could be introduced at a future date.

Key concepts: Agency (philosophy), Temporary work, Flexibility (engineering), Work (physics), Precarious work, Political science, Sociology, Economics

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
John Burgess, Julia Connell, Erling Rasmussen * Temporary Agency Work and Precarious Employment: A Review of the Current Situation in Australia and New Zealand ** — Research Paper | ScholarLens