Your search
Results 2 resources
-
The global weakness of collective bargaining and state regulation has spawned growing interest in employment protection though private governance. However, scepticism about the efficacy of unsupervised codes of conduct has triggered debate about external discipline through state regulation. This article seeks to contribute to debates about the processes that shape the nexus between private governance and state regulation.It is based on an empirical study of Australian harvest workers who formally benefit from state regulation of pay and occupational health and safety (OHS). However, industry changes have undercut standards. Product market pressures from supermarkets squeeze growers’ capacity to pay. Also, the labour market is increasingly supplied by vulnerable Asian temporary migrants (including undocumented workers), often supplied to growers by unscrupulous temporary work agencies. While pay and OHS practices vary, many harvest workers are exploited. Nor is private governance (which extends to horticulture through the codes of conduct of supermarkets and peak temporary work agency bodies) effective. All codes draw their standards from minimum legal employment conditions, and all possess loopholes allowing breaches to escape attention and rectification.In 2015, media and political attention fell on the working conditions of temporary migrants in horticulture. Government inquiries found evidence of exploitation, but were divided over solutions. Progressive politicians (influenced by unions) favoured stronger state enforcement powers and temporary work agency licensing. Conservative politicians (influenced by business lobbies) claimed these steps would fail, and favoured the status quo. Political reform therefore stalled.This study illustrates the importance of political processes in shaping the nexus between state regulation and private governance. In this case, a political stalemate leaves both regulation and governance deficient. Lacking protection from either source, harvest workers remain exposed to exploitative employment conditions.
-
International studies indicate temporary agency workers are more likely to be injured at work than other types of employees. However explanations for this have been less forthcoming. This paper seeks to begin filling this gap. A study was undertaken in Victoria, Australia, of occupational health and safety (OHS) amongst temporary agency workers drawing upon workers' compensation claim files for injured agency and directly hired workers from 1995-2001, and focus groups of temporary agency workers conducted in 2003. In analyzing the results, use was made of risk factors identified in a model that has been developed to explain how precarious employment affects OHS -- the pressure, disorganization and regulatory failure (PDR) model (Quinlan and Bohle, 2004, 2009). Drawing principally on qualitative data, the paper finds that whilst agency workers share common risk factors with other forms of precarious workers, unique characteristics associated with the triangular nature of agency employment heighten their vulnerability further.
Explore
Resource type
- Journal Article (2)