Abstract:
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to investigate whether permanent workers with standard
employment that is protected, and casual workers with long-term employment that is not protected but
performing the same core jobs, along with permanent workers side-by-side in the same work setting,
exhibit different work-related outcomes.
Design/methodology/approach – Permanent workers and casual workers holding core jobs with
long-term employment responded to the survey questionnaire. Logistic regression was used for the
data analysis.
Findings – Job satisfaction, procedural justice and work performance were found to be important
work-related outcomes that discriminate between permanent and casual workers.
Originality/value – Although consequences of different employment arrangements would be of
interest to many organisations world wide, on the one hand, little empirical research has compared
work-related outcomes of permanent workers with casuals (holding the same core functions with
long-term employment) or permanent workers with workers in any form of nonstandard employment
arrangement. On the other hand, the literature on the use of labour flexibility strategies is mainly
concentrated on developed market economies. If organisations use casual workers alongside
permanent workers in core jobs, there is a need for examining implications of such practices.
The findings of this study establish baseline data that would be a source of general guidance in
stimulating future research in this area.
