Research

Summary page

Research

Changing forms of employment and their implications for the development of skills by Sue Richardson and Peng Liu

This report concentrates on changing employment patterns by examining the shift away from the standard of full-time permanent employment which occurred between 1992 and 2005. It describes the effects of changing employment modes on the amount and type of training received by employees and considers the implications for the vocational education and training (VET) sector. This research is part of a larger suite of research undertaken by the National Institute of Labour Studies, Flinders University, and the Centre for Post-compulsory Education and Lifelong Learning, University of Melbourne.

The focus of the study was on the ways in which people learn, particularly on the job, to be productive workers. It asked whether part-time, casual and labour hire forms of work have affected the development of vocational skills.

Key messages

Since 1992, there have been substantial changes in men’s employment patterns, with a decrease in the number of permanent full-time jobs (new and existing) and a large increase in casual jobs, both full- and part-time.

Women have seen strong growth in permanent jobs, both full- and part-time.

Growth in permanent jobs has been concentrated among both men and women aged 45–59 years, while the absolute number of permanent jobs for men aged 20–30 years has fallen.

Growth in permanent jobs has been concentrated in occupations that mostly require higher education, rather than vocational education.

From 2001 to 2005, the total hours of employer-sponsored training fell by 15% for permanent workers and by 27% for casual workers. In total, casual workers get about half the employer-provided internal training and a mere fraction of the employer support for external courses that permanent workers get.

The shift away from full-time continuing employment is likely to put skill development on the job at risk, placing the onus on VET providers to offer courses that are accessible to full-time, part-time and casual workers.

The reduced employer support for training means that skills development will increasingly need to be funded by the workers themselves and the taxpayer.

For a synthesis of the consortium’s entire program of work, see A well-skilled future by Sue Richardson and Richard Teese.

Tom Karmel
Managing Director, NCVER