Precarious employment has been associated with adverse occupational health and safety (OHS) outcomes across a range of studies. Temporary agency workers are particularly vulnerable, with studies showing they experience a higher incidence of workplace injury, and a greater likelihood of more severe injuries than all other employment types. Explanations for agency workers’ higher risk of injury have, to date, been impeded by data limitations associated with researching temporary employment. This article seeks to begin filling this gap through analyzing the experience of agency workers based upon two data sources. The first is a unique qualitative and quantitative data set developed from investigated temporary agency and directly hired workers’ compensation files; the second is focus groups of agency workers conducted in the State of Victoria, Australia. Quinlan and Bohle’s (2004) Pressures, Disorganization and Regulatory Failure (PDR) model, developed to explain the greater OHS vulnerability of precarious workers, provides the framework for analyzing the data. After explaining the key concepts in the PDR Model, the article analyses the data to test for evidence of economic pressures, disorganization at the workplace, and regulatory failure impacting upon temporary agency workers’ health and safety. The analysis supports the relevance of the PDR model, and provides an understanding of additional and unique risk factors which contribute to agency workers’ higher risk of injury. Temporary agency workers experience economic pressures in common with other types of precarious workers. However, these appear more acute amongst agency workers. They also confront disorganization risks, extending to mismatched placements; lack of familiarity with host workplaces; and more complex fractured communication. These contribute to workplace risks and create barriers to improving their experience. Many of these outcomes are a result of, or contribute to regulatory failure. The analysis finds strong support for the explanatory value of the PDR model as a tool for understanding how precariousness contributes to temporary agency workers’ adverse health and safety outcomes. It also suggests the complexities of the triangular employment relationship create additional economic insecurities and disorganization problems beyond those experienced by other types of workers, which the regulatory environment has yet to address.

Australian horticulture (fruit and vegetable production) relies upon a seasonal harvest workforce, much of which now consists of temporary migrant workers. This article argues that the composition of this workforce and the character of the work lead towards layered vulnerability, some groups being more exposed to low pay and substandard working conditions than others. Formally at least, employment conditions are generally protected by the federal Horticulture Award (2010). But are decent employment standards consistently observed? The article explores this question, examining three issues. First, does analysis of workforce composition reveal different tiers in the workforce, some more vulnerable than others? Second, do the casual nature of harvest work and the job search processes used by temporary migrant workers create disadvantaged groups? Third, does evidence about pay, working hours and work intensity reveal some workers to be more vulnerable than others? The article concludes with an examination of those factors that appear to be associated with layered vulnerability in the harvest workforce, and considers some policy implications.

No abstract

Effective management of occupational health and safety (OHS) continues to pose a challenge to many organisations. While significant advancement has occurred in knowledge about traditional workplace risks, organisational and labour market changes have created new risks, psychosocial risks are more prevalent, and the trend towards the adoption of OHS management systems has produced only mixed results. These issues are the focus of this review of recent developments in workplace health and safety. We argue there is a need for organisations to refocus systematically on a collaborative approach to identifying and controlling workplace risks, and on improving the integration of OHS into broader systems and every day management to better meet existing and future OHS challenges.Keywords: occupational health and safety management systems, precarious employment, psychosocial risks Shortly after the introduction of 'Robens' type occupational health and safety (OHS) legislation throughout Australia in the mid-1980s, Hetzel (1990) wrote in this journal both that organisations were slow to respond to the legislative changes, and that 'occupational health and safety will continue to struggle as a central part of management' (p. 79). More than two decades have passed yet OHS still appears vulnerable to being sidelined. While some organisational practices have lifted the profile of OHS at board level, such as the inclusion of OHS data in company annual reports (O'Neill 2009), others have either contributed to new risks or failed to fully deliver improvements because of conflicting organisational priorities. This review of recent developments and future directions in OHS Correspondence: Dr Elsa Underhill, Deakin University, 221 Burwood Highway, Burwood, Victoria 3125, Melbourne, Australia; e-mail: elsa.underhill@deakin.edu.au Accepted for publication 12 December 2011. Key points1 Changes in the labour market pose significant challenges for management of OHS and contribute to the growing incidence of psychosocial injury. 2 There is a need to reaffirm the basic building blocks to achieve at-source solutions for enduring workplace health and safety change.

It in e ra n t fo re ig n h a rve st w o rke rs in Au st ra lia : t h e im p a ct o f p re ca rio u s e m p lo ym e n t o n o ccu p a t io n a l sa fe t y a n d h e a lt h