I keep being drawn back to…we’ve played ourselves.
Casuals are: someone’s called in sick, can you fill the shift? Nah? No worries, I’ll call the next person in our casual bank.
We have casuals working 40 hours a week, every week.
And now we’re reliant on them.
Kinda brought this on ourselves.
By being ■■■■■.
Aged Care was up an extra 100 cases.
Have to wait and see the cluster info in the report tonight to see where the additions are from.
If they are not there, then there is a giant cluster that is under investigation.
The under investigations are really holding us back from knowing what’s going on.
And you have ■■■■-tard companies forcing casuals to work even though there’s been a number of infections in the working group.
Oh, and what do they wash? Hospital linen.
You can’t make up this kind of stupidity.
No idea. But “a thousand plus” have got the $300 in the past week.
That’s what I was thinking.
It should be mandatory that aged care workers are tested weekly.
I fully accept that I’m naive, but I don’t understand how you can force casuals to do anything.
If you’re a casual, it’s very often a bad move to knock back shifts even when you’re sick, if you ever want to be offered shifts again.
Continual enhancements to “flexible arrangements for employers” coming home to roost
That’s, um, not many
Yeah. That’s what I’m waiting on.
Yesterday there was a spike in Geelong LGAs. So today’s restrictions in regional Victoria was expected.
Like it or not, they’ve worked on the data. Small upticks for quite some time, then a big spike(showing exponential growth).
I think it all comes back to casual means irregular.
This stuff needs to be…audited.
The whole system.
Audited for what? Surely its working exactly the way it was designed.
If you’re working 20 plus hours at the same place for over a year I can’t see how and why you should still be classified as casual.
I’m sure it suits a few people but I’d say the majority would want some certainty and the entitlements that go along with permanent work.
+1. Especially if the company has suffered a downtown (eg due to a pandemic) and is looking to get staff off the books. That $300 might cover a couple of days’ wages, but if taking it means the casual employee then becomes unemployed, it’s easy to see why they choose to turn up at work instead.
Paid pandemic leave for ‘regular’ aged care casuals. McManus talking to the Feds on extending across the board.
In the interim, Vic government fills the gap.
Reportedly Queensland has prohibited aged care workers from working at more than one site. I don’t know whether compensation is being paid for lost wages, or how Queensland has the legal authority to restrain the right to work in this way.
They might be still classed as casual by the company, and the company might prefer it that way, but there have been cases that have gone to the FWC when even if an employee is “casual,” if the work has been regular and ongoing, they get classed as part-time permanent by the FWC, which means they’re entitled to things like redundancy pay etc. Yeah it’s a mess.
Found it very amusing having one of our middle management lecturing people that pandemic leave was available if you tested positive and to not put the workplace at risk. When 2 years before he was cutting casuals for calling in sick.
Easy.
If they decline shifts, stop giving them work.
Creates a culture whereby employees fear if they don’t do what the employer asks, they will not get any further shifts.
Might not be an explicit forcing, but it’s getting the same result.
Not sure how much truth in it but was told Woolies workers in Victoria are now not allowed to work shifts at different stores starting from this week
That’s everywhere. Minimising cross location employees in all facets.