Same Job, Same Pay has become a major planning issue for employers using labour hire in certain circumstances. The operational impact is not only about rates. It also affects sourcing strategy, budgeting, governance and how employers segment their workforce.
This article outlines the practical questions employers and procurement teams should work through. The aim here is not to interpret the law for your situation—that requires advice specific to your business—but to help you frame the workforce and commercial questions early, so any response is deliberate rather than rushed under pressure.
Need help reviewing workforce models? Explore managed skilled workforce solutions.
Key takeaways
- Same Job, Same Pay should be assessed as a commercial and workforce-planning issue, not just an industrial relations issue.
- Employers need better role clarity, workforce segmentation and supplier governance to understand exposure.
- Reactive buying usually increases cost and disruption. Early scenario planning is more effective.
- This is a cross-functional question—procurement, HR, operations and finance see different parts of it, and the gaps between them are where risk hides.
Why it matters operationally
Where employers rely on labour hire for recurring roles, the question is not simply “what are we paying today?” It is also whether the current contingent model still fits the work being done, the duration of demand, and the organisation’s broader workforce strategy.
The operational consequences extend beyond a single bill rate. A change in the way recurring roles are costed can ripple into budgets, sourcing decisions, the mix of permanent and contingent staff, and how confidently you can forecast labour cost across a year. Employers who understand which of their roles are genuinely variable, and which have quietly become ongoing, are in a far stronger position to plan than those reacting to a number after the fact.
Questions employers should ask now
- Which roles are genuinely contingent, and which are effectively ongoing?
- Where are we using labour hire because of flexibility needs versus process convenience?
- Do we have clear job architecture and role definitions across sites?
- Can procurement, HR and operations see the same workforce picture?
- Do we know the actual duration of demand for each recurring role, not just the headcount?
How procurement and operations can respond
- Review workforce segmentation: core, contingent, seasonal, project and shutdown demand should not all be treated the same. Each has a different risk profile and a different case for using contingent supply.
- Model cost scenarios: include direct and indirect impacts, not only bill rate changes. Administration, churn, supervision and the cost of getting the model wrong all belong in the picture.
- Check supplier contracts: understand how commercial changes flow through existing arrangements, including how and when variations can be made and who carries which obligation.
- Improve governance: avoid unmanaged local buying and inconsistent exceptions, because fragmented purchasing is exactly where visibility and control are lost.
Common mistakes
- Looking only at rate uplift rather than workforce design.
- Assuming one response will fit all role families or sites.
- Leaving procurement, HR and operations to solve the issue in separate streams.
- Waiting until change is forced by urgency.
What good looks like
Strong employers typically respond with clearer role architecture, better panel governance, stronger workforce planning and more disciplined use of contingent supply. The goal is not simply to reduce cost, but to use the right model for the right type of work. Done well, the review leaves the business with a cleaner view of its workforce regardless of any specific regulatory change, which is value in its own right.
Scenario examples worth testing internally
- Recurring operational demand: if a site uses labour hire in the same roles for extended periods, employers should test whether the current model still reflects a genuine contingent need.
- Project or shutdown demand: where demand is time-bound and mobilisation-driven, the workforce model may still support a stronger contingent case, but assumptions should be documented clearly.
- Mixed environments: many employers have both structural and variable demand. That usually requires segmentation rather than a single blanket response.
- Seasonal or peak demand: where volumes rise and fall predictably, the question is whether contingent supply is sized to the peak or quietly being used to cover a year-round baseline.
Who should be involved in the review
This is usually not something procurement should solve alone. The best reviews involve procurement, HR, operations, finance and industrial relations or legal stakeholders so the commercial, workforce and compliance implications are considered together. When these functions work in separate streams, each optimises its own view and the organisation ends up with an inconsistent response, so it helps to give the review a single owner and a shared set of facts to work from.
Related reading
Also see: Labour Hire Cost Breakdown: True Cost vs Direct Hire (Incl. Hidden Admin).
Also see: Workforce Segmentation: How to Balance Core vs Contingent for Resilience.
For a closely related guide, read Labour Hire vs Permanent Recruitment.
Related services
FAQ
Is this only a procurement issue?
No. It affects workforce strategy, hiring design, supplier governance and operational planning. Treating it as a procurement-only line item tends to miss the workforce-design questions that determine whether the contingent model still fits.
What is the most useful first step?
Map your recurring contingent roles, duration of demand and current supplier model. Without that baseline, responses tend to be reactive.
Should we wait until we’re required to act?
Waiting usually narrows your options and raises the cost of change. Doing the workforce mapping and scenario planning early keeps the response deliberate, and the clearer view of your workforce is useful regardless of how any specific requirement applies to you.
Next step
If you want a more structured way to review contingent workforce design, explore managed skilled workforce solutions.
General information only: This article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Legislation varies by state and territory — consult a qualified employment lawyer or Fair Work adviser for guidance specific to your situation.
