Internationally, education systems are facing significant challenges with teacher supply and retention. The widespread shortage of teachers has led to an increased need to understand and support different cohorts of the teaching workforce. One area of focus has been teachers who are precariously employed on casual or short-term contracts, commonly referred to as substitute, supply or casual relief teachers (Reupert et al., 2023). These teachers provide significant flexibility to the teacher workforce, playing an essential role in ensuring the continuation of student learning by covering planned or unplanned staff absences (Nicholas & Wells, 2017). Increasingly, however, they are also being called upon to fill gaps in the workforce caused by teacher supply challenges (Sutcher et al., 2019).

Although some teachers seek precarious employment while trying to gain a permanent position, others choose these employment conditions because they offer a better work/life balance. However, the likelihood of precarious work is exacerbated for certain groups, including women and early career teachers, who often stay in precarious positions longer than other teachers (McGrath-Champ et al., 2023; Windle et al., 2023). The inconsistent nature of precarious work can have negative implications for some teachers by causing financial insecurity and a lack of long-term job stability, which may lead to mental and physical strain which can impact upon teacher retention. Understanding the precarious employment of teachers, particularly those who are new to the teaching profession, is becoming increasingly critical, given the implications for teacher retention and the sustainability of teacher workforces.

This study uses labour process theory (Braverman, 1998) to explain the structural and systemic factors contributing to precarity in the teaching profession, particularly among early career teachers. Originating from Marxist theory, labour process theory explores how labour is organised and controlled in capitalist systems, arguing that workers are alienated from their labour because they do not own the means of production or the products they create. Arising from structural demands, such as fluctuating student enrolments, budget restraints, and the urgent need to fill job gaps caused by staff absences (Wilson & Ebert, 2013), precarious employment is further reinforced by systemic control mechanisms. These include performance evaluations that limit workers’ autonomy (Means, 2022) and role expectations that regulate job security (Betti, 2018). Together, these structural and systemic factors regulate employment conditions and perpetuate the need for casual and short-term forms of work, leading to greater job insecurity, high stress, and reduced opportunities for career progression.

This study aims to critically review the existing literature on the precarity of teachers internationally, using labour process theory to explain the structural and systemic factors contributing to the conditions of their employment. It will identify patterns, highlight inequalities, and provide insights to inform equitable employment policies that address the teacher shortage and promote teacher retention globally. The study is guided by the following research questions: 

1. How is precarious employment understood in the literature?
2. In what ways do teacher workforces frame precarious employment internationally?
3. How does labour process theory explain the structural and systemic factors contributing to precarity in the teaching workforce, particularly among early-career teachers?

A critical literature review was chosen because it is a distinct type of review which questions ‘what is often taken for granted in the field of […] education, with the aim of offering an alternative perspective on the topic under study’ (Wright & Michailova, 2023, p. 178). By interrogating established assumptions and offering alternative perspectives, a critical literature review can provide valuable insights of the structural and systemic factors shaping the precarity of teachers and therefore enabling an in-depth exploration of precarious employment and the implications of this for teachers internationally. A critical literature review does not present ‘deeply detailed methods to be replicated by others; rather, they grapple with the complexity, recognise the uncertainty and offer creative, thought-provoking insights, ideas and possibilities that may resonate with scholars in our field’ (Wright & Michailova, 2023, p. 179). Therefore, the critical literature review in this study aims to explore the complexities of the precarity faced by early career teachers, going beyond surface-level observations to uncover the deeper systemic issues at play rather than providing a deeply detailed methodology. To conduct the critical literature review, we reviewed academic literature published over the past ten years to ensure that the analysis would highlight contemporary issues regarding the precarity of early career teachers. Peer-reviewed journal articles, book chapters, and reports were included, accessed through the following academic databases: Taylor & Francis Online, SAGE Journals and JSTOR. Keywords such as ‘precarity’, ‘precarious employment’, ‘early career teachers’, ‘labour process theory’, ‘teacher workforce’ and ‘attrition’ were used to identify relevant materials. Following this, abstracts of each publication were read to determine their relevance using a series of inclusion criteria which identified studies that defined precarious employment, both generally and in relation to teaching, and in particular, those which examined systemic or structural factors impacting teachers. Additionally, studies which examined labour process theory were also included. Literature was selected to represent diverse international contexts, ensuring the findings provided a global perspective on precarious employment in teaching. To maintain relevance, priority was given to empirical studies and reviews published in English from 2014 to 2024, though important works outside of this period were also referenced to provide theoretical context. Articles were sorted according to themes to undertake thematic analysis which identified recurring patterns or gaps, which were then interrogated using labour process theory.

Findings fall under three areas: how precarious employment is understood in literature, how precarity is framed in relation to the teacher workforce, and how it can be explained through labour process theory. First, findings show that precarious employment is widespread, characterised by insecurity and instability, and driven by neoliberal policies which prioritise market-driven solutions. Second, teacher workforces frame precarious employment in diverse ways, shaped by broader economic and policy contexts, leading to significant variation internationally in the conditions under which teachers are employed. For example, countries such as Norway and Denmark have strong employee protections through permanent contracts, while Australia and the U.S. rely heavily on casual roles. While some teachers benefit from the flexibility that this provides, others can face financial instability, limited professional development, and reduced career prospects. Third, labour process theory can help to explain how structural and systemic factors contribute to precarity in teaching. Educational institutions exert control over teachers by using precarious employment to limit job security and create workplace divisions. Precarious employment reduces the ability of teachers to advocate for fair treatment and stability by removing representation and limiting access to resources and support. Early career teachers are particularly vulnerable as they face heightened scrutiny, reduced access to professional development, and competition for permanent roles, resulting in deskilling and reduced autonomy. Additionally, for female teachers, societal expectations work alongside existing gender inequalities to increase precarious employment and create systemic inequalities in the teaching workforce. Conclusively, this study shows how precarious employment affects teacher retention and education quality globally, charting a way forward in understanding teacher precarity. By examining international approaches, the study highlights the need for systemic reforms to balance workforce flexibility with stability, ensuring equitable employment practices for all teachers. Findings aim to inform policies that promote equity and sustainability in education systems.

Betti, E. (2018). Historicizing precarious work: Forty years of research in the social sciences and humanities. International Review of Social History, 63(2), 273-319. Braverman, H. (1998). Labor and monopoly capital : the degradation of work in the twentieth century (25th anniversary ed.). Monthly Review Press. McGrath-Champ, S., Fitzgerald, S., Gavin, M., Stacey, M., & Wilson, R. (2023). Labour Commodification in the Employment Heartland: Union Responses to Teachers’ Temporary Work. Work, employment and society, 37(5), 1165-1185. https://doi.org/10.1177/09500170211069854 Means, A. J. (2022). Precarity and the Precaritization of Teaching. In M. A. Peters (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Teacher Education (pp. 1360-1364). Springer Nature Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-8679-5_117 Nicholas, M., & Wells, M. (2017). Insights into casual relief teaching: casual relief teachers' perceptions of their knowledge and skills. Asia-Pacific journal of teacher education, 45(3), 229-249. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359866X.2016.1169506 Sutcher, L., Darling-Hammond, L., & Carver-Thomas, D. (2019). Understanding teacher shortages: An analysis of teacher supply and demand in the united states. Education policy analysis archives, 27(35), 35. https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.27.3696 Wilson, S., & Ebert, N. (2013). Precarious work: Economic, sociological and political perspectives. Economic and labour relations review, 24(3), 263-278. https://doi.org/10.1177/1035304613500434 Windle, J., Morrison, A., Sellar, S., Squires, R., Kennedy, J. P., & Murray, C. (2023). Teachers at breaking point: why working in South Australian schools is getting tougher. UniSA. Wright, A., & Michailova, S. (2023). Critical literature reviews: A critique and actionable advice. Management Learning, 54(2), 177-197.