The Benefits of Temping
Are you on a working holiday visa, in between jobs or looking for more of a work/life balance? If so then temping could be perfect for you! Our clients may consider employing temporary staff for a number of reasons such as;
- Coverage for annual leave or sick leave
- Coverage for maternity leave
- Assistance with a project or work overload
- Clients can also use temporary staff as means to trial performance before offering a permanent role.
The duration of assignment could be a few days, a few weeks, or a few months. Assignments can be extended past the initial end date and if you’re a super star employee you could be offered a permanent role. Here are a few benefits of temp work;
- Gain skills and industry experience
As you take on new temp jobs, you’ll inevitably learn new skills and gain industry experience which will not only add value to your resume but it will help you explore different industries and experience different office cultures. - Work/ life balance
Most temp jobs are 38 hours a week, and when your assignment is over, you can choose to continue working or take some time out. As long as you commit to your entire assignment, you’ll be putting your best foot forward and if you do an amazing job then your temp consultant will always want to put you forward for other future roles. - Build your network
You’ll gain access to your agency’s contacts and will be able to meet many industry professionals and show them firsthand that you’re reliable and hardworking. These connections may lead to other longer-term positions in the future. - Transition into permanent employment
Once you’re working as a temp, the employer gets a chance to see you shine! So, it’s possible that what started out as a week’s assignment turns into a permanent job offer, and by then you’ll know if you’re in a company that you want to stay with long-term.
If you have a minimum of 1 year’s recent business support experience and you think temporary work is for you then please send us your resume – info@lotuspeople.com.au
You may also like...

A conversation with Hayley Martin, Executive Search Practice Lead at Lotus People As Lotus People formally launches its Executive Search practice, we sat down with Hayley Martin to talk about what separates a great senior hire from a costly one, what mid-market businesses consistently get wrong, and why she chose to build this here .

A natural next step for Lotus People - Lotus Executive Search , an organic evolution of work we've been doing for years, now delivered with the rigour, discretion, and partnership it deserves. Leading this practice is Hayley Martin who brings over 20 years of executive search experience, including deep expertise in the not-for-profit sector, membership organisations, and corporate leadership appointments

In the ever-evolving world of talent acquisition, reference checks remain a standard practice. However, I've recently asked my network a question: Is bringing two candidates to the reference check stage a fair and ethical practice? The overwhelming consensus from HR professionals, recruiters, and hiring managers is a resounding no . While companies might justify this approach to ensure they make the best hiring decision, the practice has significant drawbacks. The Candidate’s Perspective: False Hope and Strained Relationships For candidates, reference checks often represent the final hurdle before an offer. Being asked to provide references is a hopeful moment—only to discover later that they were simply a “backup” candidate. This leads to: False hope : The process feels misleading if references are strong, but the candidate still doesn’t secure the role due to a small deciding factor. Professional risk : Candidates hesitate to repeatedly ask the same referees for endorsements, fearing it may strain professional relationships or cast doubt on their credibility. Frustration and wasted time : Candidates invest considerable effort in securing references, only to walk away empty-handed. The Referee’s Burden: A Drain on Time and Goodwill Reference checks aren’t just a candidate inconvenience; they also affect referees—often senior professionals taking time out of their busy schedules. Many commenters noted: Referees have limited patience: If a former manager is repeatedly asked for references for the same person without a job offer, they may be reluctant to vouch for them in the future. - A one-sided burden : The hiring company benefits from this additional insight, but referees get little in return other than expecting a favour. The Hiring Manager’s Responsibility: Why This Practice Undermines Decision-Making Some employers argue that reference checks help finalise a tough decision between two equally qualified candidates. However, many experts push back against this rationale: Hiring decisions should be based on direct assessment, not external opinion : As one commenter put it, “You should never put the decision of who best to hire in the hands of someone you don’t know and doesn’t work for your business.” Reference checks are not selection tools : Traditionally, references are a due diligence step , not a deciding factor between multiple candidates. It’s an outdated practice : With many companies now limiting references to basic employment verification, the value of this process is already diminished. So, What’s the Alternative? If reference checks shouldn’t be used to choose between candidates, how should they be utilised?
