REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURES AND STUDIES
Like any social and employment system, labour hire has an impact on organizational citizens – the employer and employee (Boyce et al., 2007). On employees, labourbroking can affect their job satisfaction levels and the degree of commitment to theorganizations they work for (Judge, Thoresen, Bono & Patton, 2001). Despite that, labour hire becomes an option to turn to when the economic outlook turns outpressing – an opportunity to earn income for sustenance in times of economichardship despite poor basic working conditions and minimum rewards (Berchem,2005). For the employer, labour hire has been seen to provide competitiveadvantage – an avenue to pursue greater efficiencies (Jauch, 2007).
It follows that, as Mitlacher argues, when a worker is employed temporarily, a situationof expecting him or her to leave his or her employer in a short period of time isanticipated and created. Macgregor (2001) refers to labour hire as the supply oroutsource of skilled and unskilled blue collar workers hired for short- and long-termpositions and are known or referred to as field workers regarded necessary forsupplementary staffing.
Moreover, just like the workers of any occupation, production operator can only be efficient in the performance of their duties and responsibilities towards their respective organizations if they possess high level job satisfaction. Locke (1976) defines job satisfaction as the outcome of an employee’s good feelings and beliefs regarding the nature of his job and experiences related to the job. It is generally recognized as a multifaceted construct that includes employee feelings about a variety of both intrinsic and extrinsic job elements. Stordeur et al. (2001) contend that job satisfaction is an immediate antecedent of work commitment, and work commitment an immediate antecedent of intention to leave the workplace and turnover. They expound the idea by saying that the higher an employee’s job satisfaction and work commitment, the lower his intention to leave. Based on this contention the researcher has raised this question: what are the causes of job satisfaction, so that an employee will stay committed to his work, and will continue to hold on to it? Numerous motivation theories address this question. Among them are: Herzberg’s Satisfaction-Motivation Theory; McClelland’s Three Motives Theory; Vroom’s Expectancy Theory; and Alderfer’s Three-tiered Model of Needs. Motivation is defined by Newstrom and Davis (1993) as strength of the drive toward an action. These definitions according to Steers and Porter (1991) have three common denominators: 1) what energizes human behavior; 2) what directs or channels such behavior; and, 3) how this behavior is maintained or sustained. Newstrom and Davis (1993) explain that when people join an organization, they bring with them certain drives and needs that affect their work performance. Sometimes these drives and needs are not only difficult to determine and satisfy but also vary greatly from one person to another. Herzberg (Hollyforde and Whiddett, 2005), in his Satisfaction-Motivation theory explains that the things people find satisfying in their jobs are not always the opposite of the things they find dissatisfying. This is because the things that lead to job satisfaction are distinct from those that lead to job dissatisfaction. According to Herzberg (Stoner and Wankel, 1987), every individual worker has two different categories of needs: the hygiene factors, and the satisfying factors. The hygiene factors are known as the dissatisfiers, but they do not affect the motivation and output of workers. The satisfying factors on the other hand are the real motivators, but their absence does not necessarily lead to dissatisfaction. The hygiene factors include the environment around the job, such as policies and administration, supervision, working conditions, interpersonal relations,...