Agency workers regulations, new contract

fedster

SarEl wrote: »

I regularly employ agency workers - many of whom have gone on to stay as permanant staff. QUOTE]

SarEl you have previously commented that you think employers will find a way round these new Agency Rules, as far as i can see the only way round them is the Swedish Derogation Model,which only applies to pay, rotating workers after 11 weeks will surely lead to Tribunals, where the Companies will have to pay compensation to the Worker for ignoring the New Rules.

As someone who employs AGency Workers, how do you think this will effect the use of Agencies workers by Companies, will Companies not rely on Agency workers as much, is this new legilsation a toothless tiger?

I am genuinely intrested, i was an Agency worker until recently when i got took on full time, however i still have firends/relatives doing Agency work, and i was wondering what the future will hold for them.

Thanks for reading

SarEl

I think the new regulations are toothless. Rotating workers after 11 weeks will not lead to tribunals because employees have no employment rights after 11 weeks, and agencies are not required to provide work. So the fact that work may be available isn't relevant since they cannot claim unfair dismissal. These regulations are another Tupe - they will work if employers wnat them to work, but they will find a way around them if they don't. For employees in specialsied industries like mine, it won't make any difference. We actually pay agency staff more than our permanant staff - but there are other benefits that outweigh this for permanant staff, which is why they stay on where the opportunity arises, and if they want the security. But for the low-skilled low waged agency workers, I think they will find that agency and/or employers will find ways around them.

fedster

SarEl wrote: »

I think the new regulations are toothless. Rotating workers after 11 weeks will not lead to tribunals because employees have no employment rights after 11 weeks, and agencies are not required to provide work. So the fact that work may be available isn't relevant since they cannot claim unfair dismissal. These regulations are another Tupe - they will work if employers wnat them to work, but they will find a way around them if they don't. For employees in specialsied industries like mine, it won't make any difference. We actually pay agency staff more than our permanant staff - but there are other benefits that outweigh this for permanant staff, which is why they stay on where the opportunity arises, and if they want the security. But for the low-skilled low waged agency workers, I think they will find that agency and/or employers will find ways around them.

Interesting, so realistically do you think my friends will be out of Work soon?because i know for a fact that the Company i work for will not be recruiting permnant staff in the near future,and the Company will be stupid to incur extra costs by following the new regulations,if it easy to get round them.

Alpha_225

Well Hi everyone...I'm new to the forum but I've been receiving the emails for ages now.

But I thought I'd share my situation with you....

I'm currently employed/used by an agency, and working for a huge supermarket who is orange in colour and begins with J and S. I'm currently there as a HGV driver, working on nights. Now I've been working at this depot for company 'J.S' for a considerable time now, with full time hours, in the region of 60 - 70 hours per week on average. Company 'J.S' pays its agency drivers considerably less, in fact I'm on roughly 45% less per hour then if I was employed directly by company 'J.S'. For many years now, company 'J.S' has gradually been sacking it's full time drivers for the silliest of things and not a single one of them has been replaced...they've just simply been replaced by more agency drivers.

Now since the agency I'm with have been aware of this new AWR, they've said that they'll give us a briefing when they're more clued up. These meetings are now being held either next week or the week after and me and many of the other agency guys fear a few things....

1) The agency and company 'J.S' will try and ignore the law in the hope that agency drivers won't kick up a fuss......

2) The agency will take us on as proper "employees", but only guarantee us 1 hour a week of work, and therefore make us sign away our right for equal pay....

3) Make us remaining agency workers sign up to them as self employed/Ltd. or they won't use us again, therefore making us out of scope for the AWR.

In fact, earlier this week, the agency sent a text message out to all of its drivers saying that meetings will be held in due course, but for those drivers that are self employed/Ltd/nova/JSA/maxipay, they do not have to attend the meeting, as they will not be affected by these regulations.

So...where do I stand? Naturally, I want to be paid the same wages as if I were employed directly, I don't want to be "constructively forced" to work for less money than if I was employed directly or to not be used by the agency at all if I don't sign something to say I'm happy to be paid less.

Also, does anyone have a link so I can download the most recent copy of the regulations as a PDF document?

Cheers,

Alpha 225.

LittleVoice

The original:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2010/93/pdfs/uksi_20100093_en.pdf

Amendment:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2011/1941/made

whiskychaser

While I am currently on sick, I am in exactly the same boat Alpha 225. As I understand it, you cannot be made to go self employed just to get around the regs. Similarly, they cannot just pay you 1 hour's wages for a week of 'sitting on the bench'. My understanding is the law says you should be paid 50% of you weekly wage. But of course agencies will try to apply the 50% only to the 300+ hours a year they guarantee and not your 60+ hours a week. If you havent signed a new contract and worked today, they have left it too late - you are already on assignment. There is nothing in the regs stopping an agency moving you after 11 weeks. BUT there are provisions in the regs intended to stop people taking advantage of them or trying to get around them. It is also my understanding that while you may opt out, you can just as soon opt back in again. I have had a discussion with a colleague in Sweden. They way the law is being applied here is not exactly what they had mind or how it works there. So dont blame them. Have a look at 'Pay Between Assignments or 'Derogation Contracts' on the manpower.com site and the BIS (Department for business) Guidance on Agency Workers regulations. (I am a new so cant post you links)
I think some time soon there are going to be tribunals. Unfortunately the supermarkets have rather a lot of leverage at no. 10 :-(

dickydonkin

daveboy wrote: »

Having personally seen the total disregard for others (manners and safety when operating MHE) demonstrated by agency staff where I work, which will remain nameless, I personally hope a lot of people find themselves out of work right before Christmas.

I seriously hope agencies find some tricks round the 12 week rule. Even if it means taking them on and getting rid of them never to be used again after 11 weeks and 6 days.

I have worked for agencies after my redundancy and I can assure you that I had no disregard of manners and certainly not safety - bearing in mind I had been employed as a H&S Officer.

Let me tell you a story about on job where I was actually working for a very large Japanese logistics company - not for an agency.

This company employed quite a few agency workers - great lads and good workers, however, it was the company who treat these guys with utter contempt and their safety culture beggered belief.

I could not believe that agency workers were not given any inductions or safety information before deployment and in the first week I was employed, there were 4 accidents involving agency workers - one was a very serious laceration.

It wasn't their fault - it was blatantly the fault of the employer who provided no training or safe working procedures and they just copied from full time employees what they believed was the correct working practices.

One example was a MANAGER who asked a fork truck driver to lift him up approximately 20 feet by standing on the forks.

I just stood open mouthed.

I left after 5 days.

The majority of Agency workers are conscientious and hard working and will be hired to do the work that full time employees of the client won't.

No daveboy...you have got it wrong - perhaps you need to look at yourself and your colleagues before being critical af Agency workers.

castle96

our Agency/meeting.

12 weeks starts from 1/10. No new contract to be signed at this stage. Assessments/monitoring to take place ('on probation' ?), to see if the AGENCY will take us on at the end of 12 weeks. No increase in pay during or after the 12 weeks. 15 hrs work p/wk will be guatanteed (at the current place of employment), at the end of 12 weeks.
All seems to be a con. Will these measures succeed for E'ers/Agencies, to get 'around' the new Laws ?

Assume we will have to sign a new contract 1/1/12

Cheesy_Lemon

I'm the same as "Alpha 225" for the same company at a different depot, We are being told (by our agency) if we don't sign these "permenant contracts" of which is guaranteed 12hrs per week, then they will not be giving us anymore work. I don't think its the company trying to wriggle out of anything but in fact it's the agencies that will have to incur the extra costs to pay us the equal pay etc and obviously if they try to charge the company higher fees in order to pay us, then a different agency would be sourced.
I feel that we are being blackmailed into this, it isn't a choice for us as we won't be given any more work unless we sign !!!!
I haven't been asked to sign it yet, but a few of my agency colleagues have, as like almost all of us have financial commitments, we fear not having any money coming in so for us it's catch 22, has anybody approached BBC Watchdog, as this affects EVERY agency worker in the land. This new AWR is supposed to protect us from this kind of practice in the first place !!!!
It's getting my goat as i wan't to refuse signing the "opt out" permanent contract thing but can't afford not to work.