exploitation by manpower

scheming_gypsy

grai wrote: »

I worked for Manpower for 5 years as a telephonist at the Ministry of Defence

The M.O.D. were giving Manpower £45,000 a year to have me there - Manpower gave me £16,000 of that!!



the workers at Manpower were also very thick and ignorant as you would expect with a cowboy outfit

It was 5 humiliating years of slave labour

So you did "5 humiliating years of slave labour" yet you called them thick?

What Manpower charged them is irrelevant to what you got paid. You accepted the job at 16k because that's what you thought the job was worth / what you were willing to work for.

duckandcover

grai wrote: »

I worked for Manpower for 5 years as a telephonist at the Ministry of Defence

It was a skilled complicated job operating the military network for the armed forces for which I had to sign the Official Secret's act

The M.O.D. were giving Manpower £45,000 a year to have me there - Manpower gave me £16,000 of that!!

Enough said

*facepalm*....

Hammyman

k66yla wrote: »

These are not lies and what Custardy says is true.

No it isn't. If the employment via the agency lasts more than 12 weeks, even if there is a break of up to 6 weeks, then they are entitled to the same pay as permanent staff. This applies whether it is an in house agency or an external one.

However if they are employed directly by RM, then the 12 week rule doesn't apply. Being employed through Angard, even though owned by RM, doesn't meet the criteria for being employed directly by RM so the 12 week rule still applies.

Hammyman

grai wrote: »

I worked for Manpower for 5 years as a telephonist at the Ministry of Defence

It was a skilled complicated job operating the military network for the armed forces for which I had to sign the Official Secret's act

Really, it isn't. Its no different than being the receptionist at a large corporate building.

Thanet62

Hammyman wrote: »

No it isn't. If the employment via the agency lasts more than 12 weeks, even if there is a break of up to 6 weeks, then they are entitled to the same pay as permanent staff. This applies whether it is an in house agency or an external one.

However if they are employed directly by RM, then the 12 week rule doesn't apply. Being employed through Angard, even though owned by RM, doesn't meet the criteria for being employed directly by RM so the 12 week rule still applies.

Right I started work last Christmas (5th Dec) with RM. I was kept on and completed 12 weeks I was then FORCED to take a 2 week break at the end of February I was then given another contract for 12 weeks end of that a 2 week break then another contract...see already they were aware of the 12 week rule and were getting round it. My last contract with RM was due to run out in October but was terminated early and we were transferred to Angard. We now have a 38 week contract.

My gripe which I have outlined in my previous post is that under Angard we have taken a 16% cut in pay this is a huge amount to lose.

daveboy

Anybody that works for an agency is what I like to call "cannon fodder".

I work for a large national company that uses agency staff. If the workload is low, the first to go are the agency staff. I love it when they are FORCED to go as I know they are losing money. I love it because they are stupid enough to work for an agency.

I am a permanent employee - I can be asked if I want to go home early but cannot be forced to.

I have no sympathy for agency staff.

I am hoping that a number of agencies have a clear out a couple of weeks before Christmas. Just in time for the 12 weeks. Rinse and repeat in March.

At least I know I will have a job over Christmas :rotfl:. If I was an agency employee I would definitely be working out how long is left before that 12 weeks is up.

Hammyman

Thanet62 wrote: »

Right I started work last Christmas (5th Dec) with RM. I was kept on and completed 12 weeks I was then FORCED to take a 2 week break at the end of February I was then given another contract for 12 weeks end of that a 2 week break then another contract...see already they were aware of the 12 week rule and were getting round it.

The 12 week rule only came in in October so the above is irrelevant. Also as the break period can be 6 weeks without it being classed as a break of the 12 week period, even what you posted above doesn't get around the 12 week rule.

Hammyman

daveboy wrote: »

Anybody that works for an agency is what I like to call "cannon fodder".

I enjoyed my decade plus working as an agency employee. I got paid more than the staff did at most companies I was sent to, many times my basic being their overtime rate. In addition to that, I could take time off when I wanted to without any ramifications, choose who I wanted to work at and if I went to a job that was really bad, pick up the phone and get placed somewhere else the following day/week.

I did however fully understand what I was getting into, that a week booking could be cancelled halfway through, that there would be certain times of the year when there wasn't a lot of work and to take what was offered and that any agency I worked for was only interested in what was best for them despite the words that came out of their mouth.

Nothanks

Hammyman, your anti union propaganda is downright offensive, and backed up with no evidence whatsoever. Back in your day, agency work may have paid more, it did for a time, it doesn't now.

Hammyman

Nothanks wrote: »

Hammyman, your anti union propaganda is downright offensive, and backed up with no evidence whatsoever. Back in your day, agency work may have paid more, it did for a time, it doesn't now.

You're wrong on both counts. I can only assume you must be a union rep to disagree about the comments in that respect. It has been posted on these forums about the tube drivers union reneging on the agreement they previously made and the reasons for the mail workers strikes are there for all to see on the internet.

In regards to agencies. The last time I worked for an agency was three years ago to the week. The last time I looked at agency HGV driving jobs, which was this weekend, there were several for the Tesco depot at Goole which is the biggest employer of HGV drivers in my county. The employed drivers there work for Stobarts as Stobarts have the haulage contract for Tesco in the UK. The agencies are paying between £2 to £2.50 an hour more than the Stobarts permanent drivers are getting. Stobarts hourly rate for drivers is widely known in the haulage industry - it isn't a secret.