AWR - What does it really mean ?.

mountainofdebt

Interestingly enough Junior has come home today saying that he's been offered a permanent role with his company and therefore will be no longer employed by the company - and even more interestingly he's been there 12 weeks.

Might be co-incidence.

LittleVoice

ladylouise62 wrote: »

I'm still not clear about holiday pay. Say that as a temp I 'earn' 25 days of paid holiday a year, but the people I work with have 25 days holiday AND bank holidays (which adds a further 8? days). Would the temp now be getting bank holidays as well. i.e be earning 33 paid days?

If you are earning 25 days paid holiday a year, you are not working full-time. As a temp you are probably paid an hourly rate (though some are paid a daily rate) and therefore your holiday entitlement, as statutory minimum, is 12.07% of the hours you work which would equal 5.6 weeks (28 days for a 5-day-week worker) a year.

If a directly employed person would receive 33 paid days holiday then you would be entitled to the same. This additional holiday entitlement could be paid either by an extra payment rolled up into the hourly (or daily) rate or by an additional percentage to the accrual rate. I haven't yet worked out what this would be.

SarEl

LadyMissA wrote: »

But what if working in a team of people all doing the same job and they are all on different salaries? How would that work and then the company would have to disclose all salaries to the agency, no?

The answer is that nobody knows because the regulations haven't been tested in court. The assumption quite incorrectly made in the regulations is that all employers pay a certain wage or salary grade for the same job. In this case it is easy - the agency worker is entitled to the wage or the lowest point on the salary scale (because progression on the scale would be dependant on certain things like years in the position or qualification bars) and progression would then be based on the same terms as employees. But where companies appoint on haphazard salaries depending on what they can get people for, is anyone's guess. One is assuming that this won't happen all that often because this tends to happen more in the kinds of positions that aren't recruited as temps.

Of course nobody has mentioned what might happen to those agency staff who suddenly find that they get a cut in pay! Some agencies / clients pay more than the going rate precisly because agency staff do not get the same benefits as employees. Again, it doesn't apply to the majority of agency staff, but there are a sufficient minority for this to be an issue. If employers are suddenly faced with increased costs because they have effectively been "compensating" for the lack of benefits, they are hardly likely to be keen on providing the benefits and paying a premium to agency staff through their wages.

patman99

I get paid more than the advertised rate. If I get a pay-cut then I will tell the Agency to redeploy me with immediate effect.
Luckily, there is a big factory next-door who pay slightly more and recruit via the same agency. The only thing stopping me at the mo. is the smell & the fact it is shift work.

Edinburghlass_2

mountainofdebt wrote: »

Interestingly enough Junior has come home today saying that he's been offered a permanent role with his company and therefore will be no longer employed by the company - and even more interestingly he's been there 12 weeks.

Might be co-incidence.

My daughter was offered a permanent contract yesterday and is thrilled to bits.
She has been employed by the agency since May but the clock restarted on 1 October and her 12 weeks would have been up today.

patman99

Well done that girl. What a good Christmas present for her.

moose1982

I know of a very large company (retailer beginning with T, but it isn't their retail part directly) has a lot of agency staff, some have been there years but are being replaced by other temps. Reason is because the temps only get time for overtime while full time staff get time+half.

planning303

If someone (an agency worker) finds that they are layed off after 12 weeks and replaced by a fresh temp, then this would be considered by the AWR to be an avoidence measure implemented by the employer and they could get taken to court over it.

As others have said this is all currently untested legislation due to there having not been any cases regarding it yet

AimeesMum_2

The agency staff in the same position as me get £20,000 per year more than me because they get no sick pay or holiday pay. They also get paid through an composite (Sp?) company so they can claim lots of expenses. Would that mean that they would need to take a pay cut or would they be classed as technically self employed?

patman99

I guess they must be self-employed. Btw, there is no way not getting sick-pay or holidays are worth an extra £20k p/a. When a firm sh1ts on it's perms like that, it's time to get the unions involved.