|
 |
|
|
|
|
Working conditions for temporary workers
|
|
|
BCC Brief:
EC proposal for a directive on working conditions for temporary workers
September 2002
Background
1. The British Chambers of Commerce (BCC) representing 135,000 businesses (mostly small and medium sized enterprises), supports the principle of non-discrimination against temporary workers. The BCC, along with the UK Government and other UK representative bodies, have consistently argued that the proposed directive could backfire against those it is intended to help by reducing temporary employment, and that it will have a significant and particular impact on the UK.
2. This is not because the UK has an entirely deregulated temporary work labour market (temporary agency workers in the UK are covered by regulations including the working time directive, national minimum wage and statutory sick pay). The problem lies in the fact that the UK has a highly flexible temporary workers market, where temporary workers wish to remain temporary, on longer contracts, in order to suit their life-style. There are many temporary workers in the UK, at the professional and executive end of the market who earn higher rates of pay than their permanent equivalents. However, we recognise that at the lower end of the pay scale, this may not be the case. We would argue that whilst these workers need protection, the temporary workers directive should not jeopardise the whole sector and limit employers and individual choice, and potentially reduce both temporary and permanent employment altogether.
Article 3 - Definition of comparable worker
3. There are two ways of interpreting the rapporteur's proposed amendment to the directive to define a comparable worker as "a worker who is or could have been directly employed by the user undertaking for the same or similar work". If it will allow employers to ensure that temporary workers receive the "going rate of pay" without having to compare every possible individual in the workplace with regard to job description, skills and level of experience, then it would be helpful to business. Calculating individual worker comparisons in detail would represent a substantial administrative burden, particularly for SMEs, and could reduce the demand and supply of temporary workers, with a knock on and adverse impact on employment. However, if this amendment is interpreted as a more complex hypothetical comparator, or as a form of collective agreement where sectors set a "going-rate", it is unlikely to work in the UK and should be rejected.
Article 3.1.d
4. Article 3.1.d includes pay in the definition of basic working and employment conditions. We believe that the definition of pay should not include pensions. It would be practically crippling for user firms to offer pensions due to the temporary nature of the work.
Article 5.2: Peter Skinner amendment 121
5. The BCC supports amendment 121 that allows an exemption to the directive for those temporary workers who earn in excess of average earnings. It is important that the directive recognises that there are many temporary workers at executive level who earn more than their permanent equivalents and that the evidence of abuse on pay and working conditions is at the lower end of the pay scale. Using average earnings would be a good benchmark so that employers will not have to be burdened by the bureaucracy that will be involved when hiring all temporary worker, but will concentrate efforts on improving pay and working conditions for workers at the lower end of the pay scale.
Article 5.4: The principle of non discrimination - 6 week exemption
6. We welcome the rapporteur's decision to maintain the exemption from the directive for user firms recruiting a temporary worker for an assignment for a period of not more than 6 weeks despite considerable pressure to scrap it altogether. However the BCC also supports the tabled amendment 130 that calls for a 12 month period (although member states should be free to adopt a minimum period of six weeks should they wish). This would have the effect of reducing substantial administrative burdens for user enterprises (particularly SMEs) thus avoiding the real danger of a reduction in employment opportunities for temporary workers. It is also particularly important for UK user firms who will need to recruit temporary workers to cover for maternity leave for up to one year from April next year.
Article 6.2 - Access to permanent quality employment
7. We believe that whilst onerous temp to perm fees are a disincentive for user firms to employ temporary workers, it is important that the agency is able to recoup their costs. This case study demonstrates that fair arrangements can be made so that employers do not have to pay a temp to perm fee if they recruit a temporary worker for a certain period of time. If the temp to perm fee is abolished without the agency being able to recoup costs, some user firms may use agencies as a free recruitment service and the agencies will be forced to increase their rates significantly. We therefore support amendments 137, 138, 139, 140
Case study: Small printing ink manufacturer with 13 employees
The employer has an arrangement with local temporary work agencies to hire
temporary workers for a 13 week period with the intention that if they are
suitable and the employee wishes to stay, they will be offered permanent
posts. At the end of the 13 week period, the agency does not charge a temp
to perm fee. Working in this way, the employer has been able to test the skills
of the worker on a trial period, the employee may be offered a permanent position
and the agency is happy to receive it's fee for a period of 13 weeks, by which
time they have recouped their costs and do not need to charge a temp to perm fee.
This arrangement would not work if the temp to perm fee were abolished with
immediate effect. The agencies need time to recoup the costs of their service
provision and investment in the individual.
|
Contact: Stephanie James s.james@britishchambers.org.uk: Tel: 020 7565 2028
website: www.britishchambers.org.uk
last updated 26 September 2002
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
