EU due to bring in law on agency workers...

the_syco

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/siptu-rejects-proposals-on-agency-workers-wages-518934.html

SIPTU rejects proposals on agency workers' wages

SIPTU has rejected proposals from Jobs Minister Richard Bruton which could affect the wages of agency workers in Ireland.

The EU directive - due to come into force in December - says agency workers should get the same pay and conditions as those hired directly by an employer from their first day.

According to the Irish Times, Minister Bruton says that without the benefit of some leeway on the directive, Ireland could be put in a position of "significant competitive disadvantage".

The report adds that Mr Bruton is looking for cabinet approval on his idea ahead of new European rules which take effect later this year.

This will be VERY interesting, esp for companies like CPL, Manpower, etc.

Kojak

Does this mean that the agency workers pay will be increased, or will companies attempt to reduce their own workers pay to the level of the agency staff?

Jarren

well, there was nothing mentioned about reducing the payment for staff employed full time,
and yes it looks very interesting indeed

thefinalstage

the_syco wrote: »

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/siptu-rejects-proposals-on-agency-workers-wages-518934.html



This will be VERY interesting, esp for companies like CPL, Manpower, etc.

Might get a pay rise at last....

krissovo

Can it work the other way around as well where the agency/contractor is on a much higher wage than the employees?

Nody

Am I the only one seeing the companies doing an easy circle eight around it? Create two type of positions, A and B. A is what the company hire, B is a position ever filled by the company that theoretically would have the same deal as the agency staff filling it.

Legal requirements are now fulfilled.

ScouseMouse

I know of a hospital where the agency staff earn a lot more than the regular staff.

Does this mean the current staff will get an increase? or will the agency staff be given a lower rate?

This will be interesting....

donkey balls

I've be doing agency work nearly three years now since being let go the lads in the companies I'm placed in are on good T&C i could not see companies paying agency workers the same,Also what's not to stop companies hiring someone for under three months then breaking their service tesco started this crap many years ago by breaking the employees service just before they completed a years service,I would love to have the same terms as the lads in my place but to be honest when you look at the FAS WPP&job bridge scams and it not being properly policed and this being Ireland it won't be enforced.

cladda1112

wow..to good to happen. About time this was looked into. But will never happen. Agree with you donkey balls. Partner in same position as you. He is always on about the other lads and how they get good money for over time while he gets under 2 euro for the same overtime. They also get bonus and stuff while no matter how good his work effert is he is not rewarded for it. But dont hold your breath as this will not happen. As you said this is Ireland.

donkey balls

The thing is Cladda I've been offered full time positions and have turned them down due to the wages being crap,Also the work I do is fairly specialized within the industry and with the experience&training that I've got from the company makes me a shoe in hopefully for a full time position.
Also you have the likes of NERA who investigate dodgy employers etc and seemingly there stretched regarding the amount of inspectors they have how could they possibely ensure that employers pay the agency guys the same.

cladda1112

I completly understand. My partner worked for two wks(only get paid every two wks) and got just over 500 for it. C**p money. They had no work for two days so sent them home and refused to pay them plus couldnt take it as holidays as have to work them up in advance. The amount of times he has felt like walking out. We are depending for morg etc. If they have no work and send you home you lose 12 hrs pay. Try explaining this to the recruitment company. They dont care. If he knew what he knews now a year back he would have turned them down too. And no its not that he dose not want to work it just that he has worked since he was 16 and was getting more money then than he is now and far more respect.

Jarren

Ireland

Minister proposes lower pay and conditions for agency staff


EMPLOYERS WOULD be allowed to hire staff provided by agencies on lower wages than their own permanent employees are paid for similar work. These measures are being proposed by Minister for Enterprise and Jobs Richard Bruton.

The proposals would allow companies and State bodies to provide inferior terms and conditions to temporary agency workers for specific periods – possibly up to six months – before having to bring them up to the levels of their directly recruited personnel.

Some trade unions have already signalled their opposition to the Minister’s proposals, which come just weeks after the row over changes to the joint labour committee system for determining pay and conditions for thousands of other workers across the economy

Government sources said last night that, as they saw it, the Minister’s proposed reforms would for the first time oblige employers to provide temporary agency workers with the same basic terms and conditions as their permanent employees.

However, there would be a time lag before these provisions would come into effect.

Agency workers are paid by employment agencies which, in turn, assign them to another employer to carry out specific duties. Agency workers are common in various areas ranging from secretarial support to nursing and manufacturing.

At the height of the boom an estimated 40,000 such agency workers were employed – or about 2 per cent of the then two-million-strong workforce.

There are currently about 2,000 agency workers in the health service.

Mr Bruton has told trade union and employer leaders in a confidential letter that he intends to seek Cabinet approval for an effective derogation from an EU directive on temporary agency work.

A key element of this directive, which has to be signed into Irish law by December 5th, is the principle that agency workers should be treated in the same manner in terms of pay and conditions such as annual holidays as personnel hired directly by an employer to do an identical job.

A derogation from this principle, allowing temporary agency workers to be treated differently for a specific period, is permissible if the Government can secure an agreement with employers and unions.

In the absence of such an agreement agency workers will be entitled to equal treatment from the first day of employment.

In the UK, temporary agency workers can be employed for three months on inferior terms and conditions before the equal treatment principle applies. However, Mr Bruton has pointed out that in some countries the principle of equal treatment applies only after six months.

In his letter to the leadership of Irish Congress of Trade Unions, the Minister indicated that the provision of day-one equal treatment for agency workers could have implications for jobs.

“Without the benefit of some leeway in transposing the directive in the shape of a framework agreement, Ireland will be in a position of significant competitive disadvantage vis-a-vis our European trading partners,” he said.

“This would be particularly keenly felt given that our immediate and major trading partner, the UK, has already secured agreement for a waiting period of 12 weeks, an arrangement I understand extends also to Northern Ireland.

“In the current climate and with the significant challenges that face us on the road to economic recovery, we must avail of the flexibilities afforded by the directive.”

However, the Ministers proposals have already been criticised by some trade unions.

Siptu’s acting health divisional organiser, Paul Bell, said last night that the union would reject any “eleventh-hour attempt” to negotiate a derogation from the EU directive on temporary agency work.

“At this point in time the Siptu position is that nothing has been said from the Government side that would lead us to the view that there would be anything of benefit to workers in agreeing any derogation,” he said.

“In the health services there are in excess of 2,000 employees on agency contracts and we have had a very negative engagement with the HSE this year when they awarded a contract to a single agency staff provider.

“That contract was awarded on the basis of having our members’ salaries cut in the nursing, healthcare assistant and radiographer grades.

“Siptu determined then that the only way to protect health workers from such an attack was through the full implementation of the directive.”

A spokesman for the Minister said Mr Bruton’s priority was to find a fair and balanced solution “that will enable protection for and creation of as many jobs as possible”.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2011/0902/1224303349585.html

Great Britain

Vince Cable, the Liberal Democrat Business Secretary, has agreed to a controversial European directive to give agency workers the same rights as full-time employees of British companies.
An analysis of the new laws by the Department for Business discloses that it will cost firms more than £1.8 billion a year, leading to warnings from major employers that they will have to cut jobs.
The laws, which will give more than one million workers the right to the same holiday time, pay, maternity leave and other perks, will come into force next month. Under the legislation, agency workers will effectively have to be treated as full-time workers after 12 weeks.
The laws are being introduced despite a pledge by George Osborne, the Chancellor, to boost economic growth by cutting red tape and other obstacles facing businesses.
Ministers have conceded that they have effectively been forced to introduce the “disappointing” laws after pressure from trade unions.
RELATED ARTICLES
EU students get a better deal at British universities 02 Jun 2011
Your rights if you lose your job 16 Dec 2010
Last night, business leaders urged the Government to postpone the legislation until the economy has recovered. David Frost, the director-general of the British Chambers of Commerce, said: “The Government claims business growth is top of the agenda, yet UK firms will be hit with huge costs once these new regulations come into force.
“Companies cannot generate growth and create jobs when they are facing such a costly bill just to implement new employment legislation.
“Unless the Government reduces this kind of red tape, we will continue to have high levels of unemployment and could end up derailing the recovery.” The legislation stems from an EU directive initially agreed by the Labour government following pressure from the unions.
After the formation of the Coalition, the proposals were reviewed by Liberal Democrat ministers who approved the legislation.
Since the decision was taken, however, the economic situation has deteriorated significantly and senior Conservatives are understood to be angered by the forthcoming laws.
The official analysis discloses that the legislation will cost firms more than £16 billion over the next decade.
The typical small business will have to pay an extra £2,493 a year, increasing to £73,188 for large firms.
Public sector employers will have to pay an additional £259 million a year, although the Treasury expects to generate up to £332 million in taxes paid by workers earning more.
The analysis warns that ministers are effectively forced to introduce the measures as a result of the EU directive or they could face legal challenges from agency workers.
The Institute of Directors says it has taken advice from EU legal experts who claim that the Government “gold-plated” the directive. The business group says the laws could have been introduced in a far more limited form.
Alexander Ehmann, the head of regulation policy at the Institute of Directors, said: “This is a really significant piece of legislation with very high costs for business. It will undoubtedly lead to less job opportunities and is wholly inappropriate in the current economic climate. It is a very unhelpful move.”
Mr Osborne and Treasury officials are thought to be drawing up policies to boost growth which will be unveiled later in the autumn.
The Government is expected to announce in next year’s Budget that the 50p higher rate of tax will be scrapped after being blamed for deterring entrepreneurs from setting up in Britain.
Central bankers will also meet in Wyoming this weekend to discuss the economic situation caused by the eurozone crisis and ongoing arguments about government spending in the US.
The meeting is expected to be dominated by discussion of whether a third round of quantitative easing, printing more money to buy assets, is necessary.
Investors are hoping that the US Federal Reserve will indicate that it intends to pump more money into the economy. If it does not, stock markets may fall sharply again next week. Yesterday, a member of the Bank of England’s Monetary Policy Committee said that there may also be the potential for more quantitative easing in this country.
“We are exposed to financial contagion from both the euro area and the US,” Martin Weale said.
A spokesman for the Department for Business conceded that the new employment laws were “disappointing”. He said: “Ministers discussed these European regulations on a number of occasions with both the CBI [lobby group] and the TUC [union], seeking agreement on changes that we considered would have been to the benefit of both employers and agency workers. Unfortunately it was not possible to find a way forward that would be acceptable to both parties.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/jobs/8723731/New-EU-job-rights-will-derail-British-recovery.html


Can you spot the differance!!!