Debate on temporary agency work intensifies

With EU-level discussion on the draft Directive on temporary agency workers revived in December 2007, debate on the issue has intensified in the UK. The trade unions called on the government to reassess its opposition to the Directive before the December meeting of the Employment, Social Policy, Health and Consumer Affairs Council. However, the government and employers continue to oppose trade union demands for equal treatment for agency workers.

The central aim of the draft EU Directive on working conditions for temporary agency workers (EU0204205F) is to guarantee equal treatment for these workers in terms of pay and conditions as workers employed by the user company to do the same job. Following a lengthy deadlock on the issue in the Employment, Social Policy, Health and Consumer Affairs Council (EPSCO) (EU0410204F), the Portuguese EU Presidency in the second half of 2007 renewed the debate on the draft directive and prepared a new text, which was discussed at an EPSCO meeting on 5 December 2007.

Government opposition

Although the UK government supports the ‘underlying principles’ of the draft temporary agency work directive, it is opposed to certain aspects. Notably, the Portuguese Presidency text provides that agency workers should be treated equally to user-company employees after six weeks of an assignment; the government believes that this is too soon.

At the December council meeting, the UK maintained its opposition to the directive, as it is currently framed, and was reportedly supported by Germany, Ireland and Malta. However, a large majority of Member States supported the Presidency text and it seems that there is a necessary qualified majority in favour of the directive. The EPSCO conclusions suggest that there is a will to put the matter to a vote in 2008, adopting a common position without unanimity if necessary.

The UK government argues that the directive would damage labour market flexibility and lead to job losses. The Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform, John Hutton, stated:

This is a litmus test of Europe’s ability to balance the legitimate need for employment security which we clearly accept, with the compelling case for Europe to be as competitive and efficient as it possibly can be … Agency working is, in many cases, a bridge between long-time benefit dependency and the labour market. That is something I am not prepared to sacrifice.

UK legislation does not provide for equal treatment for agency workers, and the current government has focused its regulatory efforts on tackling ‘rogue’ agencies and protecting ‘vulnerable’ agency workers. Measures in this area are included in the Employment Bill published in December 2007 (UK0712019I).

Trade union concerns

Temporary agency work has become an increasingly important issue for trade unions, which are concerned about agency workers’ ‘vulnerability’ and lack of employment rights – especially given the emergence of a growing number of migrant agency workers. According to the General Secretary of the Trades Union Congress (TUC), Brendan Barber:

Too many unscrupulous bosses are replacing permanent staff – with reasonable terms and conditions – with insecure agency staff. They regularly earn less than directly employed staff, are not allowed to benefit from an employer’s contributions to a pension scheme, are given less holiday, little if any access to training, and tend to get no contractual sick pay.

Before the December council meeting, the TUC called on the government to stop opposing the directive. After the meeting, Mr Barber referred to the lack of progress as ‘very disappointing’ and said that there was ‘real anger’ that the UK government had ‘played the pivotal role in blocking progress today on this modest measure to improve workplace justice’. He added:

Contrary to business scare-mongering, this Directive would not stop agencies providing temporary staff to employers who need them. What it would have done was both make it more difficult for employers to undercut wages and conditions and help slow the growth of a two-tier workforce.

Employer opposition

The Confederation of British Industry (CBI) reiterated its longstanding opposition to the directive (UK0212101N) before the council. CBI welcomed the outcome of the meeting and its Deputy Director-General, John Cridland, commented:

The government deserves congratulations on ensuring the Directive was not passed. A quarter of a million UK jobs would have been in real jeopardy if it had been bullied through in Brussels. Hundreds of thousands of people in the UK prefer to work on a project-by-project basis, while employers depend on access to this pool of flexible labour so they can respond to the ebbs and flows of the economy.

Employee Relations Adviser at the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD), Mike Emmott, remarked:

In the UK, this Directive is an answer to a non-problem. Temporary workers are not an underprivileged and disaffected group. Many of them have chosen temporary work because of their lifestyle. It is vital the British government remains resolute in its efforts to permanently consign this proposal to the EU’s legislative dustbin.

Mark Carley, SPIRE Associates/IRRU, University of Warwick