The current page is not translated to the selected language.
Temporary agency work has become more common in Greece, with a twofold increase in the number of such contracts between 2003 and 2004. However, certain discrepancies arise between agency workers and other employees, not least in terms of pay. Moreover, user companies are evading the law in relation to making agency workers permanent after a certain period. Research concludes that the statutory framework should be changed to improve the rights of these workers.
A study published in Labour Relations Review gives data on the prevalence of temporary agency work in Greece, including: the profile of the average temporary agency worker, the length of employment through temporary work agencies, problems associated with temporary agency work, and differences between temporary agency workers and comparable workers of the user company.
Currently, eight temporary work agencies in Greece are listed on the official register of the Ministry of Employment Υπουργείο Απασχόλησης και Κοινωνικής ΠροστασίαςYPAKP. According to the register, in 2003–2004 the number of temporarily employed workers stood at 11,117 persons. Of that number, 5,634 workers – corresponding to 51% – were men and the other 5,483 – or 49% – were women. Some 6,347 temporary employment contracts were agreed in 2003 and this figure had more than doubled to reach 13,283 in 2004 (Table 1).
| Year | Number of contracts |
|---|---|
| 2003 | 6,347 |
| 2004 | 13,283 |
Source: YPAKP, General Directorate of Labour, Directorate of Employment
In addition to assessing the above quantitative data, the study included a qualitative element, by circulating a questionnaire among 35 members of the Panhellenic Union of Employees Providing Labour to Third Parties (PASYPET); the survey respondents maintained their anonymity. PASYPET currently represents agency workers who are assigned within the financial services sector, but aims to include a range of agency workers regardless of sector of economic activity.
Among the characteristics of the survey respondents were the following:
The study indicates that, among those surveyed, the most common maximum length of employment through temporary work agencies is three years; the most common minimum length stands at between one and three months. Nevertheless, the maximum length of employment may reach as high as eight years, while the minimum duration may extend to three and a half years.
The majority of those surveyed, at 82.4%, reported that their direct employer – that is, the temporary work agency – had changed during their current assignment with the indirect employer – in other words, the user company (Table 2).
| Changed direct employer | % |
|---|---|
| Yes | 82.4 |
| No | 17.6 |
| Total | 100.0 |
The number of such changes in agencies varied between two and five occurrences. At the same time, all of those whose direct employer had changed indicated that it was not their intention to change the agency, but that of the indirect employer.
This reveals an anomaly in the practice of temporary agency work. According to Law 2956/2001 (GR0111101F), if the temporary agency employee works for the same user company for more than 16 months, then the employment contract with the temporary work agency automatically converts into an open-ended employment contract with the user company. However, using a succession of agencies is a way to circumvent the workers’ right to become employees of the user company.
The main difference which the survey respondents identified between themselves and other employees in the user company was in relation to pay, despite the fact that Law 2956/2001 recognises the principle of equal treatment. Some 79.4% of the temporary agency workers reported that they do not receive the same pay as other employees in the user company (Table 3); the agency workers are excluded from bonuses and benefits awarded to other employees. Furthermore, the agency workers state that, compared with other staff, they have limited scope for action and decision making, while experiencing higher levels of work stress.
| Differences in… | % |
|---|---|
| Employment income | 79.4 |
| Scope of action and decision making | 8.8 |
| Stress at work | 5.9 |
The study concludes that certain changes must be made in the statutory framework so that temporary agency workers can enjoy the same rights as comparable employees of the user company. It should be clarified to which income category the agency workers belong, so that they are eligible for the respective pay and benefits of comparable employees. Amendments are also necessary to discourage user companies from circumventing the law, such as the practice of regularly changing the direct employer (temporary work agency).
Arrowsmith, J., European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, Temporary agency work in an enlarged European Union, Luxembourg, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 2006, available online at: /ef/publications/ef05139/2014/undefined/temporary-agency-work-in-an-enlarged-european-union.
European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, Temporary agency work: National reports – Greece, Dublin, 2002, available online at: /ef/publications/report/2014/undefined/temporary-agency-work-greece.
Georga, A., ‘Hiring out of labour: Development of the phenomenon in the EU and its implementation in Greece’, Labour Relations Review, No. 46 (in Greek).
Kouzis, G., Employment and labour relations in Greece – Reality, trends, perspectives. Findings of nationwide survey, Athens, INE Notebooks, 2002 (in Greek).
Kouzis, G., Labour relations and European unification – Flexibility and deregulation or improvement of the labour market?, Athens, INE/GSEE-ADEDY Studies, Vol. 14, 2001 (in Greek).
Leventis, G., Hiring out labour as a business and temporary employment agencies under Law 2956/2001, Labour Legislation Bulletin, Athens, 2001 (in Greek).
Sofia Lampousaki, Labour Institute of Greek General Confederation of Labour (INE/GSEE)