Small but deadly - The Agency Workers Bill

Here's what Jobshout's Nathan Mayatt has to say about the Bill. He describes as a "rant", but it's a rant with a lot of sense.

The Agency Workers Bill will have a wide sweeping effect on the welfare of everyone in society in one way or another. The Bill and what it appears to aim at sounds fine, but it will do the complete opposite. The Bill should target the problem and not create worse conditions for people who benefit from flexible working. The Bill as it stands will affect people looking for work, employers (particularly small businesses), recruitment agencies and the economy as a whole.

Any Member of Parliament should assess the negative impacts of this Bill on their constituency.

Assumptions
This Bill is based on a number of assumptions that are not true.
○ That all recruitment agencies condone unfair treatment of people
○ That all temporary workers want the exactly the same rights as permanent people
○ That all temporary workers are paid less
○ That all temporary workers are forced to work in unfair condition
○ That all the power and control is with the employer or employment agency

In the digital and creative industry, which is the sector I know most about, temporary and freelance people are paid more than full-timers, control the bookings they take and work in exactly the same conditions as permanent staff. People are moving from permanent into freelance and temporary roles, as it gives them greater control over their lives, better pay and a better work life balance.

There are already a number of laws in place to protect temporary workers, from the Employment Agencies Act, Working Time Directive, Minimum Wage and many more. Cases in law have given temporary staff permanent employment status.

Who the bill will affect:
Recruitment agencies

The Bill states that nothing should come in the way of a temporary worker taking up direct employment with the same employer and that any contract that seeks to prevent this, or has the effect of doing so, will be void. This would mean that an employer who was using an agency for temporary or freelance staff would be able to take on that individual without being charged a fee - a gross infringement of the legitimate rights of the agency. There is no restriction on the length of time that individual has been with them or if they operate as a limited company contractor or are on PAYE.

This may sound fine, but companies use employment agencies as they do not have the resources or money to pay temporary staff immediately and do not have the time to find talented temporary workers. As all permanent roles will need to be offered to temporary workers then a company may see this as an opportunity to get a free placement. This would make it economically unviable to offer a service on a temporary basis. The impact on small to medium sized recruitment companies would be dramatic, making it impossible to operate. As a consequence it would drive large numbers of people out of work.

This Bill would drive a lot of recruitment to large recruitment agencies as smaller agencies would not be able to survive. This would force large numbers of people out of work and create worse working conditions for many people.

The niche recruitment market focuses on offering a tailored professional service to both candidates and clients, as by definition it is niche and must work on quality and word of mouth. By forcing those out of business will mean that there will not be the same level of specialist service to both candidates and clients in niche markets.

Direct employers
All businesses need the ability to offer people work on a temporary basis, as a way of managing seasonal peaks, fluctuations in client activity and the economy changing. Without this companies will not be able to react to market changes, making them less competitive on a global scale. This would mean that in the medium to long-term the economy will not be able to grow, fewer roles will be created and working conditions will decline.

Small businesses now are the major employers of the future. Many organisations that started 20 years ago as small companies now employ large numbers of people but they would be stifled in their early stages without the ability to adapt to market changes, thus effecting the long-term viability of the economy.

As large organisations have the ability to sustain certain changes in the market and by their nature do not survive on flexibility but on long term strategies, means that this Bill will play right in to the hands of multi-national and major corporate groups.

People looking for work
Many people need flexible work to be able to manage their life style. The idea that everyone wants to work on a permanent basis at one company or institution is not correct. With the potential that recruitment employment businesses are unable to offer the service of temporary work would directly impact upon them.

If you’re in your twenties and you need work between jobs or university, or for any other reason, what you what is more money, not higher sick pay.

Many people like the control of being able to work on a temporary basis. We have people that have been freelancing with us for many years, as we pay them on time, protect them and find them work. This could all be lost if this Bill came into effect.

Economy
The economy needs the ability to have a flexible work force. This does not mean that they are exploited but are treated fairly. If someone receives increased pay to compensate for less benefits and the lack of security that is not a bad thing.

If this Bill were to come into effect now it would drive many people out of work in permanent and temporary roles. Stifle the economy from being able to adapt and push itself out of any downturn, making the UK less competitive on a global scale.

Summary
I agree with the Unions that people who are exploited should be protected. But the Unions want power and influence. Driving the workforce, at any cost, towards permanent rather than temporary status will tend to give them that..