Temporary work - a rock and a hard place
There is trouble brewing for the Labour government in the widespread support - more than a 100 Labour MPs - gathered behind a private member's bill seeking to improve the employment rights for the UK's 1.4m temporary workers.
Gordon Brown, the prime minister, is trying to appease party members and trade unions by offering to set up a commission that will look in to the rights of temporary workers.
He is caught between a rock and a hard place. Lined up in favour of better conditions are the trade unions and many in his own party. But opposing the move is the Confederation of British Industry and most of the UK staffing industry.
Just to complicate the picture, whether or not the private member's bill of Andrew Miller, Labour MP for Ellesmere Port, succeeds, many of the same provisions in his bill are also included in the Agency Workers Directive that has been in and out of the European Council for a number of years.
The directive was back on the agenda last December but was not put to a vote. There are signs, however, that the opposing block of countries - the UK, Germany, Malta, Ireland, Poland and Denmark - could be crumbling.
The French are expected to make a renewed push to implement the directive when they get the presidency later this year, tying in a bit of horse trading involving the working time directive.
In some European employment sectors, it should be remembered, the directive will be establishing temporary working where it does not exist at present. But among UK agencies who are paid for providing temporary workers, the proposed legal change is seen as a step backwards.
What about the temporary workers themselves? My eldest son happens to be one. He was ill the other week and missed a day's work for which he was not paid. His full time colleagues, in similar circumstances get sick pay. That does not seem fair.
On the other hand I too am a kind of temporary worker with arrangements working for various clients. I charge them separately for each piece of work. If I don't work I don't get paid. Even worse, I could be sued for breach of contract. That's business. I don't have a problem with that.
Any legislation must balance the need for fairness - which is a real issue - with the desire of many people and employers to negotiate flexible working arrangements. An employee's rights sometimes equate to an employer's costs. It is not usually so black and white, however.
An employer who loses an employee through maternity leave, say, may be amply rewarded by that same employee over time. On the other hand the employer may sometimes be left in the lurch when a mother decides to leave for good after holding out the possibility of returning to her job for the full statutory term. Employers could be forgiven some bitterness when that happens.
There will need to be some give and take over this legislation. At present the directive envisages that full employment rights would come in to play after six weeks with any employer. That period may need to be extended.
Gordon Brown, the prime minister, is trying to appease party members and trade unions by offering to set up a commission that will look in to the rights of temporary workers.
He is caught between a rock and a hard place. Lined up in favour of better conditions are the trade unions and many in his own party. But opposing the move is the Confederation of British Industry and most of the UK staffing industry.
Just to complicate the picture, whether or not the private member's bill of Andrew Miller, Labour MP for Ellesmere Port, succeeds, many of the same provisions in his bill are also included in the Agency Workers Directive that has been in and out of the European Council for a number of years.
The directive was back on the agenda last December but was not put to a vote. There are signs, however, that the opposing block of countries - the UK, Germany, Malta, Ireland, Poland and Denmark - could be crumbling.
The French are expected to make a renewed push to implement the directive when they get the presidency later this year, tying in a bit of horse trading involving the working time directive.
In some European employment sectors, it should be remembered, the directive will be establishing temporary working where it does not exist at present. But among UK agencies who are paid for providing temporary workers, the proposed legal change is seen as a step backwards.
What about the temporary workers themselves? My eldest son happens to be one. He was ill the other week and missed a day's work for which he was not paid. His full time colleagues, in similar circumstances get sick pay. That does not seem fair.
On the other hand I too am a kind of temporary worker with arrangements working for various clients. I charge them separately for each piece of work. If I don't work I don't get paid. Even worse, I could be sued for breach of contract. That's business. I don't have a problem with that.
Any legislation must balance the need for fairness - which is a real issue - with the desire of many people and employers to negotiate flexible working arrangements. An employee's rights sometimes equate to an employer's costs. It is not usually so black and white, however.
An employer who loses an employee through maternity leave, say, may be amply rewarded by that same employee over time. On the other hand the employer may sometimes be left in the lurch when a mother decides to leave for good after holding out the possibility of returning to her job for the full statutory term. Employers could be forgiven some bitterness when that happens.
There will need to be some give and take over this legislation. At present the directive envisages that full employment rights would come in to play after six weeks with any employer. That period may need to be extended.
Labels: Agency Workers Directive, Andrew Miller, Ellesmere Port, European Union, France, Germany, Ireland, Malta, Poland, temporary workers, trade unions
posted by Richard Donkin at
6:03 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home