Agency worker regulations - research

[Chris Forde]

Dear all,
I am hoping some of you might be able to help/contribute to a research project I'm conducting into the effects of the Agency Worker Regulations. Details are below - I'd be really interested in hearing about your experiences following the introduction of the regulations, and the experiences with Angard and other agencies used by the Royal Mail. My contact details are below, and I'm happy to follow up with you if you post any response on this forum
all the best
Chris




The effects of the Agency Workers Regulations on agency and employer practice
Chris Forde (University of Leeds) and Gary Slater (University Of Bradford)

Project commissioned by: ACAS

Contact details:
Chris Forde
Leeds University Business School
Leeds
LS2 9JT
Email: cjf@lubs.leeds.ac.uk
Phone: 07931842229

The Agency Workers Regulations 2010 came into force in the UK on 1 October 2011 with the aim of ensuring protection of temporary agency workers through the application of the principle of equal treatment provisions. ACAS is interested in understanding how the regulations have shaped both agency and employer practice and also the role of employee representatives/trade unions in ensuring the equal treatment of temporary agency workers.

The specific research questions to be addressed are as follows:

• How, if at all, have employers altered their use of agency workers since the adoption of the AWR?
• How have employers and agencies changed their employment practices and strategies towards agency workers since the implementation of the directive?
• In what ways has the relationship between agencies and firms altered since the AWR, and what new or different contractual arrangements are observed? What are the implications of these arrangements for workers, and for compliance with the AWR?
• Which elements of the Directive have had the most effect on employer and agency practice?
• How, has the role of trade unions and employee representatives in relation to representation of agency temps changed since the AWR, and how are disputes being mediated and resolved?

The research will be based on interviews with recruitment consultants at agencies, HR managers within firms, union/employee representatives and with industry representatives.

The research will be conducted in March and April 2013.

[Robbo57]

As I have posted an issue with the rights of agency staff under Agency Worker Regulations earlier today, I am happy to follow up on your post.
The only thing that has changed within Royal Mail since AWR was introduced in October of 2011, is the equal pay. Everything else has stayed the same and there certainly is no regard whatsoever in treating agency staff fairly and equally in line with the AWR regulations. The agency staff still get the rubbish jobs which have been left over after the directly employed staff have already taken the best work. RM staff may well argue that this is how it should be but again, such unfair treatment does not appear to be in line with AWR.

With regard to actually getting work in the first place, I am sure many of those who have completed the 12 week AWR qualifying period for equal pay will confirm their same experience of not actually being offered any work on various days of the week. Yet on those days of no work being offered, the agency still continue to supply new staff to RM who haven't yet completed the 12 week qualifying period for equal pay and are therefore being paid a lower rate of pay. That very clearly amounts to nothing less than Avoidance of AWR by not giving a qualified agency worker full weeks work on equal pay but instead, spitting the work between the 2 different pay structured agency staff.

I really could go on and I am sure I'm speaking on behalf of many other Royal Mail agency workers who feel they have not gained the full rights entitled to them since the Agency Workers Regulations were introduced in 2011. It really is nothing less than a joke the way Royal Mail treat their agency staff.

[Chris Forde]

Thanks Robbo57 for the response. Are all temps now contracted through Angard, or are other agencies used too? The experiences you cite about workers who have met the 12 week qualifying period not being used in preference for cheaper temps are definitely something I'd like to find out more about. If you are happy to talk on the phone, can you email me on cjf@lubs.leeds.ac.uk
all the best
Chris

[Angardstaffing]

Hi Chris,
Several issues of concern re Awr and Both Angard and Royal Mail's lack of understanding of the legal requirements!!!
Would be more than happy to help you with your research.
Will contact you.
Good luck.

[Robbo57]

Hello Chris, The main Agency used by Royal Mail is actually MANPOWER. And yes, they have very little regard for AWR other than the equal pay. Fully AWR qualified agency employees (12 weeks) are definitely not given preference over non qualified staff but at best, nothing more than an equal footing. On busy periods, it is those who haven't yet qualified for equal pay under AWR who will be given first preference for a full weeks work.

Manpower and Royal Mail fail to even consider that putting a non AWR qualified employee who is employed on a lower rate of pay above those who have qualified amounts to nothing less than direct Avoidance of AWR which if is the case, would very clearly be Unlawful. Yet nobody ever dares to speak out as we all know that the next thing which will happen is that the phone will simply not ring any more. You will have effectively been side lined with every excuse in the book as to why there is no more work at RM.

Under AWR, the responsibility to put this right clearly lies with the hirer, Royal Mail. Yet they never ever question who Manpower send to them and whether or not there maybe any legal obligations to have first offered work to fully qualified AWR employees.

Turning back to my previous post, there is still a complete failure on the part of Royal Mail to recognise their legal obligations under AWR to now offer agency staff the equal right to apply for jobs which become available within the company. It is still the old line being pushed out by RM, "Only open for Royal Mail staff to apply". Their long term Manpower colleagues who have been doing the exact same job for many years have are still being directly excluded from the process. And I can certainly put my hand on a fresh job advert which has appeared upon an internal Royal Mail jobs board just this week which states that very thing.

[Verging]

Hello Chris, The main Agency used by Royal Mail is actually MANPOWER. And yes, they have very little regard for AWR other than the equal pay. Fully AWR qualified agency employees (12 weeks) are definitely not given preference over non qualified staff but at best, nothing more than an equal footing. On busy periods, it is those who haven't yet qualified for equal pay under AWR who will be given first preference for a full weeks work.

Manpower and Royal Mail fail to even consider that putting a non AWR qualified employee who is employed on a lower rate of pay above those who have qualified amounts to nothing less than direct Avoidance of AWR which if is the case, would very clearly be Unlawful. Yet nobody ever dares to speak out as we all know that the next thing which will happen is that the phone will simply not ring any more. You will have effectively been side lined with every excuse in the book as to why there is no more work at RM.

Under AWR, the responsibility to put this right clearly lies with the hirer, Royal Mail. Yet they never ever question who Manpower send to them and whether or not there maybe any legal obligations to have first offered work to fully qualified AWR employees.

Turning back to my previous post, there is still a complete failure on the part of Royal Mail to recognise their legal obligations under AWR to now offer agency staff the equal right to apply for jobs which become available within the company. It is still the old line being pushed out by RM, "Only open for Royal Mail staff to apply". Their long term Manpower colleagues who have been doing the exact same job for many years have are still being directly excluded from the process. And I can certainly put my hand on a fresh job advert which has appeared upon an internal Royal Mail jobs board just this week which states that very thing.

Not sure about most casuals being Manpower - we only have a couple of Manpower casuals as drivers - the rest are Angard unless they call in casuals from a local agency (not Manpower).

We had jobs advertised before Christmas which was "only open to RM employees". They only got 1 RM employee applying. They then seemed to "select" a few RM Christmas casuals for the posts. It was never opened up to Angard staff applying - some may have been "selected" to apply too. When this was discovered an Angard employee complained and the jobs were then advertised to RM and Angard employees. We still do not know the result of this new advert.

Normally jobs are advertised and one of the main criteria appears to be "length of service" with RM - this excludes Angard casuals.