Earth to Bosses - get real! Employers call for light touch on agency staff.

Well it looks like they will never learn will they?

Just as the Fat Cats argued why big city bonuses were a essential to retain the idiots who created the worst economic crisis ever, now we are getting cals for delays and a "light touch" (remember that in the financial sector?) from the bosses on Agency Workers - including the EEF and other trade bodies.

This from todays FT.....
A government-brokered deal between employers and trade unions to improve the rights of agency and temporary workers is under siege following last week's abrupt sacking of 850 agency workers at BMW's Mini car plant in Oxford.

The contracts of the workers, who were not entitled to statutory redundancy pay, were terminated immediately and they will receive only one week's pay in lieu of notice.

The sackings have prompted calls from trade unions and Labour backbenchers for ministers to enact immediately European Union rules providing greater protection for the country's 1.4m agency workers.

For most of the past decade, the UK has opposed the introduction of a temporary and agency workers directive, fearing it would undermine the country's flexible labour market, which has attracted jobs and investment to Britain that otherwise would not have come.

It supported the directive only in return for an agreement from European employment ministers that the UK would be allowed to retain its opt-out from other EU rules restricting working hours.

The agreement is now under threat after the opt-out was opposed last December by Brussels MPs.

The UK, meanwhile, is committed to incorporating the agency workers directive into British law by 2011.

It is in a position to do so because of an agreement reached almost a year ago between the Confederation of British Industry, the business lobby, and the Trades Union Congress that temporary and agency workers should be given the same basic pay and conditions as permanent staff after 12 weeks in a job.

This still begs the question of how far legislation should go in protecting the rights of temporary and agency workers.

Employers say it should go no further than equal basic pay and existing statutory rights, which already cover all workers.

Moreover, they want Britain to delay enacting the new rules until the last possible moment and economic recovery is well under way.

David Yeandle, head of employment policy at the EEF, representing manufacturers, writing to the Financial Times, said ministers should make full use of the three-year implementation period in the directive and not implement it in the UK until at least December 2011.

He warns that early implementation could coincide with the first signs that the economy is starting to recover and when employers might be starting to think about recruiting more people.

"Employers will be very cautious about the future," he says, "and, therefore, will probably want initially to recruit temporary agency workers rather than permanent employees.

"If at that time, the cost and administrative burdens associated with taking on agency workers was felt to be increasing, it could lead to employers putting off their recruitment plans and therefore slowing the recovery. "

Employers' calls for delay and light-touch legislation will not cut much ice with trade union leaders, who are demanding greater protection for "vulnerable workers", such as those at Oxford.

Derek Simpson joint general secretary of Unite, Britain's second largest union, says: "There is nothing to stop the UK government acting now to protect agency workers. The disgraceful sacking of 850 agency workers at BMW's Mini plant shows just how vulnerable these workers are to the current economic downturn.

"Employers treat them as second-class citizens, they have no rights to redundancy pay, sick pay or holiday pay."

Permanent staff, by comparison, are entitled to statutory redundancy pay, provided they have been in a job for two years. Maximum severance pay for older workers is £10,500 but only after 20 years of service.

Unions argue that employers have abused labour laws by employing agency workers as permanent staff in all but name.

But Kevin Green, chief executive of the Recruitment and Employment Confederation in the UK, says that employing agency workers has allowed companies to adjust more easily to peaks and troughs in demand, protecting the jobs of valued permanent staff, who otherwise might have to be fired in a downturn.

Costs of hiring extra staff could become prohibitive if the scope of the directive "were to be extended beyond basic salary", he says.

"Occupational social security schemes such as pension contributions and sick pay over and above the basic statutory minimum . . . must be excluded from the definition of basic working and employment conditions," says Mr Green.

Equal pay also should be strictly limited to the "basic hourly rate" for the job and exclude fringe benefits such as gym membership, travel allowance and bonus schemes, says the REC chief executive.

Equal treatment should not be established on the basis of the terms and conditions offered to an existing comparable worker who might have 20 years experience in the job, but on the market rate for a new recruit, says Mr Green.

The Association of Professional Staffing Companies (Apsco) argues that large numbers of self-employed professionals, such as IT consultants, engineers and interim managers and directors are often paid more than equivalent permanent staff and should therefore be excluded from the legislation.

Ann Swain, the association's chief executive, says: "Apsco fully supports enhancing rights for 'vulnerable' workers, but just 20 per cent of temporary workers in the UK are at or near minimum wage level - what most people would consider to be 'vulnerable'.

"This legislation couldn't come at a worse time. It will add to employment costs when unemployment is skyrocketing and will be hugely damaging to the UK labour market and risk prolonging the downturn.

"Adopting a 'one-size-fits-all' approach and including professional temporary workers in this legislation would be a costly mistake.

"We need clarification that the government will include an opt-out for highly-paid temporary workers.

"It is clear from our discussions that most supporters of this directive did not intend for them to be included; to do so - almost by default - would be an outcome that nobody wants."

Employers and trade unions will be watching very closely to see how Lord Mandelson, the business secretary, has responded to all of these arguments, when the business department publishes its consultation paper on agency workers' rights next month.