According to reports in The Independent this week, SNP strategists are considering the option of Scotland joining the circle of Scandinavian countries as part of the Prospectus for Independence. But many workers in the Scottish Government will be deeply unimpressed with one Swedish model apparently being imposed upon them.
In 2010/11, Scottish Government spent over £6.8 million on temporary agency staff. With the ongoing recruitment freeze, the work of civil servants departing from permanent posts is increasingly covered by agency workers, with the majority of administrative and support staff roles in the Scottish Government supplied by the recruitment agency Pertemps.
Since 1 October, under the new Agency Workers’ Directive, after twelve weeks’ work temps should gain the rights to the same basic employment and working conditions as if they had been recruited directly by the company where they are based – mostly the right to the same pay, holidays and working hours.
You would think matching civil service pay, holidays and terms and conditions for agency staff would be an achievement the SNP government would be proud to implement, given their commitment to improving workers’ conditions through policies like the living wage. However, the Scottish Government, no doubt beholden to some decision made in Whitehall, appears happy to let private companies legally bypass protections for vulnerable agency staff working in our corridors of power.
Pertemps is one of many private firms understood to be using the Swedish derogation model as a loophole to get out of the Agency Worker Regulations. Also known as “pay between assignments”, the model is derived from an opt-out clause Sweden negotiated when the Agency Workers’ Directive was agreed at EU level.
Basically, if an agency worker is made into a permanent employee of the recruitment agency, they do not gain the same basic rights of employees of the organisation where they are placed after 12 weeks’ work. Therefore the hundreds of agency staff the Scottish Government is paying over £6m on each year are probably working to implement and deliver government policy without the right to equivalent pay, holidays and working hours as the civil servants doing the same job, all because they are permanent employees of a recruitment agency, and just happen to be placed in a Scottish Government office.
It can be argued that the Swedish derogation is better than nothing. As an employee of the recruitment agency, the temp gains protection against unfair dismissal after one year and the right to basic redundancy pay after two years. They also have to be paid for at least four weeks between postings, and receive at least 50% of their last pay packet or the minimum wage, whichever is greater. However, if the temp’s contract says they can be placed on varying working hours anywhere across the country, with very little advance warning, they could be placed on a low-hour contract somewhere miles away instead of receiving pay between postings, and threatened with dismissal for gross misconduct if they don’t turn up.
Pertemps proudly displays its various good employer credentials on its website – including Investors in People and the Sunday Times Top 100 Companies to Work For. If they are implementing the Swedish derogation, and making all the temps they place in Scottish Government and other organisations permanent Pertemps employees, it will be interesting to see how long they can hold on to such accolades. And it will be even more interesting to see if the Scottish Government is happy to have a second-class workforce within its employ.
#1 by Barbarian on December 9, 2011 - 7:51 pm
I worked in recruitment for a few years in one of the most successful, and dare I say it, one which respected both it’s client companies and registered candidates both permanent and temporary.
Recruitment agencies are basically sales companies, with the most successful consultants having a sales background. I’m an exception, having a professional recruitment and business relationship management background. I was fairly successful, but I have witnessed many sharp and at times potentially illegal practices in other agencies.
I’ve also suffered first hand by the sheer unprofessionalism of one major company.
Temporary staff can be a major asset to any organisation, and some manage to obtain permanent employment. But as pointed out above, they are employed by the agency.
It does work other ways, where sometimes agency staff – usually professional contractors in fields such as IT or Engineering – will get paid greatly more than people employed by the client company. But contractors rely on reputation and in the vast majority of cases do a good job.
For clarification, agencies do NOT take a “cut” of their temps pay – that is illegal. They charge over and above the rate paid to the temp. On government contracts they will likely take a reduction in their fee rate, but in most cases it costs the Government more on basic pay to hire an agency temp than to employ somebody full time. That is why many small companies hire people on a cash-in-hand basis. It does happen and with the economy nosediving will increase.
Another issue with hiring temps is stability. Many temps will be looking for permanent employment, and this contributes in some cases to very high turnover of staff. That can result in a shortage of trained and experienced staff, and that impacts on what the Government can deliver. I’ve seen this several times.
High volumes of agency staff should be a last resort. It’s fine for certain projects, but as an ongoing model it results in inefficiency and higher costs. Recruitment agencies can and do provide an essential service, but there needs to be effective control.
#2 by theshooglypeg on December 10, 2011 - 9:56 am
Oh dear, I feel an unfamiliar right-wingyness about this subject. I temped for more than a year after I finished uni. It was an interesting time, which included working for a nun, learning to touch-type and getting massively frustrated about the outdated and inefficient working practices of factors. I didn’t get holiday pay, redundancy, pension rights or anything, and I didn’t expect them: I was a temp.
I don’t begrudge anybody a decent employment package, but don’t people employ temps precisely because they want someone flexible who won’t cost as much as a permanent employee? If you have to give them paid holidays etc, wouldn’t you be as well just employing someone permanent?
Oh dear. I sound like Alan Sugar, this is not good.
#3 by Observer on December 10, 2011 - 6:27 pm
Are you sure that a majority of adminstrative & support staff are agency workers? If that is the case then it is a complete disgrace that the Scottish government are using agency staff, who should only ever be employed in public sector organisations as a last resort. It certainly happens during periods of re-organisation or merger when nobody know what the final structure will be. It also happens when you know you are going to be making cuts, no you ensure that long serving employees are treated fairly. But a majority? That’s a deliberate choice to have a workforce with very few rights.
#4 by Kirsty on December 11, 2011 - 2:22 am
It’s the majority of temporary administrative and support roles are covered by Pertemps – follow the link. Apologies for any confusion.