back to news list...
Further attack on agency supply industry
Date: 16 Nov 2009
The Government's review document on the Conduct of Employment Agencies and Employment Businesses Regulations 2003 published last week states that the Government intends to make changes to include a requirement for reasonableness if transfer fees are to be recoverable. Adrian Marlowe, chair of the Association of Recruitment Consultancies (ARC), said "The suggested change to the wording will undoubtedly place a very difficult burden on employment businesses and provide a significant advantage to hirers seeking to avoid payment”.
The suggestion refers to wording already contained within the 2nd consultation proposals for regulations to implement the Agency Workers Directive (AWD). However Adrian Marlowe believes the explanation for the proposed new reasonableness test is confusing “On the one hand we are lead to believe that it is a requirement of the AWD, which obliges the Government to take action to stop clauses that have the effect of deterring hirers from employing supplied workers. On the other hand this particular response document says that the measure is for reasons entirely separate from implementation of the AWD.”
At a recent seminar run by the recruitment law specialist Lawspeed Karen Wilshaw, a Director at the Employment Relations Directorate at the Department of BIS, said that the reason is because the department receives some 25 complaints a month about the level of charges to hirers and that Government Inspectors want to be able to challenge them.
Adrian Marlowe went on to say “if the reason is the AWD, the Directive does not require the change to be as draconian as suggested. If the reason is the number of complaints then this was news to us – none of this was set out in the consultation document. Even if the complaints were all valid, which I doubt, 300 complaints a year pales into insignificance when you recognise that there are reported to be some 1.2 million agency workers on placement at any one time.
Whatever the reason, this proposal will be a litigation lawyer’s dream come true and could largely kill temp to perm and temp to temp fees in a single blow, with further dangerous consequences. I challenge anyone to suggest otherwise and I strongly encourage everyone to wake up and smell the coffee. I urge agencies to join ARC in its resolve to fight this unfair and ill thought through proposal.”
