agency and temp staff should be given rights as perm. staff?

Former Member

the government still isn't fulfilling it's pledge to equalise out the employment rights of temps and contractual staff

surely this is stupid as it just encourages employers to take on people they can pay far less for more work, meaning people on benefits are better off on benefits and the only people who can do it are 16-19 year olds or immigrants

Former Member

More and more people here in Wales are working for agencies.
Short term they do better.
Take van drivers ...minmum wage or agency ...from seven to nine quid an hour!
Same for cleaners painters etc.
Some people prefer it as well ...move from job to job with a few weeks off here and there by refusing work that comes in over the phone ...bit like being self employed.
They can also build up a reputaion for reliability and knowledge with the different agencies.
i know one guy who drives a transit van ...he is on the books of just about every agency available and they now fight over him as his knowledge of N.Wales is superb as well as being very reliable ...he earns between ten and fifteen pounds an hour ....for driving a van ...not bad!

Former Member

As someone who personally must have done 20+ different jobs through agencies over the years I can only agree that you should be treated equally as a member of agency staff - hiring agency staff should be an ultimately short term measure to handle an overflow in work, not as an excuse to treat people badly or massively reduce wages.

Former Member

Jim V wrote: »

As someone who personally must have done 20+ different jobs through agencies over the years I can only agree that you should be treated equally as a member of agency staff - hiring agency staff should be an ultimately short term measure to handle an overflow in work, not as an excuse to treat people badly or massively reduce wages.

But ...since you worked for agencies i believe things have changed on the wages front ...for the better.
But ...more and more companies, especialy out here in the sticks ...are employing more and more agency staff long term ...which is wrong seeing as all the benefits of a 'proper' job aint included.
Big cheese factory near me where around half the staff are agency and are employed for like eighteen months and then out the door ...then back in again for three months and ...i'm realy bored with this topic so i'm going to open a beer and sing some Tom Waits songs ...out of earshot of the long suffering wife.
wh\t happened to all the fyun in the world ...am i rambling?
good ...

Former Member

I disagree. I worked as a temp for quite a while. I did so because it gave me the option to quit, without notice whenever I wanted yet still get paid a half decent wage.
If workers want rights, equal to a permanant employee, then they need to become permanant employees, and enjoy the advantages and disadvantages the rest of us do.

Former Member

Whowhere wrote: »

I disagree. I worked as a temp for quite a while. I did so because it gave me the option to quit, without notice whenever I wanted yet still get paid a half decent wage.
If workers want rights, equal to a permanant employee, then they need to become permanant employees, and enjoy the advantages and disadvantages the rest of us do.

Not that simple though is it ...the problem is that companies are taking on more and more agency staff instead of permanent staff.
Some companies i know of are almost fully staffed by agecy workers.

Former Member

morrocan roll wrote: »

Not that simple though is it ...the problem is that companies are taking on more and more agency staff instead of permanent staff.
Some companies i know of are almost fully staffed by agecy workers.

Yea, if you go into a bank or whatever now they always go through recruitment agencies first. Even in my village at home asking if shops had jobs they say that they get their worker from an agency so I'd need to sign up... silly

Former Member

morrocan roll wrote: »

Some companies i know of are almost fully staffed by agecy workers.

Which is daft, because it costs a lot more to recruit a temp than it does to hire a member of staff.
The agency I was working for was getting paid £15 an hour for me, I was on £5.50......
The wage in the shop was £6 or so.

Former Member

Whowhere wrote: »

Which is daft, because it costs a lot more to recruit a temp than it does to hire a member of staff.
The agency I was working for was getting paid £15 an hour for me, I was on £5.50......
The wage in the shop was £6 or so.

Less overheads with an agency though, recruiting costs, interview costs, etc.

Former Member

I think it's an issue which needs to be explored further. However, it doesn't help that, the moment you suggest giving more rights to temporary and agency staff, that some creep from the CBI pops up on TV to denounce the proposal. He or she will say, in the usual robotic manner, that the proposal is outrageous / it will mean millions of people being left without jobs / that the world will end if the changes are made / that kids should be sent back down the coal mines.

And the CBI has big influence in the government. Its former head, Digby Jones, is now working for Macavity. Looking at him, the only thing he'd know anything about is finding the nearest McDonalds.

Former Member

Whowhere wrote: »

Which is daft, because it costs a lot more to recruit a temp than it does to hire a member of staff.
The agency I was working for was getting paid £15 an hour for me, I was on £5.50......
The wage in the shop was £6 or so.

But you can get rid of an agency worker without a seconds notice ...no legal requirements ...(thats what this threads about)
you pay nothing into pensions sickness holiday etc ...so it works out simpler and cheaper in the long run without any expensive legal comitments.