20 June 2022
Following reports that the UK government is preparing plans to repeal a legal ban on agency workers filling in for workers who are on strike, the Association of Professional Staffing Companies has warned that such a move would breach international labour standards.
Last week it was reported that Transport Secretary Grant Shapps said there are plans that involve removing a legal restriction introduced under former Prime Minister Tony Blair that prevents employers taking on agency workers to cover work done by striking staff.
It comes after the rail union RMT announced over 50,000 railway workers will walkout as part of three days of national strike action scheduled for tomorrow in the biggest dispute on the network since 1989.
The Department for Transport has previously stated, “To protect the public’s right to access vital services, we are looking at everything we can do to help maintain services.”
Shapps said ministers were urgently drawing up legal changes that could take effect ‘during this particular dispute’ and that the plans to repeal the agency workers restriction could be ‘brought forward within a week or two as it would not require primary legislation.’
The move to repeal the ban on agency workers filling in for striking workers has been criticised by unions and trade bodies including the Recruitment and Employment Confederation.
Tania Bowers, Global Public Policy Director at APSCo, said in a response issued today, “We would not expect the government to go ahead with this plan for a change in the agency worker legislation without consultation with the recruitment sector including ourselves. This legislative move would be out of line with most developed nations and in breach of international labour standards. It’s also not a short-term solution as it requires primary legislation change.”
“This government was elected on a manifesto of improving worker rights via implementation of the recommendations of 2017’s Taylor Review, currently being considered by the Prime Minister’s Future of Work review. We are therefore surprised by the unexpected move to amend the agency legislation, which will only restrict the impact of workers exercising their rights to strike,” Bowers continued.
“We are sceptical about the impact of removing the prohibition on agency workers replacing strikers, or those workers moved to replace strikers. This is for several reasons,” Bowers said. “Most of the roles are skilled and therefore agency workers may require upskilling, onboarding and compliance checks. This means that there would certainly be a time lag before workers would be ready to fill resourcing needs. In a very skills short market, skilled workers, such as train drivers for example are unlikely to be “on the bench” and readily available. Furthermore, workers – and we anticipate recruitment businesses – will be reticent about replacing strikers.”
Neil Carberry, CEO of the REC, told iNews, “It’s a reasonably consistent opinion across the whole sector that this isn’t a sensible move at all. The practicalities of it are challenging. Right now agency workers have plenty of choice in the work that they do. We simply do not believe that the average agency worker will choose to take a job where they cross the picket line over one where they didn’t have to cross a picket line.”
The provision of temporary agency workers to replace strikers has long been illegal in most developed economies, as well as many undeveloped ones.
Credit: Source link
