The UK government is pushing forward with significant changes to labor laws that will have a major impact on agency workers. In a bid to expand protections, the government is extending its ban on zero-hour contracts to include agency workers. This amendment is part of a wider set of updates to the Employment Rights Bill, which includes around 250 additional provisions. While unions have largely supported the move, there are concerns about the impact on the flexibility that many agency workers currently enjoy.
Expanding Protections for Agency Workers
Zero-hour contracts have long been a source of debate in the UK. These contracts, which do not guarantee a set number of working hours, have been criticized for their potential to exploit workers. Agency workers, who are employed by agencies and placed in various industries like hospitality, warehouse operations, and the National Health Service (NHS), will now benefit from stronger protections against sudden shift cancellations or changes.
Under the new law, agency workers who are on zero-hour contracts will receive compensation if their shifts are canceled or altered at short notice. However, the law does not specify exactly what qualifies as “short notice,” leaving some uncertainty around how this will be implemented.
There are approximately one million agency workers in the UK, making up a significant portion of the workforce. Many of these workers are employed in sectors that require flexibility, such as hospitality and healthcare. The government’s new bill aims to guarantee agency workers a certain number of hours per week, a measure that will provide more stability for workers who have long faced the uncertainty of unpredictable schedules.
Unions Back the Changes, But Warnings Are Raised
Unions have been vocal in their support for the extension of these protections. Trade unions, such as the Trades Union Congress (TUC), have long argued that agency workers should be included in the rules governing zero-hour contracts. The inclusion of agency workers in this law is seen as a crucial step in preventing employers from exploiting workers through indirect means, such as relying on agency staff to bypass the protections intended for direct employees.
Paul Novak, the general secretary of the TUC, praised the government for closing what he described as a “loophole.” Novak emphasized that agency workers make up a significant portion of the zero-hour workforce and should not be left unprotected. His statement echoed the growing concern among unions that without such protections, employers could continue to exploit vulnerable workers in the sector.
However, not everyone is in favor of these changes. The Recruitment and Employment Confederation (REC), which represents recruitment agencies, has raised concerns about the potential negative effects on agency workers. Kate Shoesmith, the deputy chief executive of the REC, pointed out that many agency workers actually choose the flexibility offered by such contracts. According to Shoesmith, the new laws must strike a balance between protecting workers from exploitation while ensuring that the flexibility inherent in agency work is not undermined.
The REC has urged the government to proceed carefully and to ensure that the new laws do not result in unintended consequences that harm workers who rely on the flexibility of agency work. The organization has committed to working with the government to address these concerns and make sure that the new laws do not interfere with existing protections for agency workers.
New Regulations for Agency Contracts
One of the most significant changes in the Employment Rights Bill is the introduction of regulations that will require employers to provide agency workers with contracts that guarantee a minimum number of hours per week. These guaranteed hours will be based on the worker’s average hours over a specified period, although the government has yet to decide whether to use a 12-week reference period or a longer one.
This change will be a welcome development for many agency workers, who have often faced unpredictable schedules and financial instability. By guaranteeing a certain number of hours, the government aims to reduce the uncertainty that many agency workers face and provide them with a more stable income.
However, the question of what qualifies as “short notice” remains unresolved. Critics of the bill have raised concerns that the lack of clarity on this issue could lead to confusion and inconsistency in its implementation. The government has indicated that further details on this provision will be provided in due course.
Changes to “Fire and Rehire” Tactics and Sick Pay
In addition to extending protections for agency workers, the UK government is also introducing other important amendments to the Employment Rights Bill. One key change involves increasing penalties for companies that use “fire and rehire” tactics. Under these tactics, employers dismiss staff and rehire them on less favorable terms without proper consultation. The government is now proposing that companies who engage in this practice could face penalties of up to 180 days’ pay per affected worker—double the previous 90-day penalty.
The bill also includes provisions to extend sick pay to workers who earn less than £123 per week. Currently, employees must be ill for at least three consecutive days before they qualify for statutory sick pay, which is set at £116.75 per week. Under the new bill, these workers would receive 80% of their average weekly earnings or statutory sick pay, whichever is lower, from the first day of illness.
These changes are aimed at improving the welfare of workers and ensuring that they are not penalized for situations beyond their control, such as illness. However, some business groups have raised concerns about the financial impact these measures could have on employers, particularly small businesses.
Impact on Small Businesses and Business Groups’ Concerns
While the government’s proposed changes are aimed at improving labor conditions, some business groups have expressed concern about the impact on small businesses. Martin McTague, the national chair of the Federation of Small Businesses, warned that the proposed amendments could harm economic growth if small businesses do not receive adequate support. McTague revealed that two-thirds of small businesses are hesitant to hire new employees due to the proposed changes, and one-third are considering reducing their workforce.
McTague also pointed out that the government has not done enough to address the specific challenges faced by small businesses, particularly when it comes to the financial burden of providing sick pay and navigating changes to dismissal rights. He urged the government to provide more support for small businesses to ensure that these reforms do not inadvertently stifle job creation and economic growth.
The UK government’s efforts to strengthen the rights of agency workers and expand protections for workers on zero-hour contracts represent a significant shift in labor policy. While unions have largely supported these changes, there are concerns about the impact on the flexibility that many agency workers rely on. Business groups, especially those representing small businesses, have raised concerns about the potential economic consequences of the bill.
The government’s decision to extend protections to agency workers and address issues like “fire and rehire” tactics and sick pay reflects a growing recognition of the need to improve labor standards in the UK. However, the implementation of these measures will require careful consideration to ensure that they do not have unintended negative effects on the economy.
For more updates on these developments and other labor-related news, visit Wealth Magazine.