Hirers retain flexibility as agency worker claim denied by the Court of Appeal
In a decision that will be welcomed by employers with a requirement to use agency workers to fill staffing gaps as work fluctuates, the Court of Appeal has confirmed that those workers are not entitled to the same number of working hours per week as permanent employees.
The Agency Workers Regulations 2010 (AWR) were introduced to ensure that the basic terms and conditions of temporary agency staff are the same as those enjoyed by permanent staff (once the agency worker has been in the same role for 12 continuous weeks). The relevant “terms and conditions” under the AWR include the “duration of working time”. The issue that the courts had to determine was whether this meant that an agency worker doing the same job as a directly employed employee should, after the 12 week qualifying period, be entitled to work the same number of hours per week that that permanent employee enjoyed.
Mr Kocur was an agency worker supplied to work at the Leeds Royal Mail centre. He claimed that after 12 weeks he should have been allocated the same number of working hours as the directly hired Royal Mail employees. The Tribunal, EAT and ultimately Court of Appeal all rejected his claim. Any arrangement that denied the hirer the flexibility to engage agency workers according to the fluctuating demands of the business would defeat the purpose of hiring agency staff. It was unworkable and not what was intended by the AWR.
The “duration of working time” referred to in the AWR related to working time limits under the Working Time Regulations, not the contracted hours of permanent staff. Any other reading of the AWR would enable agency workers to pick the permanent member of staff who worked the hours that suited them most (as there could be many different working patterns in the business) which would be entirely unworkable.
Fortunately for businesses that need to use agency workers to cover fluctuating work patterns, this is a very practical decision. Flexibility is the key for hirers, and had this decision gone in Mr Kocur’s favour, much of that flexibility would have been lost.
Since the AWR came into force in 2011 there have been relatively few related cases before the tribunals. The AWR are often cited by commentators as an example of employment legislation which may be repealed following Brexit. However, following the Good Work Plan, this does not seem to be the direction of travel at all. In April 2020 the widely used Swedish Derogation (a partial exemption from the AWR under which an agency worker may be given a permanent contract of employment with an agency, and continue to be paid between assignments) will be repealed. This will mean that all agency workers will be entitled to parity of pay after 12 weeks, and agencies must inform their relevant agency workers by 30 April 2020 that the Swedish Derogation no longer applies.
For more information, please contact Anne-Marie Balfour.
Flexible working requests: 5 tips for employers
Charles Russell Speechlys advises Acora on acquisition of Westgate IT
Westgate IT specialises in providing IT support to businesses in the South West.
Nick Hurley quoted by the Society for HR Management on the UK government's proposals to prevent workplace sexual harassment
The U.K. government introduced legislation in July 2021 for employers to take proactive steps to prevent sexual harassment on the job.
Returning to work post-lockdown: FAQs for employers
We look at some of the main issues employers may face and the key steps to consider as restrictions ease.
Covid passports - are they workable or just a shambles?
Amelia Goodwin writes for Civil Society on a recent employment tribunal ruling which found that anxiety constitutes a disability
The tribunal found that an anxiety state constitutes a disability for the purposes of the Equality Act 2010.
Face coverings at work post lockdown
While the legal requirement has been lifted, employers may consider face coverings as an appropriate safety measure in certain workplaces.
Charles Russell Speechlys advises Apposite Capital on acquisition of i2a Diagnostics
i2a is a leading provider of laboratory instruments, software and reagents for the clinical microbiology market in France.
Brace yourselves: dentists could be liable for actions of self-employed staff
Nick Hurley interviewed by GB News on the legal ramifications of employers insisting employees have the COVID-19 vaccine
Nick considers the potential dangers of employers setting a precedent by adopting a 'No Jab, No Job' policy.
Government to introduce duty on employers to prevent sexual harassment
Record success for Charles Russell Speechlys’ Private Wealth practice in Chambers HNW 2021 directory
We are delighted to have once again been recognised as a leader in our field in the Chambers High Net Worth 2021 Guide.
Michael Powner writes for People Management and explains how employers can carry out an equal pay audit
How do employers carry out an equal pay audit?
COVID-19 Vaccination – can an employer make it compulsory for employees?
We review what legal issues to take into account when considering to make vaccination compulsory as an employer.
Changes to Right to Work Checks from 1 July 2021
EEA citizens and their family members are required to evidence immigration status in the UK, in the same way as other foreign nationals.
Changes to Right to Rent Checks from 1 July 2021
Following the UK’s departure from the EU, the right to rent checks grace period of six months will end on 30 June.
Michael Powner and Laurence Whymark write for The Caterer on the implications of the new tipping laws on the hospitality industry
Operators will soon have to pass on tips to staff without deductions.
Post-Brexit business visitors and working in France, Germany, Spain and the UK
Watch the final session in a series of webinars on post-Brexit mobility.
Top 7 Data Protection Tips for Employers
Here are our top 7 data protection tips for employers.
Nick Hurley quoted by the Daily Mirror on the legal implications of implementing a 'No Jab, No Job' policy
"'No jab, no job' may seem clear and concise, but whether an employer can make it mandatory is far from straightforward.