In response to the proposed reforms for zero-hours contracts, the Association of Professional Staffing Companies (APSCo) has strongly recommended that these changes exclude agency workers due to the unique nature of their employment. APSCo stresses that mandated guaranteed hours are impractical and unwanted for agency staff, employers, and recruiters because of the inherently unpredictable nature of agency work. This unpredictability is particularly evident in sectors such as healthcare, education, and construction, which are already suffering from significant staff shortages. Consequently, imposing guaranteed hours on agency workers could exacerbate these shortages and hinder critical services.
Impact on Critical Sectors
Tania Bowers, APSCo’s global public policy director, has highlighted the negative impact that the proposed zero-hours contract reforms could have on access to crucial temporary resources. The reforms could hamper the ability of these sectors to function efficiently, given the reliance on temporary staffing to fill gaps caused by permanent staff shortages. Bowers believes that highly skilled and well-paid temporary workers do not require the same level of protection as those subjected to exploitative zero-hours contracts. For such workers, flexible working arrangements are often a positive aspect of their employment, allowing them to balance multiple roles and commitments.
APSCo suggests that fixed-term agency work should be exempt from the proposed reforms and alternatives should be considered to better address the specific needs of different types of workers. One possible alternative is to limit the applicability of the reforms by task or hourly rate, ensuring that agency workers receiving competitive remuneration—and those engaged in highly specialized tasks—do not face unnecessary constraints. This approach would help preserve the flexibility that is essential for both workers and employers in sectors where temporary staffing is an integral part of the workforce strategy.
Differences in Regulations
One of the key points APSCo makes is that agency worker agreements differ significantly from exploitative zero-hours contracts. Unlike zero-hours contracts, agency worker agreements are subject to stringent regulations under the Employment Agency Standards, Agency Worker Regulations, the Conduct Regulations, and the Employment Agencies Act. These existing regulations provide a comprehensive framework that ensures agency workers’ rights and working conditions are protected, distinguishing them from the more controversial zero-hours contracts. Bowers contends that this regulatory framework is sufficient and that additional reforms aimed at zero-hours contracts are not necessary for agency workers.
APSCo also emphasizes the importance of carefully considering key definitions before enacting any new laws about agency workers. For instance, the term ‘genuinely temporary’ should be clearly defined to reflect the reality of professional sectors where six-month agreements are more common, rather than a 12-week period proposed in the reforms. A clear and precise definition would help avoid unintended consequences that could undermine the employment model for agency workers and disrupt the industries that rely heavily on their services.
Future Considerations
The Association of Professional Staffing Companies (APSCo) has issued a strong recommendation that proposed zero-hours contract reforms should not apply to agency workers due to the distinct nature of their employment. APSCo argues that enforcing guaranteed hours for agency staff, employers, and recruiters is both impractical and undesirable. Agency work is characterized by its inherent unpredictability, particularly in sectors such as healthcare, education, and construction, which are already grappling with severe staff shortages. These industries depend heavily on the flexibility that zero-hours contracts provide. Imposing mandatory guaranteed hours on agency workers could not only worsen these shortages but also significantly impair critical services. The flexibility offered by zero-hours contracts allows employers to respond swiftly to fluctuating demands and ensures that workers can easily transition between assignments. Therefore, excluding agency workers from these reforms is essential to maintain the operational efficiency and effectiveness of these vital sectors, preventing further disruption in already strained industries.
