EMPLOYERS WILL have to pay staff hired through employment agencies the same basic wages, overtime and premium-rate payments as directly employed personnel from next Monday.
Minister for Enterprise and Jobs Richard Bruton told employer representatives last night that, as part of a new EU directive, agency workers must also receive the same “piece rate” payments as regular staff, and identical holiday entitlements.
The measures will apply to existing agency workers and to those taken on in future.
However, the Minister told the group that the directive does not require agency workers to receive the same entitlements as directly employed personnel on pensions, sick leave, share options, bonus payments or benefit-in-kind.
The Minister said he would bring legislation to Cabinet before Christmas to transpose the directive into Irish law.
The legislation will take effect from next Monday.
Unions, employers and the Government failed on Wednesday to agree on a derogation under which agency workers would have to work in a company for a certain period before becoming entitled to the rights included in the directive.
It is understood the Government was unwilling to make concessions to trade unions on issues such as wage determination, particularly in relation to rates for Sunday working.
Unions had also sought new arrangements on collective bargaining as part of the negotiating process on the EU directive.
Mr Bruton said last night that he would have preferred if a derogation had been agreed, as this would have kept costs down.
However, a derogation was not in the gift of the Government and could only be agreed between the social partners. Unfortunately, this did not prove possible, he said.
“This is an issue with a potential impact on employment that was in the control of the social partners. At a time of crisis I am disappointed that it was not possible for them to reach agreement,” he said.
Employers last night expressed strong criticism of the Government’s plans. Ibec said it had particular concerns about the retrospective nature of the legislation. It said that the move raised constitutional questions. Siptu vice-president Patricia King said: “No persuasive case was made as to why the application of the directive should be different here from the situation in the majority of other European countries.”
