Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Are we being treated unfairly and can we do anything about it.

Options
  • 05-09-2013 4:18pm
    #1
    baloobachuff
    Registered Users Posts: 1 ✭


    Hi
    I work in a call centre for a leading Irish Bank, and I am employed by a company who were employed by the Bank to take on outsourced staff.

    I was taken on at minimum wage, which is fine because I knew this would be the case. However, within the call centre there are also staff that are employed by the bank itself, who earn E11.78 per hour. Recently, lots of jobs have become available working for the Bank itself, but the Bank will not allow any outsourced staff to apply for any of these positions, even though we are good workers doing exactly the same job. We have been told we already have a job, which is true of course, but we are at a loss as to why we are unable to work directly for the Bank on a secure contract, better pay etc...

    When the Bank has vacancies, they do not advertise externally but they send an email to all Bank staff (excluding outsourced staff) asking them if they have any friends or family that are interested in working for the Bank. We are not allowed to see these mails.

    I am so afraid of making my feelings known, because I do not want to lose my job but I just wondered if anyone had any advice for me? If I knew they were doing something wrong I would feel more confident of saying something.

    Thanks
    B


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    wmpdd3
    Registered Users Posts: 9,624 ✭✭✭wmpdd3


    Really the only way you can find out is by applying for a job and then letting them explain to you why they will not interview / employ you.

    It could be an agreement with your agency that they will not employ you directly. Either way you are risking your current job by pursuing the job working directly for the bank.


  • Options
    #3
    tatli_lokma
    Registered Users Posts: 3,332 ✭✭✭tatli_lokma


    AFAIK under the terms of the Agency Workers Directive which came into effect this year (well should have been in 2011 but only actually came into effect in 2013), there are lots of things they are doing which they shouldn't - in particular:
    EU Directive on Temporary Agency Work
    The EU Directive on Temporary Agency Work 2008/104/EC (pdf) came into effect on 5 December 2011. It provides that all temporary agency workers must have equal treatment with regular workers from their first day at work in respect of:

    •The duration of working time, rest periods, night work, annual leave and public holidays
    •Pay
    •Work done by pregnant women and nursing mothers, children and young people
    •Action taken to combat discrimination on the grounds of sex, race or ethnic origin, religion or beliefs, disabilities, age or sexual orientation.
    Temporary agency workers must also have equal access to facilities such as childcare and must be informed of permanent employment opportunities.

    I have highlighted two of the issues you mention as the practice in the bank you work for are specifically prohibited under the directive.

    Your own company - i.e the one you are outsourced to and therefore paid by, should be taking this matter up on your behalf. Particularly because as a business they are loosing out on revenue by you lot being paid less and loosing out on commission by none of you being able to be made permanent.

    I would say contact your outsourced company, explain that under the Agency workers directive there are several areas where the bank are neglecting their obligations and ask that something be done about it.


  • Options
    #4
    whatnext
    Registered Users Posts: 915 ✭✭✭whatnext


    tatli_lokma wrote: »
    AFAIK under the terms of the Agency Workers Directive which came into effect this year (well should have been in 2011 but only actually came into effect in 2013), there are lots of things they are doing which they shouldn't - in particular:



    I have highlighted two of the issues you mention as the practice in the bank you work for are specifically prohibited under the directive.

    Your own company - i.e the one you are outsourced to and therefore paid by, should be taking this matter up on your behalf. Particularly because as a business they are loosing out on revenue by you lot being paid less and loosing out on commission by none of you being able to be made permanent.

    I would say contact your outsourced company, explain that under the Agency workers directive there are several areas where the bank are neglecting their obligations and ask that something be done about it.

    The work is out sourced to another company. This may not be an agency, and I suspect it is not.
    Therefore the AWR is completely irrelevant.


  • Options
    #5
    tatli_lokma
    Registered Users Posts: 3,332 ✭✭✭tatli_lokma


    whatnext wrote: »
    The work is out sourced to another company. This may not be an agency, and I suspect it is not.
    Therefore the AWR is completely irrelevant.

    Outsourced workers are also covered by the directive. All agency workers are outsourced to some extent. OP works side by side with company employed workers doing the same job for less money - that is definitely covered by the directive.


  • Options
    #6
    whatnext
    Registered Users Posts: 915 ✭✭✭whatnext


    tatli_lokma wrote: »
    Outsourced workers are also covered by the directive. All agency workers are outsourced to some extent. OP works side by side with company employed workers doing the same job for less money - that is definitely covered by the directive.

    It depends if it is work that is being outsourced or the provision of staff.
    For eg. If outsource some building work to another contractor on my building site AWD is n/a. However if I outsource the provision of labour to an agency and that labour will be directly 'under my control and direction' and I would normally or currently employ direct labour it does apply.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    tatli_lokma
    Registered Users Posts: 3,332 ✭✭✭tatli_lokma


    whatnext wrote: »
    It depends if it is work that is being outsourced or the provision of staff.
    For eg. If outsource some building work to another contractor on my building site AWD is n/a. However if I outsource the provision of labour to an agency and that labour will be directly 'under my control and direction' and I would normally or currently employ direct labour it does apply.

    Exactly, and OP has confirmed that the bank directly employs staff to do the same job so the directive applies.


  • Options
    #8
    whatnext
    Registered Users Posts: 915 ✭✭✭whatnext


    tatli_lokma wrote: »
    Exactly, and OP has confirmed that the bank directly employs staff to do the same job so the directive applies.

    We don't no the exact nature of the contract. I suspect they ( the company) may be contracted to undertake a certain piece of work. Furthermore I've just checked and my understanding is that the AWR /AWD only applies to temporary agency workers and not outsourcing companies.
    The regs have for example resulted in an increase in the use of IT outsourcing companies for low level IT work in the UK.


  • Options
    #9
    tatli_lokma
    Registered Users Posts: 3,332 ✭✭✭tatli_lokma


    whatnext wrote: »
    We don't no the exact nature of the contract. I suspect they ( the company) may be contracted to undertake a certain piece of work. Furthermore I've just checked and my understanding is that the AWR /AWD only applies to temporary agency workers and not outsourcing companies.
    The regs have for example resulted in an increase in the use of IT outsourcing companies for low level IT work in the UK.

    I hear what you are saying but I think given OP's description of the situation I think the directive applies in their case.
    Who is covered by this Act?

    The Act applies to agency workers employed by an employment agency who are temporarily assigned to work for, and under the supervision and direction of, another organisation (the hirer).

    Who is not covered by the Act?

    The Act does not cover employees of contractor companies and limited liability companies where the worker is the beneficial owner. The Act may also exclude those employed under a managed service contract, which is a contract for services, for example, cleaning, where the contractor is responsible for managing and delivering the service.The Act does not apply to work done on the Work Placement Scheme, JobBridge or any publicly-funded vocational training or re-training scheme specified by the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation.

    It is based on this that I believe OP is covered, as the bank is supervising the work done. The term 'temporary agency workers' can be misleading and I think this leads to confusion.

    However the OP should seek proper legal advice to be sure. That said, it would still be the first port of call for OP to ask their company directly if the directive applies to them and if not, get an explanation why, which was my original advice.


Advertisement