The temp trade

One of the proposals mentioned during the budget speech aimed at encouraging employment was that the registration system of the unemployed will be revised to help those on the register seek opportunities of temporary work without losing the unemployment benefits once their temporary work is terminated. At face value this is a commendable initiative but it underlines the intention of promoting temporary employment.

Our labour market has already experienced a shift or, rather, an increase in jobs from traditional full-time indefinite employment to part-time work or definite contracts and now it seems we are heading towards the setting up of temporary working agencies.

Is this a healthy move aimed at eradicating unemployment? Would it alleviate the burden of social services abuse? How would it affect the standard of living of the workers?

It is estimated that in the European Union there are more than seven million temporary agency employees. Temporary agency work is the most rapidly-growing form of atypical work. In Denmark, Italy, Spain and Sweden the use of temporary agency workers has increased five-fold and has, at least, doubled in most other countries.

The nature of jobs varies between countries. In the UK some 80 per cent of temporary agency work is in the service and public sectors while in France 75 per cent are in the construction and manufacturing industry.

The gender profile of workers also varies from one country to another. In most of the EU member states the majority of temporary employees are male but in all three Nordic countries there are more women and proportions are practically equal in the Netherlands and the UK.

Temporary agency work involves an agency that acts as an intermediary between the worker and the user company. It is the agency that employs the workers and then hires them out to user companies on a temporary basis, as required. These workers are normally engaged to replace full-time employees on relatively long absences, such as those who avail themselves of parental leave, sickness and long-term training.

The use of temporary workers enables companies to implement more flexible systems of work organisation especially for SMEs that suffer more from absenteeism due to their relatively smaller workforce. Under the pretext that temporary work could serve as a stepping stone from unemployment to full-time employment, employers tend to emphasise the positive aspects of temporary work. In France, for instance, recent statistics reveal that, prior to temping, about 43 per cent of temporary agency workers were unemployed. Whereas, in the EU 33 per cent of temporary workers had the opportunity to switch to permanent employment with the user company or elsewhere within a year.

Employers also contend that temporary agency work enables entrants into the labour market to gain experience that increases their chances of securing a full-time job. Students would opt for temporary work to balance work with study. Housewives and pensioners would find such employment as ideal for them to meet their financial needs while securing the demands of their family life and leisure.

However, compared to all other forms of employment, temporary agency work has the worst record in terms of working conditions, judged on a number of indicators such as repetitive labour and the supply of information to employees about workplace risks. Experience has shown that temporary workers have less control over the sort of work they do and how they do it. They get less training and have a higher rate of workplace accidents. They do more shift work and have less time to complete jobs. Agency work means greater job insecurity with the consequence that workers find it impossible to secure house loans and enter into other financial commitments. As for pay, although there are some examples of temporary agency workers earning higher rates than permanent staff, most evidence points to lower wages for similar work coupled with the exclusion from bonuses and benefits awarded to other employees.

Trade unions across Europe are worried about the emergence of two-tier employment structures in Europe consisting of a segment employed in full-time indefinite work and another occupied in precarious and insecure jobs. Although temporary agency work is not to be confused with informal employment originating from the black economy, where workers' exploitation is rampant, the efforts made at EU level to enforce a temporary agency work directive have been unsuccessful and, as such, this form of work lacks adequate and proper regulation.

The directive laid down the principle of non-discrimination against temporary workers, aiming to set minimum EU-wide standards and create a level playing field for companies in different member states. Until this directive becomes law, the growing army of temporary agency workers across the EU is at risk of unfair treatment and discrimination at the workplace.

In its recent information bulletin the Malta Employers' Association had this to say on temporary agency work: "As the Maltese labour market is also subject to the same developments prevalent in other industrialised countries, one expects an increase in demand of temporary agency work. The changes in the labour market call for more flexible work arrangements and an increase in temporary work opportunities can be one of the factors that leads to an increased female participation rate, and also to the implementation of active aging policies, as part of an emerging trend towards enhanced labour mobility to substitute traditional forms of employment".

Is the Maltese government in sync with this policy declaration? Do we need to read between the lines of the budget speech to get the right answer?

matyas@maltanet.net