AWR - how does it affect me?

[Taita]

use of comparators in AWR

(Header should obviously read AWR - Agency Workers Regulations)

OK, I've tried to read up on it - I have google'd, I have searched.. But I fail to see how the new AWR will affect me.. Will I get anything out of it?

The only thing I care about if the change to getting paid holidays.. I am now entitled to the same number of paid holidays as my colleagues.. Can somebody please explain? Will the AWR actually mean I can now take 25 days PAID holiday (as my colleagues?).. If so, who actually pays for this? Usually when something sounds to good to be true, it is.

AWR is about parity between workers. If my fee works to more than the salary+perks of my permie fellow worker then I am outside the scope of the Regulations.

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

AWR is about parity between workers. If my fee works to more than the salary+perks of my permie fellow worker then I am outside the scope of the Regulations.

Nope actually that's not true - you are inside the scope of the legislation if you are a temporary worker who is not genuinely in business on their own account whether through a brolly or a ltd company. You would not reasonably be able to make a claim under the terms of the legislation if your earnings were at least those of a comparable permanent employee and you were treated equally in terms working time, rest breaks, annual leave etc but that's a different matter altogether

[Taita]

Nope actually that's not true - you are inside the scope of the legislation if you are a temporary worker who is not genuinely in business on their own account whether through a brolly or a ltd company. You would not reasonably be able to make a claim under the terms of the legislation if your earnings were at least those of a comparable permanent employee and you were treated equally in terms working time, rest breaks, annual leave etc but that's a different matter altogether

So you agree! The comparator is key to whether one is in or outside scope.

A tribunal is (in my opinion) unlikely to favour a claim from somebody who can be shown to have chosen contracting as a career, somebody who earns more than 120% of permie basic (perks usually do not exceed 15% of basic salary) or somebody who works through their own company.

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

So you agree! The comparator is key to whether one is in or outside scope.

A tribunal is (in my opinion) unlikely to favour a claim from somebody who can be shown to have chosen contracting as a career, somebody who earns more than 120% of permie basic (perks usually do not exceed 15% of basic salary) or somebody who works through their own company.

No I don't agree; the AWR is not all about earnings, there are other rights to take into account as well and whether or not you fall inside or outside the scope is not determined by what you earn. A contractor may earn 120% of permie basic but the AWR does not only consider basic salary - overtime rates, holiday pay, bonuses and commissions all need to be taken into account.

[Taita]

No I don't agree; the AWR is not all about earnings, there are other rights to take into account as well and whether or not you fall inside or outside the scope is not determined by what you earn. A contractor may earn 120% of permie basic but the AWR does not only consider basic salary - overtime rates, holiday pay, bonuses and commissions all need to be taken into account.

Yes! Yes! Lisa! But a tribunal will put a value on all those perks and if my earnings are in excess of the TOTAL value of pay & perks, it will not uphold a claim. The rest is semantics.

[malvolio]

Yes! Yes! Lisa! But a tribunal will put a value on all those perks and if my earnings are in excess of the TOTAL value of pay & perks, it will not uphold a claim. The rest is semantics.

Wrong. Perhaps you should read the PCG guide I quoted earlier. The parity is in terms of opportunity, not money. Access to career paths and reviews, health care, SSP, paid holidays (but only as many days off as your peer permies, mind), training, job opportunities, use of social facliities and canteens... In fact, all the things most of stopped being permie to get away from.

And if you're brollied you're already covered under the Swedish Abrogation and if you have your own limited you're out of scope anyway.

So stop flogging dead horses...

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

Wrong. Perhaps you should read the PCG guide I quoted earlier. The parity is in terms of opportunity, not money. Access to career paths and reviews, health care, SSP, paid holidays (but only as many days off as your peer permies, mind), training, job opportunities, use of social facliities and canteens... In fact, all the things most of stopped being permie to get away from.

And if you're brollied you're already covered under the Swedish Abrogation and if you have your own limited you're out of scope anyway.

So stop flogging dead horses...

Hate to be picky Mal but not all umbrella company contractors will be covered under the Swedish Derogation Model, only if the umbrella in question operates a full contract of employment with provision for pay between assignments. Also, you are not automatically outside the scope if you operate your own limited company.

[malvolio]

Hate to be picky Mal but not all umbrella company contractors will be covered under the Swedish Derogation Model, only if the umbrella in question operates a full contract of employment with provision for pay between assignments. Also, you are not automatically outside the scope if you operate your own limited company.

Apologies - I should of course have said "probably covered" wrt to the brolly community.

The LtdCo exemption is for those "genuinely in business" which is BIS gold-plating things a little. Their intention is to prevent forced incoprporation of vulnerable workers to get around the rules; proper jobbing freelances like me will almost certainly not be treated as being in scope.

Just occurred to me though - the guys in the whizzy off-shore schemes may have a problem since they don't fit either group...

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

Apologies - I should of course have said "probably covered" wrt to the brolly community.

The LtdCo exemption is for those "genuinely in business" which is BIS gold-plating things a little. Their intention is to prevent forced incoprporation of vulnerable workers to get around the rules; proper jobbing freelances like me will almost certainly not be treated as being in scope.

Just occurred to me though - the guys in the whizzy off-shore schemes may have a problem since they don't fit either group...

Nope but they will fall within the scope - temporary workers working through an intermediary - oohh that should be interesting - can't wait to see the attempted get-rounds - hours of fun

[Taita]

When AWR fails to protect Temporary Workers

Workers supplied through an intermediary (agency) are covered but if an end user hires temps directly (e.g. seasonal workers) the temps are outside the scope of the regs. Go figure!