0370 270 6000

already registered?

Please sign in with your existing account details.

need to register?

Register to access exclusive content, sign up to receive our updates and personalise your experience on brownejacobson.com.

Privacy statement - Terms and conditions

agency workers: relief for employers or calm before the storm?

11 February 2008

The Court of Appeal has rejected an agency workers claim that she was an employee of the end user. Her complaint of unfair dismissal therefore failed.

Agency worker relationships

Agency workers register with an employment agency to provide their services to end users. There is no direct contractual relationship between workers and the end user, so you might think there is no possibility of agency workers being regarded as employed by the end user.

However, the Court of Appeal decided in Dacas v Brook Street Bureau (UK) Ltd [2004] ICR 1437 that it was possible for a contract of employment to be implied where the worker has worked for one end user continuously over a long period. The decision resulted in a stream of tribunal cases brought by agency workers.

Conflicting authorities since then have resulted in uncertainty for employers and agencies. The position has to some extent been clarified by the Court of Appeal, in the case of James v London Borough of Greenwich [2007] ICR 577.

The decision in James

Mrs James had worked for seven years at Greenwich Council. She brought a claim for unfair dismissal when she was told she was no longer required. Mrs James claimed she had an implied contract of employment with the council. Her claim failed in the Employment Appeal Tribunal last year and this week her appeal was rejected by the Court of Appeal.

The Court of Appeal suggested that a tribunal will rarely imply an employment relationship between a worker and an end user where the agency arrangement accurately reflects the nature of the relationship. Where there is no written contract (as was the case between Mrs James and the council) the test is simple - an employment contract will only be implied where it is "necessary" in the circumstances for a tribunal to do so.

The Court of Appeal recognised that "it is not always possible to predict with certainty how this question will be answered by the tribunal". This test presents a significant hurdle for potential claimants. In effect, an agency worker will have to show that the manner in which the agency arrangement was conducted could only have been consistent with their being engaged on a contract of employment. Such a claim would verge on asserting that the entire tripartite relationship was, in fact, a sham.

What can end users do/not do to ensure there is no contract of employment?

Do

  • Maintain a periodical dialogue with the agency about its workers
  • Ensure arrangements for sick pay and holiday pay are made by the agency

Do not

  • Give agency workers an employee handbook unless you clarify that it is given for information only and does not apply to them
  • In documentation, refer to agency workers as employees
  • Apply company sick pay schemes to agency workers
  • Apply company holiday arrangements to agency workers

False hope for employers?

The ruling in James has been welcomed by agencies and employers, who had feared judicial expansion of the rights of Britains 1.4 million agency workers and subsequent undermining of the flexible labour market. Trade unions, however, argue that the current legal position creates a two-tier workforce. The James decision is unlikely to be the end of the matter. The Court of Appeal noted that, whilst courts are "not architects of economic and social policy", there is nothing to prevent Parliament from introducing changes to the law in this area.

The United Kingdom has been under pressure from Europe to introduce laws that would give agency workers the same rights as permanent employees after only six weeks of continuous working for the same end user. Reports suggest that more than 100 Labour MPs have now pledged to back a private members bill introduced by Andrew Miller MP on 6 February. Operating under the title of the Temporary and Agency Workers (Equal Treatment) Bill, this draft legislation is due to be debated on 22 February and could ultimately force ministers to confront the conflicting demands from business and unions.

The decision in James may only provide brief respite for employers.

training and events

14Oct

ISBL regional Conference Sheffield

Browne Jacobson’s Associate Sophie Jackson discusses the rise in growth of SEN and the impact of this on schools. Please note that this event was postponed from June 2020.

View event

19Nov

CST Inaugural Annual Conference Hilton Metropole, NEC, National Exhibition Centre, Pendigo Way, Marston Green, Birmingham, B40 1PP

Come and meet the team at CST’s Inaugural Annual Conference this summer. Partner Nick MacKenzie will also be delivering a workshop on governance leadership.

View event

focus on...

Upcoming webinars

Keeping children safe 2020 – managing allegations and agency staff

In this webinar, our leading HR and safeguarding experts Emma Hughes and Dai Durbridge will provide you with all the information you need in order to meet your statutory obligations.

View

Legal updates

Recommendations – how wide can they be?

In successful discrimination claims, one remedy available to a Tribunal is an appropriate recommendation. In this case of Hill v Lloyds Bank plc, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has considered the scope of a recommendation sought by an employee.

View

Health and care transactions - the outlook

Browne Jacobson, Clydesdale Yorkshire Bank, Connell Consulting and Christie & Co are pleased to invite you to our webinar looking at the outlook for health and social care transactions.

View

Legal updates

Pay inequality

The High Pay Centre has issued its interim report based on the first pay ratios disclosed between 1 January 2020 and 31 April 2020.

View

The content on this page is provided for the purposes of general interest and information. It contains only brief summaries of aspects of the subject matter and does not provide comprehensive statements of the law. It does not constitute legal advice and does not provide a substitute for it.

mailing list sign up



Select which mailings you would like to receive from us.

Sign up