BACK TO HOME
PAGE BACK TO HOME
PAGE EUROPEAN REVIEW
IN APRIL 2000 THE U.K. GOVERNMENT launched its work-life balance campaign. The aim was to encourage employers to introduce flexible working practices to enable employees to achieve a better balance between work and the rest of their lives, in turn contributing to lower absence and staff turnover and better productivity. It included an alliance of leading employers pledged to further the cause, a 'challenge fund' of £1.5 million and information, advice and research on the subject. Government ministers hailed the scheme as an example of 'imagination, not legislation', and Margaret Hodge, then minister for employment and equal opportunities, emphasised that 'work-life balance is about sheer common sense and good practice in management'. Last November a research report* was published which seemed to show that common sense had not permeated many areas of British working life. The Warwick University study showed that long hours remained common and that demands for flexible working time were not being met. Four in five workplaces had employees working more than their standard hours, with two in five of these workers doing so without extra pay. One in nine full-time employees worked over 60 hours every week. One in eight employees reported working both Saturdays and Sundays, and one in five worked for companies open round the clock.
These results agreed with those in an earlier TUC survey** in which nearly half of full-time workers reported that at times they cannot cope with the pressure of work. The report went on 'This pressure in the modern workplace is reflected in two main ways. First long hours and unpaid overtime and secondly stress '.The TUC did recommend legislation to force 'rogue employers' into line but emphasised also that 'there needs to be a change of culture, better work organisation and more effective managers as well'. One piece of already existing legislation which was supposed to play a key part in the regulation of working life is the EU Working Time Directive which was embodied in regulations introduced by the U.K. government in 1998. Its most well known provision was a maximum average working week of 48 hours but it also provided for rest breaks, limits on night work and four weeks annual paid holiday.
However, last April the Department of Trade and Industry published
research*** which indicated that the regulations were not having a
great impact in the workplace and ways around them were often found.
This was facilitated by an opt-out which the government added to the
original directive. This enabled employees to work longer than 48
hours if they signed such an agreement with their employer. These
were often included in initial employment contracts, with most
workers resigned to accept them as 'part of the job'. While some
workers felt pressurised to sign, others were worried about losing
overtime and were happy to opt out. More progress had been made on
holiday pay but even here some employers flouted the regulations
aided by a government ruling which included public holidays in the
four weeks. The result, according to the DTI research, was that many
companies have declared 'business as usual' in the knowledge that, by
the end of 2000, only 13 improvement notices relating to the Working
Time Regulations had been issued by the Health and Safety Executive.
However employers have no reason to be complacent as unions and the
TUC will continue to push the government on its family-friendly
aspirations in such areas as parental leave and employee consultation
while individual court cases alleging mental injury due to excessive
work hours are likely to burgeon.
|
*'Work-Life Balance 2000 : Baseline study of work-life balance practices in Great Britain :summary' **'Work Smarter - an end to burnout Britain' ***'Implementation of the Working Time Regulations' |
THe EU-wide employer and trade union organisations have failed to
come up with an agreement to regulate the employment of temporary
workers attached to job agencies. This was to be the third leg of
their discussions on so-called 'atypical' work. There have already
been agreements on part-time work (1997) and fixed term contracts
(1999) which have since been turned into directives by the EU.
The temporary agency work agreement was always going to be the
hardest to come to due to the triangular relationship which exists
between the worker, the agency and the temporary employer (or user
company). In March it became clear that there were two major sticking
points: 1) equality of treatment between the temporary worker and the
other employees in the user company and 2) the conditions under which
the user company would be allowed to recruit agency staff. As the
talks ground to a halt the European Trades Union Congress (ETUC)
called on the main employers organisation, UNICE to give signals that
it was prepared to budge on these issues.The Employment Commissioner,
Anna Diamantopoulou, met with the UNICE president, Georges Jacobs,
and the ETUC general secretary, Emilio Gabaglio to stress that it was
necessary to guarantee flexibility and security for temporary agency
work, at European level. The talks continued but no compromise could
be reached. The ETUC blamed the employers and their refusal to take
the user company as the basis for comparison of an agency employee's
terms and conditions. UNICE insisted that the unions were being
inflexible and that temporary work increased employment as a
whole.
Mr. Gabaglio called on the European Commission to present a directive
that would guarantee the rights they had wanted in the voluntary
agreement whilst Mr. Jacobs stressed that the employers wanted to
continue the social dialogue and were proud of the previous deals
that had been done.
|
Back to |
Forward to |
Up to |
