That this Assembly calls on the Minister for Employment and Learning to take the necessary measures to protect agency workers, and to ensure that such workers are provided with the same statutory protections, regarding pay and conditions of employment, as

I support the amendment and the general thrust of what the proposers of the motion and the amendment have sought to achieve. Some rights should be extended, and those that are in place should be enforced. The whole issue of agency workers’ rights has been ignored for far too long, to the detriment of thousands of workers. Although they make up only a small proportion of our overall workforce, agency workers are an important part of our labour market and are currently protected by a range of employment laws. However, the current protection mechanisms fall short of what is required.

Employers across Northern Ireland benefit greatly from agency workers, who provide a measure of flexibility that enables our economy to perform competitively against competing forces across Europe. As they provide such a benefit to our economy, agency workers deserve parity on a range of factors regarding their employment. However, while supporting the general aim of parity, caution must be exercised in determining when an agency worker should become eligible for parity. The proposed six-week period is too short and would be of detriment to our economic competitiveness. The Assembly has supported a draft Programme for Government that has economic development at its core. Therefore, we should exercise caution and give serious consideration to the implications of the proposal. At the same time as protecting the worker, we must ensure that we do not encourage practices that fly in the face of economic development.

There are examples of extreme cases of abuse of agency staff. I am sad to say that Depart­ments have been at least as guilty as private enterprise in that. I know of a case in which an agency employee has worked from 9.00 am to 3.00 pm for 12 years in the same Department. That employee has carried out the full duties, similar to those of permanent staff, without being afforded the same pension rights, for example, as her permanent colleagues. If she is sick, she receives only statutory sick pay, and not the other benefits afforded to her colleagues. Furthermore, she receives a lower rate of pay, and she does not receive yearly increments, as do other workers. Her conditions in many other areas, including annual leave and bank holidays, are worse than those of her colleagues.

In that same Department, another member of agency staff has worked for eight years, and another for six years.

I suggest that people who have worked in that Department for 12, eight and six years are in full-time employment, and their positions should have been made permanent. Their situation is an absolute disgrace, and the Minister and the Department must seriously examine the issue.

With regard to the more short-term employment of agency staff, the matter comes to a head.

Short-term employment provides many people with an opportunity to work flexible hours to suit their circumstances. Many are mothers who are returning to the workplace as an essential first step back into the labour market. The ability to balance work and life is important to such groups, and care must be taken not to discourage employers from using them.

In the light of the warning from 58% of employers that the requirement for agency staff to work for six weeks before achieving equality would lead to a significant reduction in the use of temporary staff, I urge the Minister to consider carefully how such a directive could be rolled out.

I urge him also to examine all Departments that are attached to the Executive. I could name the Department to which I referred earlier, but I will not do so now because there is an ongoing tribunal. The practice is not specific to one Department: it is widespread across Departments and must, along with other matters, be given serious attention. I support the amendment.