Agency work is an embodiment of the ‘Flexicurity’ – issue: It is flexible due to its uncomplicated usage and fast availability in companies, but it is strictly regulated in order to provide sufficient security for the workers employed. It was created by the demand in the market for a more flexible method of utilization of the available of workforce, but the need to provide for security of the employee especially in this form of work was always recognized by the trade unions. Formerly called a ‘modern form of slave work’ it is now recognized as legal and its necessity is not anymore contested.
The share of temporary work in Europe saw a growth of 10% between 1991 and 1998 and it is believed to continue to grow. In the overall employment its share is still small: in 1998 a mere 1.4% of the total employment in Europe was agency work, but its dynamics and fluctuation of workforce makes it an important factor in the labour market. Agency work is an important part of the European labour policy as the Social Agenda recommended stimulating the creation of quality jobs, diversifying forms of employment and reconciling flexibility and security. Agency work is not equally spread in Europe: Around 80% of its workforce is employed in 4 countries: the Netherlands, France, Germany and the UK. The methods of regulation of agency work differ considerably between the Member States: Germany and Austria have specific definitions of and regulations for temporary work which mainly cover the relationship between the three partners. Denmark, the role model in terms of ‘Flexicurity’, only has a limited regulation while France, Italy, Belgium et al. have regulated agency work in detail covering not only the relationship but also the status of temporary workers. All over Europe different strategies have been employed to regulate this type of atypical work providing for more or less flexibility or security. On the European level a directive has been drawn up, that provides for significantly less protection than granted in Germany and Austria. The first intentions to regulate the matter are found in the 1980ies.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. The Employment Title and the Lisbon Strategy
2.1. The Review Process of the Employment Title
2.2. The Luxembourg Jobs Summit and the Employment Guidelines
2.3. Flexicurity and the EU
2.4. The Lisbon Strategy
2.5. The OMC
2.6. Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)
3. Flexicurity
3.1. Flexicurity and Agency Work
4. The Austrian Agency Work Legislation
4.1. The Agency Workers Act (AÜG)
4.2. Application and Exceptions
4.3. Duties of the Employers
4.4. Remuneration
4.5. Other Provisions of Interest
5. The German Agency Work Legislation
5.1. AÜG: The Licensing System
5.1.1. Exceptions from the obligation to obtain a licence
5.2. The Personnel Service Agencies (PSA)
5.3. Obligations of the Employer
5.4. The Principle of Equality: Remuneration & Working time
5.5. Other Provisions of Interest
6. Protection in Austria & Germany
6.1. Austria
6.2. Germany
7. A floor of Rights for Temporary Agency Workers
7.1. Protection in the Proposed Directive
8. Conclusions
Objectives and Core Themes
This work examines the legal regulation of agency work in Austria and Germany within the context of the European 'Flexicurity' model. It explores whether the existing national legislations provide sufficient protection for temporary agency workers or if a mandatory European 'floor of rights' is necessary to prevent exploitation and social insecurity.
- Analysis of the 'Flexicurity' concept and its implementation in EU labour policy.
- Comparative examination of Austrian and German agency work legislation (AÜG).
- Evaluation of the principle of equality and collective bargaining impacts on agency workers.
- Review of the proposed European Directive on Working Conditions for Temporary Workers.
- Discussion on the balance between labour market flexibility and worker protection.
Excerpt from the Book
1. INTRODUCION
Agency work is an embodiment of the ‘Flexicurity’ – issue: It is flexible due to its uncomplicated usage and fast availability in companies, but it is strictly regulated in order to provide sufficient security for the workers employed. It was created by the demand in the market for a more flexible method of utilization of the available of workforce, but the need to provide for security of the employee especially in this form of work was always recognized by the trade unions. Formerly called a ‘modern form of slave work’ it is now recognized as legal and its necessity is not anymore contested.
The share of temporary work in Europe saw a growth of 10% between 1991 and 1998 and it is believed to continue to grow. In the overall employment its share is still small: in 1998 a mere 1.4% of the total employment in Europe was agency work, but its dynamics and fluctuation of workforce makes it an important factor in the labour market. Agency work is an important part of the European labour policy as the Social Agenda recommended stimulating the creation of quality jobs, diversifying forms of employment and reconciling flexibility and security. Agency work is not equally spread in Europe: Around 80% of its workforce is employed in 4 countries: the Netherlands, France, Germany and the UK. The methods of regulation of agency work differ considerably between the Member States: Germany and Austria have specific definitions of and regulations for temporary work which mainly cover the relationship between the three partners.
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: Introduces agency work as a central element of the 'Flexicurity' debate, highlighting its growing importance in the European labour market and the tension between economic flexibility and worker security.
2. The Employment Title and the Lisbon Strategy: Examines the development of European employment policy, focusing on the Essen job creation priorities and the shift towards the Open Method of Coordination (OMC) and Corporate Social Responsibility.
3. Flexicurity: Defines the concept of 'Flexicurity' as a combination of flexibility and security, exploring its different interpretations and its application to agency work.
4. The Austrian Agency Work Legislation: Details the Austrian 'Agency Workers Act' (AÜG), emphasizing the legal compromise between employers and trade unions, with a focus on remuneration and social security protections.
5. The German Agency Work Legislation: Analyzes the German AÜG, including the licensing system, Personnel Service Agencies (PSA), and the 'principle of equality' regarding remuneration and working conditions.
6. Protection in Austria & Germany: Compares the levels of protection for agency workers in both nations, concluding that while both provide stricter regulations than the proposed EU Directive, gaps remain in social protection.
7. A floor of Rights for Temporary Agency Workers: Reviews the proposed European Directive on Working Conditions for Temporary Workers and questions whether it provides adequate security for the workforce.
8. Conclusions: Summarizes the conflict between flexibility and protection, arguing that a statutory 'floor of rights' is necessary to avoid social instability and worker abuse in the agency sector.
Keywords
Flexicurity, Agency Work, Employment Legislation, Austria, Germany, Labour Law, Lisbon Strategy, Open Method of Coordination, AÜG, Principle of Equality, Remuneration, Social Security, European Employment Strategy, Worker Protection, Working Conditions
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the central focus of this research?
This work fundamentally investigates the tension between labour market flexibility and the necessity of legal protection for temporary agency workers, comparing the legislative frameworks in Austria and Germany.
Which key policy areas are covered?
The study covers the European employment policy, the 'Flexicurity' paradigm, national agency work acts (AÜG), collective bargaining agreements, and the proposed European Directive on temporary work.
What is the primary objective of the author?
The primary goal is to assess whether current national legislations sufficiently protect agency workers or if a binding European minimum standard (a 'floor of rights') is essential.
What methodology is used in this analysis?
The work employs a comparative legal analysis, evaluating national legislations against the backdrop of European policy frameworks and existing EU proposals.
What topics are discussed in the main body of the work?
The main body treats the conceptual evolution of 'Flexicurity', the specific regulatory mechanisms in Austria and Germany, and the debate surrounding the effectiveness of EU-level interventions.
Which keywords define the scope of this research?
Key terms include Flexicurity, Agency Work, Labour Law, Principle of Equality, and Worker Protection.
How does the Austrian system of remuneration differ from the German approach?
Austria focuses on a proportionate and locally customary pay guaranteed by law, whereas the German system heavily relies on collective bargaining agreements and a specific principle of equal pay.
What is the author's critique of the current German situation?
The author argues that German agency workers face declining remuneration and that the 'valve' function of agency work leads to potential exploitation and social insecurity despite legal protections.
Why are Personnel Service Agencies (PSAs) in Germany controversial?
PSAs are criticized for potentially creating a two-class system of unemployed individuals and for conflicting with their own self-financing models in the attempt to transition workers to standard employment.
Does the author consider the proposed EU Directive sufficient?
No, the author concludes that the Directive provides too little protection due to its limitations and exemptions, arguing instead for a non-deviable statutory floor of rights.
- Citation du texte
- Olivia Homolatsch (Auteur), 2007, Flexicurity in Austria and Germany - is a "floor of rights" for agency workers necessary, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/115322
