Agency workers sought to establish the right to equal pay with permanent workers of the hirers/end-users. Held, inter alia, that the ‘Swedish derogation’ in the Agency Workers Regulations 2010, SI 2010/93, reg 10 was not engaged. The EAT accepted that references in the contractual documentation to “a rate of pay at least equivalent to the then current NMW” was sufficient to satisfy the requirements of reg 10(1)(a)(i). However, the EAT upheld the Tribunal’s finding that the contracts under consideration were non-compliant with reg 10(1)(a)(iii). The reference to workers being expected to work “any 5 days out of 7” was insufficient to satisfy the obligation in reg 10(1)(a)(iii) to specify the expected hours of work during any assignment.
Andrew Smith was involved in this case.