The guidance on AWR regulations has created uncertainty on whether employees hired using in-house staffing banks come under the scope of the regulations.

Commenting on the final guidance published last week, Simon Horsfield, partner, employment group, at law firm Pinsent Mason, told Recruiter the draft guidance made it explicit that in-house staffing banks where hirers engage workers directly would be out of the scope of the regulations.

Horsfield says: “The draft guidance said they were not in scope but the final version says they may not be in scope. I don’t understand why there is that shift of emphasis from ‘definitely not’ to ‘may not be’.

“It seems to open the door for challenges from temporary workers that they should be entitled to comparable basic work and conditions as the permanent employees employed within that organisation.”

“The final guidance did say there might be an issue if workers are engaged by one company within a group and supplied to another company within the group. This could happen with larger organisations where there is a complicated group structure.

“It would have to be a different legal entity but that is where the issue potentially arises. The company with the group that has engaged those workers and supplied them to another group company is deemed for the purpose of these regulations a temporary work agency. Those individuals will have the right to equal treatment with comparable employees in the other group company.”