01 Feb 2023
by APSCo United Kingdom

Minimum Service Level Bill won't have the impact the Government wants

Responding to the news that the Minimum Service Level Bill has cleared the House of Commons, the Association of Professional Staffing Companies (APSCo) and its members have warned that the Bill won’t have the impact hoped due to a lack of resources and unwillingness to cross the picket line.

Tania Bowers, Global Public Policy Director at APSCo comments:

While the Bill does still need to go through the House of Lords to be scrutinised further, the fact that it has moved this far in the process is a concern for APSCo and its members. We fully recognise the need to maintain service levels in the public sector, but legislating a minimum level of service during strikes for sectors with resourcing challenges isn’t feasible. As we saw with the repeal of Article 7 in the Conduct Regulations, the issue is broader than being able to mandate the number of staff working. The likes of the education and healthcare sectors are struggling with significant skills shortages which will make it difficult to replace striking workers. There’s also the added issue of staffing companies and agency workers themselves being reluctant to cross the picket line for fear of longer-term impacts on their reputation. The strikes across the public sector are a symptom of a greater problem that’s underpinned by broken hiring processes, skills shortages and budget challenges. These issues cannot be solved by Bills designed to make strike action difficult. Instead, we could see skills shortages exacerbated as more individuals choose to leave the sector for better opportunities elsewhere.

 

Simon Bloch, Partners at JMW Solutions LLP - and an APSCo Trusted Partner – added:

Should this Bill be passed, there will need to be greater clarity around what the minimum service levels mean for each sector. The wording of the Bill reads that employers must detail a) the people required to work in order to ensure minimum service levels, and b) the work required to be carried out by those people. In the education sector, for example, schools or teaching academies could specify that a science teacher or a geography teacher is needed for cover in those subject areas. However, sectors which employ individuals with more overarching roles could face more difficulties in specifying the ‘work’ needed to ensure minimum service levels. For example, workers in the healthcare sector may have overlapping responsibilities. Doctors, nurses, pharmacists, and other professionals may have licenses to prescribe medicine. However, there are other aspects of their roles which may only be completed by a doctor or a nurse. Hospitals and other care facilities will need to ensure that they specify workers who can complete as many similar duties as possible, in order to maintain minimum service levels. There’s a lot of questions around how this Bill would work in practice that do need to be addressed sooner rather than later.

Eddie Austin, CEO of Operam Education Group and APSCo Education Sector Co-Chair commented:

The Minimum Service Level Bill will be controversial if it passes, but the impact it will have on preventing disruption is questionable. When there is an appetite to strike in the public sector then some form of action will be taken. The Bill may simply facilitate another call for action instead of prevent it. For the education sector in particular, there are already difficulties sourcing supply staff when needed due to talent shortages. Should the Bill be passed, Supply Agencies will have to rationale the reputational impact, conflict and controversary that would surround supporting schools with the delivery for a minimum level of service. Like for like staff cover could also become a challenge, especially where supply staff are supportive of the strike cause