Why are all the big nasc members using agencys more than ever.??? (1 Viewer)

TEESSIDE SCAFFOLDER

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 20, 2010
Messages
9,220
Reaction score
1
Location
TEESSIDE
Why are all the big nasc members using agencys more than ever.???


Nasc employee's had to directly employed it was part of the nasc rules to become a member of the nasc in the first place
 
The rule is a minimum 75% of the total labour workforce is directly employed.
 
The rule is a minimum 75% of the total labour workforce is directly employed.

Mentioned a few times about Atlantic(NASC member) in Liverpool using cash in hand labour,not supplying PPE,not paying proper rates/holiday pay.Been getting away with it for years.Think that large brown envelopes may be getting passed around!!!
 
nasc_application.jpg


Employment: The applicant must be able to show that all management and supervision are directly employed. A
minimum 90% of yard and site operatives must be directly employed as a condition of membership.

That was taken from the NASC application form.

The NASC apparently held a regional meeting a few weeks ago and the 90% subject was brought up by a member. The NASC person chairing the meeting apparently got very touchy on the subject. The member who brought up the subject was told that those were the rules and there would be no more discussion about it. Then the NASC person told the room that if members didn't like it, they could leave.

Personally it makes no difference to me how many lads are employed through agencies as long as they are being paid a decent rate. The problem the NASC has is they have made this rule and they have to be seen to enforcing it.
If the likes of Debs, Interserve, Palmers and Harsco all decided they were going to ignore the rule, would the NASC kick them out? I very much doubt it. They couldn't survive the drop in the income they receive from the big boys.
 
Last edited:
Interesting Dass, I didn't realise it had changed to 90%

That blows some firms out of the water with their ratio of direct/subbie labour!
 
Phil, from what I read about meeting, that was the point that was unsuccessfully made. It was more or less swept under the carpet.

The thing is, if virtually everyone in the scaffolding game know about the use of agencies, how does the NASC not know?

I'll see if I can find the thing I was reading
 
Interesting Dass, I didn't realise it had changed to 90%

That blows some firms out of the water with their ratio of direct/subbie labour!

It certainly does Phil 181,but will it change anything,i think not.
 
My old boss summed it up:- to pay an advanced Scaff £14 per hour as a PAYE employee, it was costing him £21, after holiday pay, travel, national insurance, tax, ppe, redundency, etc.
To pay a sub contract adv. Scaff £14 it cost him £14.
He wasn't the first to start using subbies/agencies but once all his competitors started it was impossible to compete so he had to start using them.
A lot of the subbies I spoke to didn't mine that they weren't getting travel and holiday pay because they said they got it all back at the end of the year via tax rebate?
 
Are there any outright scaffold agency's regestered with NASC ?

No RV, I'm no expert but it's my opinion they use this rule to encourage the use of a fully carded workforce so companies will invest in men's training.

The 90% figure doesn't have to be adhered to every day but as long as that figure is not breached at the end of the year.
 
I know of very few NASC members down this end that employ any one on PAYE other than office staff supervisors ect
Most are UTR or Agency users umbrella companies etc or subbies
 
Top Bottom