27 May 2021
As a result of skills shortages, fluctuating workloads, the changing nature of the workplace, and contingency requirements, an increasing number of companies in the metal and engineering industry are making use of Temporary Employment Service Providers provided by our members. While TES Providers provide an important service to the industry, compliance to the relevant legislation and Bargaining Council Agreements is paramount. The CEA (TESD) was established by TES Providers that practise self-regulation and who stay abreast of the latest legislative developments. They uphold good governance and implement industry requirements. Compliance should be the main consideration when a client chooses a TES Provider.
Since the CEA (TESD) is part of an industry association that promotes compliance, it has introduced an accreditation process, affording members time within which to voluntarily apply to be accredited according to a specific set of criteria.
Going through this accreditation process is not limited to TESD members having employees that fall under the MEIBC and members and clients are reminded of the following:
- That the establishment of the Employment Services Board (ESB) in 2015 specifically emphasized the need that TES providers be accredited, either by an employer body, or by the Department of Employment and Labour.
- The CEA (TESD) accreditation process has been noted as the only acceptable and fully functioning accreditation process. This has been achieved through continuous interaction with the DEL and ESB and promoting our process as the gold standard for accreditation.
During constant interaction with the ESB and DEL the following become apparent:
- Due to a lack of resources at the ESB, accreditation has become more and more the responsibility of employer associations such as the CEA.
- There is a lack of understanding from the ESB and DEL on how to manage accreditation of TES providers, irrespective of the nature of the industry and category of employees they supply. This has led to a situation where there is no certainty on the how they would accredit registered TES companies.
In essence, accreditation is not about the placement of candidates under the auspices of a particular Bargaining Council or even if a company has employees on its books, but rather about having some accreditation or verification process that satisfies the requirements of the ESB and DEL.
As mentioned above, the CEA (TESD) process has become the unofficial recognised system that is accepted by the DEL due to the constant interaction directly through the CEA or via CAPES.
On the basis of the above members need to weigh up the progress that has been made by the CEA (TESD) in influencing the decisions at government level of the past 13 years. We appreciate that all members feel the pressure that the current economic environment has placed us under, irrespective of company size or sector.
We need to remember that this effort, when times were good, has created the environment that made us prosper in the past, if we now decide to abandon these efforts we might find ourselves in a situation where we don’t influence policy anymore, but become sub servient to laws that will destroy our very existence and an Industry and undo all the good that has been done.
In closing, all members have over the years invested huge amounts of time and capital into their businesses and CEA accreditation will assist members in being prepared to do business when the situation require proof of compliance and accreditation.
