Agency worker law
body of law associated with agency workers
Agency worker law refers to a body of law which regulates the conduct of employment agencies and the labour law rights of people who get jobs through them. The typical situation involves the person going to an employment agency and then the employment agency sending the person to an actual employer for proper work.
Such arrangements are referred to by different terminology across jurisdictions. Some examples of terms used are 'labour hire', 'labour brokering', 'labor contracting', 'permatemping', or 'agency worker' arrangements.
History
The International Labour Organization called for the establishment of public employment agencies in their place. To prevent the abusive practices of private agencies, they were to be fully abolished or at least tightly regulated. In most countries, they are legal but regulated.
Probably inspired by the dissenting judgments in a United States Supreme Court case called Adams v. Tanner, the International Labour Organization's first ever recommendation was targeted at fee-charging agencies. The Unemployment Recommendation, 1919 (No.1), Art.
Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Agency worker law” is body of law associated with agency workers. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Agency, worker and body, not as a finished interpretation.
Why this record matters
The phrase “body of law associated with agency workers” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.
The record creator and administrative purpose are central evidence, because official documentation reflects both action and institutional priorities. The source revision retrieved here is dated Apr 11, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q105106133. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1919.
Later summaries often reconcile disputed chronology or motive more neatly than the contemporary record permits. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Compare institutional narratives with records created by participants and affected communities. Dates and formal titles are useful anchors, but not substitutes for context.
- Event chronology
- Institutional context
- Locating named record creators
Contemporary correspondence, government or organizational records, oral histories and cited historical scholarship.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Agency worker law”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Agency worker law primary sources, Agency worker law archive and Agency research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Agency worker law”?
- What chronology connects this entry to wider political or social change?
- Who created the surviving record, and for what administrative purpose?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Agency worker law” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.