🌟 Employment Rights Bill

• Agency Workers Rights: The Employment Rights Bill now includes a definition of an “agency worker” and introduces rights related to guaranteed hours and shifts for these workers. This ensures that agency workers are entitled to similar protections as directly employed workers, addressing a gap in employment rights for this group.

• Zero-Hours Contracts: The Bill aims to reform zero-hours contracts by offering workers the right to guaranteed hours after a reference period. It also addresses situations where an employer may structure work to avoid making these offers, providing clarity and protection for workers.

• Shift Notice and Compensation: Workers will gain rights to reasonable notice about shifts and compensation for short-notice changes. This change seeks to reduce uncertainty and financial instability for workers, particularly those in sectors with unpredictable schedules.

• Collective Agreements: Employers and unions can opt out of certain zero-hours measures through collective agreements, allowing for tailored solutions that might suit specific sectors or companies better.

• Unfair Dismissal: The legislation makes unfair dismissal a day-one right, removing the previous two-year qualifying period. This change aims to protect workers from being dismissed without fair reason early in their employment.

• Fire and Rehire Practices: The Bill seeks to end the practice of “fire and rehire” by making it automatically unfair to dismiss and then rehire an employee on worse conditions, protecting workers from such exploitative practices.

• Collective Redundancy: The threshold for triggering collective redundancy consultation is adjusted to 20 or more redundancies at one establishment, or meeting a certain number across the organization. The protective award an employment tribunal can make is increased, enhancing worker protections during redundancies.

• Flexible Working: The Bill supports flexible working rights, aiming to improve work-life balance and support working parents by making it easier to request flexible arrangements.

• Statutory Sick Pay (SSP): SSP reforms include removing the lower earnings limit and waiting days, extending access to more workers. The rate of SSP is set at the lower of 80% of an employee’s normal weekly earnings or a flat rate, aiming to provide better financial support during illness.

• Holiday Pay and Record-Keeping: New obligations for employers to keep records of holiday pay and annual leave are introduced to ensure compliance and fair treatment.

• Umbrella Companies: Regulations around umbrella companies are to be tightened, aiming to prevent non-compliance and ensure workers receive entitled rights.

• Negotiating Bodies: The Bill establishes bodies for negotiating terms in adult social care and support staff in schools, aiming to improve conditions and wages in these sectors.

• Harassment Protections: Employers are liable for third-party harassment of employees, enhancing protections against harassment in the workplace.

• Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs): There’s a push to review the use of NDAs, particularly in cases of harassment or discrimination, to prevent their misuse.

• Whistleblower Protections: A duty for larger employers to investigate protected disclosures is proposed, aiming to strengthen whistleblower rights and encourage reporting of wrongdoing.

• Paternity and Parental Leave: Proposals for extending paternity and parental leave are mentioned, aiming to provide better support for working parents.

• Modern Slavery: The Bill includes measures to review and ensure that employment rights are not undermined by practices linked to modern slavery.

• Seafarers’ Rights: Annual reporting on the application of employment rights changes to seafarers is proposed, addressing a specific sector’s needs.

• Overall Economic Impact: There’s a debate about the Bill’s potential economic impact, with concerns raised about its effect on business flexibility and job creation, countered by arguments that stronger employment rights can boost productivity and growth.

The session shows significant disagreement on key aspects of the Employment Rights Bill, particularly concerning its potential impact on businesses, economic growth, and worker rights. Here are detailed examples of disagreements:

1. Zero-Hours Contracts: There is a notable disagreement around the sections related to zero-hours contracts. The Conservatives argue that the Bill’s provisions will reduce flexibility, potentially harming businesses and employment, particularly for those who value flexible working hours. For example, Greg Smith (Con) emphasized the negative impact on employers’ willingness to hire due to increased administrative costs and potential tribunal claims. Conversely, Labour and Liberal Democrat MPs, like Michael Wheeler (Lab) and Steve Darling (LD), supported the measures as necessary to protect workers from insecurity and exploitation.

2. Impact on Economic Growth: The debate highlighted stark disagreements on whether the Bill would aid or hinder economic growth. Several Conservative MPs, including John Cooper (Con) and Alison Griffiths (Con), criticized the Bill extensively, arguing that it would impose a significant financial burden on businesses (£5 billion according to their estimates), potentially stifling growth. They urged for new clause 87 to be included to prioritize economic competitiveness. In contrast, Labour MPs, such as Peter Dowd (Lab), argued that strengthening employment rights would actually enhance productivity and economic growth, citing historical precedents and expert evidence.

3. Third-Party Harassment: Clause 18, addressing employer liability for third-party harassment, received both opposition and support. Greg Smith (Con) and others raised concerns about this measure potentially stifling freedom of speech and placing unnecessary burdens on sectors like hospitality. Labour and other MPs, such as Antonia Bance (Lab), supported the clause as important for protection against sexual harassment, underlining the need for a duty of care from employers.

4. Unfair Dismissal and Employment Protections: Clause 21, which provides protection against unfair dismissal from day one, was another point of contention. Conservatives argued it would deter employers from hiring, particularly those considered ‘risky’ candidates, whereas Labour and others supported it as a vital protection for workers, especially young and low-wage workers who often lack job security.

5. Parental and Adoption Leave: There were disagreements on extending parental and adoption leave. New clauses were proposed to extend these rights, but there was significant resistance to any measures that might add costs to businesses. MPs like Ms Stella Creasy (Lab) argued strongly for better paternity leave policies, highlighting the economic benefits of supporting families equally, while others worried about the impact on businesses.

6. Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs): There was a clear divide on NDAs, with Louise Haigh (Lab) and Layla Moran (LD) pressing for stronger regulations to prevent misuse in cases of harassment or discrimination. The Minister showed openness to consider these issues further but did not commit to legislative change, indicating a disagreement on the timing and scope of reform.

7. Statutory Sick Pay (SSP): The changes proposed to SSP also sparked debate. Some Labour MPs, like Lee Barron (Lab), welcomed the removal of the waiting period and lower earnings limit, but there were calls for further reform due to concerns about low-paid workers potentially receiving reduced sick pay under the new system. Conservative MPs questioned the financial sustainability of increased SSP.

These examples illustrate intense discussion and disagreement on various aspects of the Bill, leading to a rating of 4 for disagreement due to the breadth and depth of opposing viewpoints expressed by various MPs.