Employment Rights (Transparency and Arbitration) Bill - Clause 1

Questioned the Deputy Prime Minister about the £4.5 billion annual estimated costs of measures in the Bill, expressing doubt that adding financial burdens to employers will boost growth and job creation.

Challenged the Deputy Prime Minister on the impact assessment which stated potential positive impacts could be small in magnitude, while negative impacts on small businesses would likely be serious. He requested a clarification on how negative impacts will be minimised.

Inquired about the definition of 'working people' used by the Deputy Prime Minister, possibly questioning the inclusivity or applicability of the term.

Recalled that during the 1990s, the Conservative party predicted half a million job losses due to social chapter and national minimum wage; however, jobs were actually created.

Concerned about the impact of day one rights against unfair dismissal on small businesses, fearing they could be held to ransom by individuals who do not complete a day's work.

Asked whether pre-hearing reviews for employment tribunals have been considered, questioning the assertion that businesses will face significant costs without such provisions.

Challenged the shadow Minister on how many of his Front-Bench team are trade union members, implying criticism towards the opposition's stance on workers' rights.

Echowed concerns about small and medium businesses being unable to employ staff in short-term positions during long-term illnesses, risking business closure.

Expressed concern that the timing of this legislation alongside potential tax increases could add additional risk for businesses.

Asked the shadow Business Secretary to assure a commitment to low-tax, deregulated economy during opposition period to foster growth.

Reminded that he is the shadow Business Secretary, likely in response to questioning about the party's stance on business matters.

Noted potential resentment among staff bodies due to new legislation affecting small businesses' ability to offer flexible working conditions.

Criticised trade unions for financial mismanagement, questioning who will hold them accountable under the new legislation.

Asserted that his party's manifesto was pro-business and welcomed the Employment Rights Bill, suggesting opposition is due to embarrassment over past records.

Questioned whether the hon. Member wants to distance his party from previous statements by a former Business Secretary regarding burdens on businesses.

Questioned whether the shadow Minister is concerned about employment levels under this Government, given Labour's track record in improving employment rates.

Asked why the hon. Member does not acknowledge the result of the general election which supported provisions similar to those in the Bill.

Informed that there will be a consultation period and certain businesses will have probation periods before full implementation, suggesting pro-business stance.

While broadly supporting the Employment Rights Bill, Sarah Gibson highlights its limitations in supporting carers, parents, and those who fall ill. She proposes that the bill should introduce paid carer’s leave, increase parental pay and sick pay to £350 a week, extend paternity leave pay with an income cap for high earners, and improve support for small businesses through consultation and business rates reform.

Stella Creasy supports the Employment Rights Bill, advocating for greater emphasis on maternity and paternity rights to address gender inequalities in the workforce. She highlights issues such as the motherhood pay gap and discrimination against women returning to work after having children. Stella also points out that fathers face financial pressures to return to work early and calls for measures to support paternity leave.

The Bill has been rushed through without proper consultation. The issue of unpaid internships is crucial for ensuring equal opportunities for young people, but it lacks from the Bill. Proposing a ban on unpaid internships to be brought in alongside the Bill.

[Intervention] Pragmatism should guide the approach behind the Bill rather than tribal ideology, supporting the need to address unpaid internships.

Supports the Employment Bill as a landmark expansion of workers' rights but does not specifically mention or oppose the amendment on unpaid internships.

Shivani Raja expressed concern over the Employment Rights Bill, arguing that it threatens to undermine the entrepreneurial spirit in Leicester. She highlighted the city's diverse and resilient community and emphasised how the additional costs and regulations proposed could discourage innovation among small businesses. She argued that the bill would add burdens to local businesses already working with thin margins, potentially harming workers by making jobs less secure rather than protecting them.

Ghani made a brief interjection during Shivani Raja's speech, showing support for her arguments and expressing interest in visiting Leicester to experience its cultural diversity.

Ferguson praised Shivani Raja's maiden speech before presenting his support for the Employment Rights Bill. He emphasised the benefits of the bill for workers, including an end to exploitative zero-hours contracts, improved sick pay, and stronger collective bargaining rights. Ferguson argued that the bill would improve employment conditions in overlooked sectors like care work and teaching assistants, contributing positively to recruitment and retention.

[INTERVENTION] Billington agreed with Ferguson's view that the measures in the Employment Rights Bill would be beneficial for both employees and small businesses, contributing positively to productivity and staff retention.

Labour’s antipathy towards business is harmful. The Bill will hurt small businesses disproportionately, increasing economic inactivity and damaging employment growth. It also increases risks for hiring new employees, potentially leading to bankruptcy for small employers.

The Bill is needed due to issues like fire and replace at P&O and fire and rehire of British Gas workers. It establishes day one rights on unfair dismissal, paternity leave, parental leave, bereavement leave, a right to guaranteed-hours contract and tightens unfair dismissal protections.

The amendment will kill off any ambition for growth. The Government’s impact assessment shows that small businesses are likely to be hit hardest, with costs up to £5 billion. It undermines the agility of businesses in ensuring workers maximise productivity and threatens employment decisions by increasing economic inactivity. The Bill is not about employment rights or better conditions but rather appeasing trade unions, weakening the case for hiring new employees.

Supports the transformative Bill which sets us on a road to implementing a new deal for working people. It repeals draconian anti-trade union legislation, establishes a fair pay framework in adult social care, offers guaranteed-hours policies to end zero-hours contracts and widens access to statutory sick pay.

Expresses concern about the impact of the Bill on seasonal workers, particularly in tourism, agriculture, and retail. Increased regulation will put livelihoods at risk and face rising costs and greater bureaucracy for small businesses reliant on flexible short-term contracts to meet demand.

MP Lola McEvoy supports the Employment Bill, emphasising its reasonable approach to ensuring a living wage and protecting workers from sexual harassment. She highlights the importance of paid time off for preventive cancer screenings, citing an example of a woman who missed her smear tests due to inability to take unpaid leave, leading to stage 4 cervical cancer. Additionally, she welcomes the strengthening of maternity rights in the Bill and supports the review on parental leave as it helps level the playing field between men and women regarding paternity leave.

MP Katie Lam made her maiden speech, introducing herself to the House and highlighting historical figures from her constituency. She did not discuss any specific clauses or amendments within the Employment Bill.

Smith emphasises the social issues in her constituency, including gambling-related suicides and poor working conditions during the industrial revolution. She supports the Bill due to its aim of strengthening employee rights by stopping exploitative use of zero-hours contracts and providing maternity and paternity pay from day one.

Hobhouse supports the Bill, particularly clauses 15 and 16 which reinstate protections against workplace harassment and sexual harassment. She acknowledges the progress made since her original Worker Protection Act but highlights that three quarters of employers are concerned about protection from harassment by third parties.

Kirkham supports the Bill for its provisions on sick pay, parental leave, fair pay agreements for adult social care workers and school support staff. She highlights the importance of addressing low pay in the care and school sectors and protecting women's rights.

He argues that the Bill is detrimental to small and medium-sized businesses, as it will increase the number of unfair dismissal claims presented to employment tribunals. The abolition of the qualifying period for bringing an unfair dismissal claim will flood the already overwhelmed system with additional cases, which will be particularly burdensome for SMEs lacking the resources of larger companies. He criticises the government's proposals for hindering growth and productivity by undermining employer-employee balance.

He supports the Bill, arguing that it rebalances power between employers and employees to improve working conditions and wages. He suggests further steps such as introducing sectoral collective bargaining and fair pay agreements, ensuring single worker status rights are protected, and advancing reforms for insourcing. He also highlights the importance of addressing insecure work practices and providing protections for specific groups like seafarers and prison officers.

He expresses concerns about provisions that increase burden on employers, particularly in sectors such as social care. He criticises the introduction of a statutory probation period which he sees as vague and likely to increase litigation in employment tribunals. Robertson also emphasises the need for more detail in the Bill to mitigate costs for employers and stresses the importance of reforming social care before implementing new laws.

Supports the Bill as it advances workers' rights and improves industrial relations. Emphasises the importance of collaboration between employees and employers, criticising previous legislation for causing disruption. Advocates for modernisation of employment laws with immediate benefits for constituents.

Welcomes core elements of the Bill but criticises Labour's hesitance and lack of speed in implementing reforms. Points out gaps such as delayed consultations for meaningful changes, missing provisions on worker status, right to switch off, and mandatory reporting of pay discrimination. Advocates for devolving employment law to Scotland.

Cocking expresses concern that the Employment Rights Bill could hinder job creation, particularly for small businesses. He argues that increasing day one rights will make employers hesitant to hire new employees due to fear of potential unfair dismissal claims. Cocking also criticises the lack of consultation on the bill and calls for a more balanced approach between workers' rights and business needs.

Robertson intervenes to support Cocking's stance, asserting that growth in small businesses is beneficial for workers. He urges the Government to ensure a fair balance between worker protections and business needs.

Begum, as a trade unionist, highlights the inadequacy of current laws in protecting workers from insecure work conditions. She welcomes the Employment Rights Bill as a significant step forward for workers' rights, particularly praising the removal of restrictive thresholds from the Trade Union Act 2016 and repealing undemocratic anti-strike legislation. Begum also calls for further provisions to protect survivors of domestic abuse in the workplace.

He argues that the Bill will make it easier for militant unions to infiltrate workplaces, increase strikes, burden employers with more rules, stifle economic growth, and hit public services hard. He criticises the proposed Fair Work Agency as a new layer of bureaucracy whose costs will be borne by business.

She welcomes the Bill, describing it as transformative for workers' rights. Lorraine highlights its benefits for social care workers facing low pay and poor conditions, and emphasises that the bill will empower working people in her constituency.

He broadly welcomes the Bill but expresses concerns about statutory sick pay and the exclusion of fostering from the legislation. He also calls for recognition of Disability Confident employers.

He welcomes the Bill, particularly its repeal of much of the 2016 anti-trade union legislation. He criticises the Conservative Party's relentless attacks on trade unions.

The speaker opposes changes to employment law in the Bill, arguing that it will harm businesses and workers by increasing costs and reducing flexibility. He highlights concerns from industry bodies such as Scottish Chambers of Commerce and the Recruitment and Employment Confederation about increased burdens on businesses. Thomas also mentions a lack of consultation on collective redundancy proposals and the potential for more grievances and disputes.

The speaker supports the provisions in the Bill, stating that it will create conditions for jobs around which people can build lives and families. She emphasises the importance of enforcement through a fair work agency to prevent exploitation and ensure that businesses are not undercut by those avoiding their responsibilities.

The speaker focuses on the impact of the Bill on unpaid carers and expresses disappointment that paid carer’s leave is not included. She calls for clarity regarding the review of the current Carer's Leave Act and proper information dissemination to businesses about carer's leave.

Proudly supports the Workers' Rights Bill, emphasising its importance in improving workers’ rights and conditions. Argues that fair wages are essential for wellbeing and economic growth. Points out the previous Conservative government’s failure to address critical issues like low pay and poor working conditions. Highlights conversations with businesses and employees in his constituency indicating a need for sustainable business models grounded in fair treatment of employees.

Welcomes the Workers' Rights Bill but calls for stronger protections against fire and rehire practices, zero-hours contracts, and increased equality measures. Criticises the polarized rhetoric that portrays workers versus employers as adversarial, highlighting historical context where worker organising led to improved conditions. Points out the International Monetary Fund’s findings on inequality being bad for growth.

Supports the Bill, highlighting its benefits to small businesses and workers. Emphasises his commitment to public service based on family values of hard work and dedication. Expresses support for Dover and Deal’s local economy and calls for better infrastructure and opportunities for young people. Strongly supports the Bill as a response to the P&O Ferries scandal affecting his constituents.

Critiques the Employment Bill for not addressing substitution clauses in contracts, which allow companies to exploit workers. Expresses concern over trade policies that favour cheap imports and their impact on British industries and labour market. Highlights issues such as high unemployment rates, economic inactivity among workers, and regulatory burdens on businesses. Suggests the Government should focus on reindustrialisation and supporting domestic businesses instead of imposing new regulations.

Supports the Employment Bill, highlighting its benefits for workers such as protection against exploitative contracts and harassment. Argues that better working conditions lead to more committed and productive employees, which in turn is good for business growth. Cites support from the Confederation of British Industry (CBI) and mentions conversations with local businesses who appreciate the new rights being introduced.

Emphasises the importance of care workers and unpaid carers. Supports fair pay proposals in the Bill but suggests increasing the minimum wage for care workers by £2 above the standard rate. Proposes establishing a royal college of carers to enhance esteem and career paths within the sector. Argues that current regulations prevent many from combining paid work with caring responsibilities, impacting workforce productivity.

Delivered his maiden speech, expressing pride in serving Airdrie and Shotts. He emphasised the importance of upgrading workers' rights and thanked the Government for prioritising this bill. He highlighted the industrial history and potential of his constituency, advocating that such legislation could reignite industrial and technological progress.

Congratulated Kenneth Stevenson on his maiden speech. He expressed concerns about the Employment Rights Bill, arguing it would disproportionately affect small businesses. He cited the Federation of Small Businesses' criticism of the bill as rushed and poorly planned. Moore highlighted that the bill could stifle economic growth and job creation, especially for vulnerable workers. He also criticised clause 48 for forcing union members to pay into political funds without explicit consent.

Raises concerns about the implications of the Bill on small and microbusinesses, citing a case where an online Government calculator led to significant back pay owed by a small business. He argues for more support and clear guidance for businesses in implementing new regulations.

Supports his colleague's concerns about the need for better engagement with small businesses. Urges the Secretary of State to work closely with the business community.

Emphasises the importance of protecting workers' rights in her constituency, noting that nearly 5,500 people are paid at or below the national minimum wage. She argues for a Government committed to serving working people.

Welcomes clause 7 which applies an objective test for employers to refuse reasonable requests for flexible working. Highlights benefits of modern and flexible paternity leave, advocating for better statutory paternity leave. Supports clauses 20 and 21 as they provide additional protection for working parents.

Advises Members to limit interventions due to time constraints. No specific arguments against clauses 7, 20 or 21 presented.

Welcomes legislation as a game-changer for many people across the workforce. Highlights insecure work conditions and lack of security for young workers, advocating for rights that protect workers from discrimination by their bosses.

Welcomes Bill as a significant step forward in employment rights. Advocates for closing loopholes on fire and rehire, strengthening union access to workplaces, and returning prison officers' right to strike.

Ms. Blake noted that despite progress, the gender pay gap remains stubbornly high at 14%, with certain sectors like care seeing even higher gaps. She advocated for concrete action beyond mere reporting to require organisations to publish plans addressing their gender pay gaps. She also supported provisions in the Bill aimed at tackling menopause-related challenges faced by women.

Ms. Sonia Kumar, a Labour MP from Dudley, highlighted that her constituency is home to many small businesses and gig economy workers. She argued the Bill offers a consultation period for businesses allowing them time to adjust before implementation in 2026, dismissing claims of urgency as unfounded. Ms. Kumar also praised provisions strengthening statutory sick pay, ensuring access to basic health support at work, eliminating long wait times for unfair dismissal rights, and improving protections against discrimination during menopause.

Mr. Tom Hayes, a Labour MP from Bournemouth East, welcomed the Bill's provisions aimed at enhancing workers' rights and employer security in his constituency. He highlighted benefits such as day-one parental leave, new fair work agency enforcement of holiday pay, protection against sexual harassment, and new measures to support pregnant women and those returning from maternity leave.

Ms. Yuan Yang, a Labour MP from Earley and Woodley, stressed the importance of strong unions as forms of workplace democracy, citing international examples where union representation was lacking. She discussed how weak worker protections lead to economic inefficiencies and individual hardships such as reliance on food banks by working families in her constituency. Ms. Yang also mentioned concerns about fire-and-rehire practices threatening supermarket workers' job security.

Turner supports the Employment Rights Bill, highlighting its importance for workers in low-paid occupations and those on insecure contracts. He emphasises the creation of negotiating bodies for school support staff and care workers, the reinstatement of fair wages resolution for outsourced public service workers, and proposed reforms to trade union recognition.

Simons supports the Bill's protections for pregnant women and rights to paternity leave. He references historical context of worker rights, emphasising the transformative power of secure work in communities like his constituency.

Paffey supports the Bill for its provisions on zero-hours contracts and unfair dismissal protections, highlighting benefits to both workers and employers. He notes its role in making work pay and ensuring stability for constituents.

Entwistle supports the Bill's uplift in workers' rights, particularly focusing on youth unemployment issues and protections against sexual harassment. She commends the Deputy Prime Minister for bringing forward legislation that benefits working families.

She highlighted the issue of sexual harassment in workplaces and criticised the current state of corporate governance, which often fails to prevent such incidents. She argued that women who experience harassment are desperate to avoid bringing claims due to financial constraints and the fear of reputational damage. Russell also pointed out that young women and those on zero-hours contracts face higher levels of harassment and economic vulnerability, emphasising the need for stronger workplace rights.

Pearce focused on the Bill's impact on young families and women. He criticised the Conservative Party for their stance against maternity pay improvements, asserting that businesses understand the importance of protecting pregnant women from dismissal after returning from maternity leave. He cited statistics indicating around 4,000 women being dismissed annually during pregnancy or post-maternity leave periods, stressing the need for legal reforms to protect working mothers.

McAllister emphasised the Bill's significance in addressing low-paid and insecure employment, highlighting his personal experience as a solicitor advising clients on their limited rights. He advocated for adequate resourcing of employment tribunals to ensure accessibility to justice for workers' rights violations. McAllister shared a constituent’s appreciation for the legislation’s potential impact, particularly in ending exploitative zero-hours contracts and fire and rehire practices.

Bance discussed the negative impacts of zero-hours contracts on workers, especially younger and ethnic minority employees. She called for legal measures to ban such contracts while advocating for unions' access to more workplaces to negotiate better wages and conditions. Bance argued that stronger recognition rights would enable fair bargaining between employers and employees.

Welcomes the Bill and highlights its importance for social care workers who are underpaid despite their essential work. Emphasises that many cannot feed their family on statutory sick pay of £116 a week, citing an example from his constituency where NHS workers were striking over unfair sickness pay. Supports strengthening statutory sick pay.

Highlights the economic rigging against millions of UK workers, citing low incomes and reliance on food banks. Supports provisions for statutory sick pay from day one, security in employment contracts, and a living wage that accounts for cost of living.

Supports the Bill's provisions on collective bargaining rights for school support staff and adult social care workers. Urges further measures to establish negotiating bodies in other sectors.

Supports the Bill's efforts to tackle zero-hours contracts and strengthen rights for flexible working. Highlights improvements for school support staff, social care workers, and provisions on unfair dismissal from day one.

The Bill is a transformative step for working people, addressing insecure jobs and zero-hours contracts. It aligns with public opinion as 60% of employers support employee security at work, while 74% believe in workforce retention through stronger employment rights. The bill aims to improve pay and conditions, particularly in the care sector, which faces recruitment and retention challenges.

Welcomes the Bill's focus on security for workers by banning exploitative zero-hours contracts, ending fire and rehire, and providing day one rights. Stresses that these measures give dignity to workers and an opportunity for economic growth through fairer employment practices.

Supports substantial uplift in employment rights, including establishment of a Fair Work Agency to ensure fair pay and dignified work conditions. Highlights that 20% of minimum wage workers did not receive what they had earned due to lack of sick pay and holiday pay. Mandates that the minimum wage should match living costs annually.

Calls for prison officers to have parity with Scottish counterparts, including rights to strike, addressing recruitment and retention issues. Urges repeal of section 127 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 that bans industrial action by prison officers.

Welcomes repeal of Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Act 2023 and calls for protections for pregnant workers, including maternity pay as a day one right. Emphasises hardships faced by prison officers who cannot strike due to section 127.

After years of Tory attacks, this Bill begins reversing anti-union laws. She supports scrapping minimum service levels for strikes and removing ballot thresholds to restore workers' rights. While welcoming electronic balloting, she argues for going further by repealing all post-Thatcher anti-trade union legislation.

The Bill supports workers' rights by addressing issues such as unpaid holiday pay, dismissal of pregnant women and mothers returning from maternity leave, and providing support for those who need to look after their families. Baxter highlights that 1.1 million employees did not receive holiday pay last year, 4,000 women were dismissed upon returning from maternity leave, and 3,800 workers in her constituency earn the minimum wage.

The Bill will benefit low-paid and insecure workers by ensuring contracts reflect regular hours worked. While welcoming these measures, he urges the Minister to avoid using the term 'low' in drafting, as it might limit benefits and lead to unintended consequences. He advocates for trade unions to work with the government to ensure maximum benefits.

Critiques the role of trade unions in the Employment Bill, highlighting financial donations from unions to Labour MPs. He mentions that constituents will face negative impacts such as strikes and increased bureaucracy due to the legislation. Bacon argues that the bill is ideologically driven rather than focusing on economic growth.

Reynolds supports the Employment Rights Bill, arguing it addresses modern work challenges and delivers on Labour’s promise of better job security. He criticises the Conservatives for failing to implement similar measures in their manifesto and highlights numerous large companies that already meet or exceed these standards. Reynolds acknowledges contributions from new MPs but dismisses the reasoned amendment by Kevin Hollinrake as unhelpful, pointing out inconsistencies in Conservative policy on employment rights. He assures businesses of close collaboration to ensure the reforms are proportionate and beneficial.