-
Asked the Minister why employment rights from day one were no longer sacrosanct despite previous pledges. The Minister responded that this Bill is close to her heart and they are working towards a compromise to deliver on promises for working people while ensuring the Bill does not remain in parliamentary limbo.
-
Commended the Minister for her work on the Employment Rights Bill, noting its long-standing status and expressing support for the measures to provide a right compromise. He stated that shop stewards he met are keen for these measures to be implemented.
-
Asked if provisions would be made to protect workers when they request guaranteed hours and the employer cancels them at the last minute. The Minister responded by emphasising that this is about rebalancing power and giving workers access to guaranteed hours.
-
Griffith criticises the Employment Bill as a charter for a jobless generation. He points out that since Labour took office, 144,000 payrolled jobs have been lost across various sectors due to high energy and employment costs. Griffith argues that under this Government, unemployment has been higher each month with half of those losing their jobs being under-25s. The MP also highlights the proposed amendments' support for unions, including automatic political fund deductions and more paid time off for union representatives.
-
Pinto-Duschinsky challenges Griffith's comments on employment under this Labour Government being higher than the previous Conservative administration. He emphasises that unemployment has been lower and argues for an apology from Griffith.
-
Rand defends the Government's actions, pointing out that the promise to deliver an employment Bill was broken by Conservative Ministers. He questions how Griffith can justify raising unemployment and costing young people their jobs.
-
Welcomes the Bill's progress, highlights job security and fairness for workers, criticises Conservative Members for delaying the bill. Supports reducing the qualifying period for unfair dismissal claims to six months, calls for robust fines for employers who deny unions access or recognition.
-
Welcomes many principles but concerned about last-minute changes such as removing the cap on compensation for unfair dismissal. Calls for a higher compensation cap through secondary legislation following consultation with stakeholders to avoid undermining business confidence.
-
Defends the Liberal Democrats' stance, clarifies that they will abstain due to last-minute changes, not反对该法案。
-
Corrects Sarah Olney's statement about the negotiation process, confirms that removing the compensation cap was part of the agreement.
-
Challenges Sarah Olney to name business groups who claim the measure was not agreed upon in negotiations.
-
Asks if it would have been helpful to conduct an impact assessment before implementing the change.
-
Asked about the impact of exploitative zero-hours contracts on workers' financial security.
-
Questioned whether granting employees the right to request a permanent contract but not guaranteeing it would provide sufficient protection and justice for workers in his constituency with high levels of zero-hours contracts.
-
Argued that during economic downturns, zero-hours contracts exacerbate financial insecurity for workers, making it difficult to pay basic bills and mortgages. Emphasised the need to balance employer burdens with worker protections.
-
Asked for clarification on the Government’s intended duration for subsequent reference periods after scrapping compensation caps.
-
Declared interests as a trade union representative before becoming an MP. Urged swift passage of the Employment Rights Bill, declaring it a manifesto commitment that must be fulfilled despite delays. Emphasised the importance of protections for workers in areas such as statutory sick pay and paternity leave.
-
Questioned why no Scottish National Party MPs were present, suggesting they were not supporting workers’ rights adequately. Agreed that the Bill is foundational for industrial relations and worker protections.
-
Asked Justin Madders to give way but was declined due to time constraints.
-
The Employment Rights Bill has been weakened. My motion would restore day one rights on unfair dismissal. The Government's shift from two years to six months reflects a negotiated balance between unions and businesses, but I do not accept that characterisation.
-
We have worked on this legislation for more than 20 years. We wish to abide by the manifesto commitment of day one rights, which is breaking a promise not to do so. The Government should not compromise any further on this legislation.
-
My hon. Friend was one of the authors of the new deal for working people, insisting that the most critical part of this Employment Rights Bill would be employment rights from day one. No decent employer should fear any of these measures, and rogue employers were warned that exploitation and arbitrary dismissal would end.
-
The people who will experience the most discrimination will be disabled workers, young workers, and ethnic minority workers. Under this compromise, a bad employer may still dismiss someone without reason or justification.
-
No system should allow dismissal without cause for blatantly unfair reasons. The Employment Rights Bill needs to deliver the full package of workers' rights reforms, and this House must ensure that the back door is not opened to dismantling it.
-
Made a point of order to declare his support from the trade union movement, which he is proud of.