← Back to House of Commons Debates
Employment Rights Bill 2025-11-05
05 November 2025
Lead MP
Kate Dearden
Debate Type
General Debate
Tags
EconomyEmployment
Other Contributors: 32
At a Glance
Kate Dearden raised concerns about employment rights bill 2025-11-05 in the House of Commons. A government minister responded. Other MPs also contributed.
How the Debate Unfolded
MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said:
Lead Contributor
Opened the debate
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade outlined the Government's commitment to ending exploitative employment practices, supporting fair employers, and enhancing job security through the Employment Rights Bill. She emphasised the need for modern industrial relations that prioritise fairness, trust, and dignity at work, rejecting the notion that employer-employee interests must always conflict.
Kate Dearden
Con
Dewsbury
Dearden highlighted the Government's goal of improving economic growth by ensuring secure and predictable employment for workers. She explained that the Bill aims to extend employment protections beyond just employees in large companies, offering security and opportunities to all hard-working people. Additionally, she noted that the Government is committed to ending one-sided flexibility, providing guidance on implementation, and supporting young people with a youth guarantee programme.
James Wild
Con
North West Norfolk
Wild questioned whether Dearden understands the concerns raised by businesses regarding the impact of the Bill's provisions on employment opportunities for young workers. He argued that retaining a qualifying period for unfair dismissal could provide necessary protections and stability in employment relationships.
Ian Lavery
Lab
Blyth and Ashington
Lavery cited research from the Institute for Public Policy Research and TUC, which showed significant support among employers and managers for providing employees with protection from unfair dismissal on day one. He emphasised that improved workers' rights can positively impact workplace productivity.
Naushabah Khan
Lab
Gillingham and Rainham
The Bill provides vital protections to the workforce while giving businesses the certainty they need to grow the economy. It creates a level playing field for businesses that might otherwise be undercut by others not adhering to these rules.
Dwyfor Meirionnydd
The amendment places a statutory duty on the Office of Rail and Road and the Health and Safety Executive to produce guidance supporting 14 to 16-year-olds who volunteer on heritage railways. This will offer clear benchmarking for reasonable activities and assist inspectors in important decisions.
Jim Shannon
DUP
Strangford
Small businesses without human resources departments find it hard to navigate the legislative waters of employment rights, requiring support so they can implement measures without costly legal fees detrimental to their business operations.
Laurence Turner
Lab
Birmingham Northfield
Turner questions Andrew Griffith about which elements of the Employment Rights Bill the Conservatives will retain and asks how many times the words 'maternity' and 'union' appear in the bill. He also criticises the Conservative party for not declaring union interests, stating that only one member has declared an interest throughout proceedings.
Liz Twist
Lab
Blaydon and Consett
Twist raises concerns about zero-hours contracts and their impact on young people's ability to live a decent life and plan for the future. She emphasises that mental health in the workplace is an issue of concern.
Ian Lavery
Lab
Blyth and Ashington
Lavery defends the Labour party's commitment to fulfilling their manifesto pledge regarding employment rights, declaring his financial interest with regard to his connection with the trade union movement. He criticises Griffith for despising the trade union movement and ordinary working people.
Justin Madders
Lab
Ellesmere Port and Bromborough
Madders challenges Griffith on the Trade Union Act 2016, which he claims was part of Griffith's legacy before being fired. He questions Griffith's stance on the balance between workers' rights and employers' rights.
Antonia Bance
Lab
Tipton and Wednesbury
Bance questions Griffith’s position on pre-2016 and post-2016 trade union regimes, pointing out the inconsistency in his arguments regarding the balance between workers' rights and employers' rights.
Sarah Olney
LD
Richmond Park
Supports many principles of the Bill but raises concerns about implementation details such as the qualifying period for unfair dismissal claims and clarity around probation periods. Advocates for a balance between employee protections and business needs, suggesting amendments that provide more certainty to employers.
Euan Stainbank
Lab
Falkirk
Asked about the distinction between rights granted to desk workers versus bar workers under amendment 48B.
Ian Lavery
Lab
Wansbeck
Inquired if it is acceptable for a Member elected by a minority of their constituents to advocate for a similar process in strike ballots. Criticised the Liberal Democrats' stance on industrial action thresholds.
Laurence Turner
Lab
Bristol East
Turner points out that nations with weaker employment protections do not necessarily have higher unemployment rates. He argues that the Resolution Foundation's report does not establish a clear relationship between employment levels and employment regulation.
Lincoln Jopp
Con
Spelthorne
Jopp challenges Madders to commit to his constituents if unemployment rises after passing the bill. He questions Labour’s stance on unemployment given their history in power during high unemployment periods.
Antonia Bance
Lab
Bolton West
Bance opposes concessions on the Employment Rights Bill and supports restoring the opt-out system for political funds, which she sees as an attack on workers' political voice. She also criticises Lords amendments that reintroduce ballot thresholds and weaken unions.
Andy McDonald
Lab
Middlesbrough and Thornaby East
McDonald emphasises the need to raise living standards through trade unions, highlighting the Employment Rights Bill's role in protecting workers. He opposes Lords amendments that water down day one rights against unfair dismissal and weaken protections for new employees.
Laurence Turner
Lab
Birmingham Northfield
Turner argues against the Lords amendments that contradict manifesto commitments. He mentions specific amendments such as those on political funds and school support staff negotiating bodies, highlighting their historical context and potential negative impacts. He also emphasises transparency regarding donations received by MPs to support or oppose the Bill.
Amanda Martin
Lab
Portsmouth North
Martin supports the Employment Rights Bill, focusing on its importance in providing stability for workers with unpredictable hours. She uses local examples such as 'Sara' and Dave to illustrate the benefits of fixed-hours contracts and the negative impacts of exploitative zero-hours contracts.
Michael Wheeler
Lab
Worsley and Eccles
Wheeler agrees with Martin's stance, emphasising that proposed amendments could undermine workers' rights by introducing an opt-out clause for fixed hours. He highlights the potential detrimental effects on workers who already work long hours and face financial insecurity.
Euan Stainbank
Lab
Falkirk East
Stainbank argues against Lords amendments, stating that they would remove the day one right on unfair dismissal and leave people without a legal right of action. He emphasises the need for security in employment and criticises the opposition for attempting to water down the Bill.
Tracy Gilbert
Lab
Edinburgh North and Leith
Gilbert agrees with Stainbank, emphasising that good employers have nothing to fear from the measures in the Bill and many will embrace them. She supports fixed-hour entitlement as a basic standard of decency.
Jopp challenges Stainbank on his commitment regarding unemployment if the Employment Rights Bill is passed without being watered down, questioning whether he would resign from his seat in such an event. He highlights concerns about potential negative impacts of the bill.
Knowsley
Midgley emphasises the transformative nature of the Employment Rights Bill, citing research that 73% of employers support giving employees protection from unfair dismissal from day one. She criticises attempts to delay protections and supports delivering the new deal for working people in full.
Andrew Griffith
Lab
Arundel and South Downs
Critiques the government's handling of employment tribunals and funding cuts under the previous administration. Highlights issues with seasonal work and mentions a concern about the initial reference period being set at 12 weeks.
Amanda Martin
Lab
Portsmouth North
Requests more information on what the taskforce will look into to support employees, emphasising the need for comprehensive solutions to employment issues.
Andy McDonald
Lab
Middlesbrough and Thornaby East
Stresses that enforcing rights is critical alongside introducing them. Supports the Fair Work Agency's potential in ensuring workers receive awards they are entitled to.
Chris Philp
Con
Croydon South
Chris Philp raised a point of order regarding the Justice Secretary's failure to disclose information about prisoners being released early. He questioned whether the Deputy Prime Minister was aware of prisoner Brahim Kaddour-Cherif's accidental release and requested that the Justice Secretary make an urgent statement.
Chingford and Woodford Green
Sir Iain Duncan Smith supported Philp's point of order, citing a report from The Times which contradicted the government's claim that there were operational reasons for withholding information about prisoner releases. He argued this was misleading the House.
Graham Stuart
Con
Beverley and Holderness
Stuart raised another point of order, questioning whether the sponsoring Minister of a Bill on duty of candour should remove himself from sponsorship given recent events. He asked if the Justice Secretary would be requested to clarify his position.
Andrew Murrison
Con
South West Wiltshire
Murrison reiterated concerns about the Justice Secretary's candour and whether there should be a request for clarification on recent statements regarding prisoner releases. He also referenced an important Bill presented by the Prime Minister and sponsored by the Justice Secretary.
Government Response
We are committed to creating a modern and positive framework for trade union legislation that delivers productive and constructive engagement. We have tabled amendments in lieu to strengthen rights, reflect the value we place on fair work, and align with established practices. Reiterates the importance of updating employment laws for a modern economy, addressing issues like zero-hours contracts and the gig economy. Announces plans to consult extensively with stakeholders on industrial relations reforms and electronic balloting for unions by April 2026.
▸
Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy
About House of Commons Debates
House of Commons debates take place in the main chamber of the House of Commons. These debates cover a wide range of topics including government policy, legislation, and current affairs. MPs from all parties can participate, question ministers, and hold the government accountable for its decisions.