As key consultations on the Employment Rights Bill end, the Recruitment and Employment Confederation (REC) has warned that the Employment Rights Bill is ‘undercooked’ and needs changes. With businesses already struggling with rising costs, the REC urges further change to avoid the measures stifling opportunity.
The REC comments come as MPs continue to scrutinise the Employment Rights Bill at Committee in Parliament next week. And as a recent report from the Regulatory Policy Committee (RPC) rates the government’s impact assessment of the Employment Rights Bill as ‘not fit for purpose’, The Employment Lawyers Association (ELA) suggesting the Bill could ‘swamp business’ and may not achieve better conditions for workers, and The London Chamber of Commerce and Industry (LCCI) survey showing firms predicting the upcoming Employment Rights Bill would have a significant impact on their operations
“At a time when our research shows that the flexible labour market really works for Britain, especially when times are uncertain, it is worrying that some of these proposed changes put those benefits at risk for both businesses and workers,” said Shazia Ejaz, REC Director of Campaigns and Research. “A dynamic labour market is the best way of keeping the labour share of income high, as the relatively stronger performance of the UK by comparison to UK competitors shows.
“Recruiters across the country are keen to work with the government to protect our jobs market, but this Bill is undercooked. Major revisions to the Bill are necessary to ensure that the Plan to Make Work Pay will succeed at protecting workers and growing the economy.”
The government is introducing measures to tackle one-sided flexibility in zero-hours contracts through a right to guaranteed hours with a contract that reflects the number of hours regularly worked, and a right to reasonable notice of shifts with payment for shifts cancelled or curtailed at short notice. The REC appreciates the reasons for greater protections for directly employed workers but applying it to temps working through agencies is wholly unnecessary given their separate framework of rights under the Conduct of Employment Agencies and Employment Business Regulations 2003 and the Agency Workers Regulations.
Ejaz commented: “Government wants to apply these rights to agency workers to avoid evasion by a few rogue employers switching away from direct employment. We are more concerned about the million temps who went to work this morning and protecting their opportunities. The plans are using a hammer to crack a nut. Agency workers are well protected by law already and choose to work flexibly; exempting agency workers from the new rules is a simple way to make the law changes work without unnecessarily upending the temporary labour market. Fears of a loophole created by such a carve-out for agency workers are exaggerated, as businesses will still need to maintain a pool of directly engaged staff to effectively manage their resources and staff workloads.
“When someone chooses to work through an agency, they understand the temporary nature of their role. Guaranteeing their hours after 12 weeks on assignment, or to provide ‘reasonable notice’ of shifts isn’t within the gift of an agency. There are alternatives to this that could be delivered within the framework of existing agency regulations, and the REC is ready to work with government on this.”
Fire and rehire
The government is seeking views on measures to strengthen the collective redundancy framework and protections for employees against fire and rehire practices. REC strongly supports the principle of the government’s reforms in this area, but it has concerns about the method and detail of the government’s proposals.
“Fire-and-rehire practices are not an appropriate way to manage staff outside the most extreme scenarios, but it is important that dismissal and re-engagement remains available in some way as a necessary tool for businesses,” said Shazia. “The government should focus on strengthening the existing Code of Practice rather than pushing through rigid primary legislation that could present a higher bar to essential business restructuring than they intend. The previous government worked in close partnership with businesses to develop this Code, ensuring it reflects real business needs. It offers clear, practical guidance for managing significant changes in a way that works for both employers and employees.”
