Employment Rights Bill

Commons Amendments and Reasons

Motion A

That this House do not insist on its Amendment 1, to which the Commons have disagreed for their Reason 1A.

1A: Because it is appropriate for workers who meet the qualifying criteria to receive a guaranteed hours offer without having to make a request for one.

My Lords, I beg to move Motion A, and shall also speak to Motions B, E, E1, H and H1.

I start by thanking your Lordships’ House for the constructive contributions, debate and scrutiny that this Bill has received throughout its passage. The Bill has been strengthened in many places in this House, reflecting the depth of engagement and careful consideration that it received during earlier stages. At this point, I place on record my thanks to my noble friend Lady Jones for all her work at those earlier stages.

I believe that the Employment Rights Bill as agreed by the House of Commons strikes the right balance between promoting secure employment and protection against exploitative employers, while providing the flexibility that good employers need to grow. Our approach is based on the recognition that an engaged and content workforce underpins success.

By now, after the extensive debates we have had at each stage of the Bill, I know your Lordships are fully aware of the arguments that have been advanced in support of this progressive piece of legislation. The Bill delivers on the manifesto commitment to make work pay, improving protections and standards for workers. These arguments have been thoroughly rehearsed, and I will not detain the House by repeating them today. However, I will speak to Motions A, B, E and H, which address amendments that remain to be agreed across the Bill. For each of these, I will set out the clear rationale as to why the Government cannot accept these amendments.

In this group, we will be debating amendments made in this House relating to zero-hours contracts, unfair dismissal and seasonal work. This House has debated these topics rigorously and we have had the pleasure to meet the noble Lords, Lord Fox, Lord Sharpe of Epsom and Lord Hunt of Wirral, to discuss their amendments. I will take these in turn, outlining why the Government believe these amendments are unnecessary or would disrupt the balance of the Bill.

I turn to Motion H relating to Amendment 48, as well as Motion H1 relating to an amendment in lieu tabled by the noble Lord, Lord Sharpe of Epsom. The amendment in lieu seeks to insert into the Bill a new legal definition of “seasonal work”, to which the Secretary of State would have the power to add certain sectors. It would also insert a new obligation on the Secretary of State to have regard to the characteristics of seasonal work, as newly defined, when making regulations under Part 1. I thank the noble Lord again for raising the important issue of seasonal work.

The Government appreciate that work in certain sectors fluctuates seasonally. That is why consideration of issues relating to seasonal work is built into the provisions contained in Part 1. The Bill allows guaranteed hours offers to take the form of an offer to enter into a limited-term contract if it is reasonable to do so. For example, a fruit picker could be engaged on a limited-term contract to perform a specific task tied to the end of the picking season. Following the end of the initial reference period, the fruit picker’s employer would need to guarantee their hours only for the duration of the limited-term contract, not permanently.

The Bill also provides the necessary powers to address seasonal work through regulations, ensuring flexibility as needs evolve. We will consult with employers, trade unions and stakeholders before making any regulations. I hope this reassures the noble Lord that the Government’s approach will provide clarity and certainty, while maintaining the flexibility needed to support both workers and businesses.

Motion E, tabled by the noble Lord, Lord Sharpe of Epsom, addresses Amendment 23 and Amendments 106 to 120 on unfair dismissal, while Motion E1 insists on those amendments. The amendments look to reduce the qualifying period for bringing an unfair dismissal claim from the current two years to six months. They would also create a new initial period of employment during which regulations can provide for a different test for unfair dismissal and set a lower compensation cap.

We remain committed to our make work pay manifesto pledge to introduce unfair dismissal protection from day one of employment. This will ensure that the approximately 9 million employees who have worked for their employer for less than two years can challenge the fairness of a decision to dismiss them.

Our intention is to ensure that employment can provide security and predictability, and we intend to deliver this from day one on the job. The Government’s approach provides for a statutory probationary period, during which we will set light-touch standards to allow for fair dismissal for reasons relating to capability, conduct, illegality or some other substantial reason relating to the employee. This approach recognises the importance of employers being able to continue to hire with confidence.

The Government have been clear that our preference is for the probationary period to be nine months long. Contractual probationary periods are typically three to six months long, and nine months enables an employer to extend probation to give a new hire a chance to improve their performance. We will ensure that the framework is fair, workable and responsive to the needs of businesses and employees. I hope noble Lords will feel reassured that the Government’s approach upholds fairness while ensuring a balanced, evidence-based framework that supports both employees’ rights and employer confidence. I beg to move the Motions in the name of my noble friend Lady Lloyd.

Motion A1 (as an amendment to Motion A)

As an amendment to Motion A, at end insert “, and do propose Amendment 1B in lieu

1B: Clause 1, page 2, line 14, at end insert— “(1A) From the date on which this section comes into force, after the end of each reference period the employer must send the worker a written notice explaining their right to receive a guaranteed hours offer under subsection (1) and giving them the opportunity to decline such an offer. (1B) If the worker does not respond to the notice, or responds to confirm that they wish to receive an offer, the employer must make a guaranteed hours offer under subsection (1). (1C) A worker who is sent a notice under subsection (1A) may at any time ask not to receive any further notices or offers, after which the employer must not send further notices or make offers under this section. (1D) A worker who has asked not to receive notices or offers under subsection (1C) may notify the employer that they wish to start receiving notices and offers again after the end of the next reference period, after which the employer must act in accordance with subsections (1A) and (1B).”