Workers will skive off if sick pay offered from day one of illness, say Tories
Labour's plans to introduce sick pay from day one of illness will cause workers to skive, senior Tories have said.
Critics of Angela Rayner's Employment Rights Bill claim the proposals will lead to soaring absenteeism.
The Bill will end the current situation where new workers are not entitled to Statutory Sick Pay (SSP) for the first three days of a sickness – a so-called three-day waiting period. The Bill will also remove the lower earnings limit to qualify for the payment.
Labour argues the existing situation can force people to work when they are unwell, leading to the spread of infection and poorer productivity for businesses.
Lord Hunt of Wirral, the Tory business minister, argued the legislation brought with it 'a raft of unintended consequences'.
He said: 'Absenteeism is a critical issue for many businesses especially those in hospitality, retail and other service-based industries, where staff shortages can lead to disruption, cancellations and even closures.
'With the removal of waiting days for SSP and the expansion of eligibility it is essential that all of us should understand fully how these changes are going to affect absenteeism patterns across various sectors.
'One of the sectors most concerned with the potential rise in absenteeism that these changes will cause is of course hospitality.
'The concern is that the reforms could result in workers taking sick leave when it may not be strictly necessary as the financial implications of their doing so would be mitigated by the statutory sick pay payment.'
He added: 'We believe it is essential that the Government thoroughly evaluates how these statutory sick pay provisions would affect absenteeism.
'When workers can call in sick and expect SSP from day one businesses will inevitably be forced to deal with more absences at short notice.'
Baroness Noakes, a fellow Conservative peer, said: 'Extending the days for which payment is made is likely to increase the number of days lost to sickness, as the current incentive to work if the illness is mild will simply disappear.
'The Government say they have no idea what the behavioural impact of the changes will be – whether positive or negative – but I am prepared to bet that there will be far more short-duration absences, which will qualify for statutory sick pay, than there were before.'
'Bad for business'
However, Baroness O'Grady of Upper Holloway, the former general secretary of the Trades Union Congress (TUC) and a Labour peer, said: 'The Covid pandemic exposed just how precarious life is for those in insecure, low-paid work, and we do not know how many preventable illnesses were caused by people struggling into work and spreading the virus because they could not afford to stay home.
'But we do know, as we have heard, that forcing people back to work when they are ill is bad for workers and bad for business, puts pressure on the NHS and is costly for the economy.'
She argued SSP had failed to keep up with the cost of living or increases in the living wage.
Baroness Jones of Whitchurch, the business minister, said the proposed changes to sick pay would cost businesses around an extra £15 per employee, which she described as 'a relatively modest amount'.
She said: 'I assure the House that the Government remain committed to monitoring the impact of these SSP measures.
'Our proposals have to be seen in the wider context of the Bill. The Bill is intended to improve the experience of employees at work.
'For us, that is an important challenge that we intend to monitor,' she added.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
14 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Labour ‘abandons' manifesto pledge to hire more teachers
Labour has been accused of abandoning its flagship manifesto pledge to recruit 6,500 new teachers. In its pitch for the 2024 election, the party vowed to enlist 6,500 extra teachers in key subjects to tackle shortages across the country. The Government has since claimed it is on the right track, pointing to more than 2,000 new teachers recruited last year. But it has now admitted that it is not counting primary school teachers towards the target, shortly after it emerged their numbers have fallen by nearly 3,000. The revelations, first reported by TES, the specialist education magazine, have led to claims that Labour is fiddling the figures to inflate its achievements. In a statement on Thursday, the Department for Education (DfE) said there are now '2,346 more teachers in secondary and special schools in England compared to last year, as Government makes progress on its additional 6,500 teacher target '. However, the overall number of teachers in state-funded schools in England fell in 2024-25. This is because the primary school total has dropped by about 2,900, while the number of secondary and special school teachers, as well as those working in pupil referral units, has gone up by about 2,350. The DfE has since confirmed to TES that primary teachers will not count towards the 6,500 target. Outrage from Tories It has sparked outrage from the Tories, who accused Labour of abandoning one of their central manifesto pledges. Neil O'Brien, the shadow education minister, told The Telegraph: 'Labour have abandoned not just their main education pledge but one of their main promises in their whole election manifesto. 'And everyone knows why they have dropped it. The statistics show the number of teachers overall is down under Labour. 'Falling teacher numbers are driven by a particularly sharp fall of 2,900 fewer primary school teachers under Labour. So now they are suddenly saying that primary school teachers don't count, which is so rude to primary teachers.' The drive to recruit 6,500 teachers was supposed to be funded by Labour's VAT raid on private schools. But questions have been raised about the amount of cash the change will raise, with Treasury analysis suggesting it could actually require the Government to spend an extra £650 million per year. In March, the National Foundation for Educational Research found teacher vacancies in England were at their highest rate since records began. 'They broke both promises' Mr O'Brien added: 'They promised that taxing independent schools would pay for more state school teachers and also promised they would compensate schools for the national insurance tax increase. 'They broke both those promises and now children are losing out as a result, and their response is to try to fiddle the figures. It's pathetic.' Damian Hinds, the former education secretary, also suggested that the DfE had been dishonest about the target. Last year, the Tory MP tabled a parliamentary question asking which phases of education would count towards the goal. In response, Catherine McKinnell, the education minister, said: 'This Government will work with the sector to deliver its pledge to recruit 6,500 additional teachers across schools and colleges over the course of this parliament to raise standards for children and young people and deliver the Government's mission to break down the barriers to opportunity at every stage.' Mr Hinds posted on X: 'In a written question I asked ministers specifically 'which phases of education count towards the 6,500 target of new expert teachers'. 'The answer says 'across schools and colleges' and does not say 'except primary'.' The DfE has been approached for comment.
The Independent
18 minutes ago
- The Independent
Rachel Reeves must do more than hope for the best when it comes to paying for Labour's spending
R achel Reeves has an unenviable task as she puts the final touches to the government -wide spending review she will unveil on Wednesday. It will be a defining moment for the Labour government as she sets out departmental spending limits up to the next general election. The headlines garnered in the run-up to the chancellor 's big day are misleading. We have been promised £15.6bn for local transport projects, mainly in the North and Midlands; £4.5bn a year for schools; £22.5bn a year for science and tech, and £187m to bring digital skills and AI learning into classrooms and communities. While all are worthy, the government is playing a rather cynical game. Some of its pre-announcements stem from the extra £113bn of capital spending for which Ms Reeves created room last October by sensibly changing her fiscal rules so investment projects do not count towards her target to balance revenue and spending by 2029-30. However, her determination to stick to her fiscal rules to prevent a wobble on the financial markets means that Wednesday's statement will impose a squeeze on day-to-day budgets. Although overall spending will rise by an average of 1.2 per cent a year on top of inflation, big increases for health and defence will mean real-terms cuts for other budgets, possibly including the Home Office (which funds the police), housing and local government. So there has been a bruising round of negotiations between the Treasury and ministers such as Angela Rayner, who is responsible for housing and councils, and Yvette Cooper, the home secretary. During a media round on Sunday, Peter Kyle, the science secretary, did not rule out real-terms cuts to the police and housing. While the squeeze will technically be less severe than the austerity over which George Osborne presided from 2010, the danger for Labour is that it will feel like austerity 2.0 for many voters. Labour backbenchers are well aware of this and, after the party's poor results in last month's local elections in England, have pushed ministers into a U-turn on Ms Reeves's disastrous decision to means-test the pensioners' winter fuel allowance and extracted a promise from Sir Keir Starmer of more measures to combat child poverty, possibly by easing the two-child limit on benefits. There could also be a tweak to the £5bn of cuts to disability and sickness benefits hurriedly announced in March. The government must prioritise the fight against child poverty; without intervention by ministers, it would rise significantly over the five-year parliament, which would be an indictment of Labour. Ms Reeves must find a way to make good her promise in her article for The Independent last week to ensure ' every young person can fulfil their potential '. Admittedly, that will not be easy, given all the conflicting pressures on her to spend more. Although Wednesday's statement will not be a Budget, Ms Reeves should do more than rattle off a list of spending commitments without making clear where the money will come from. There is already a risk of doing so on defence. The strategic defence review unveiled last week is based on the government's ambition to raise defence spending to 3 per cent of GDP in the next parliament but it has not yet allocated the funds to go beyond a rise from 2.3 per cent to 2.5 per cent by 2027. The UK will come under pressure to commit to 3.5 per cent at a Nato summit later this month. Ms Reeves should also provide clarity on which pensioners will receive winter fuel payments in the coming winter. The about-turn has been slow and messy, to the consternation of Labour MPs. In responding to such pressures, the chancellor and prime minister have cited the economy's 0.7 per cent growth in the first quarter of this year but there is no guarantee that will be maintained. They should not lose sight of the need to balance higher spending with genuine public sector reform. There will be a limit to how much can be achieved through 'efficiency savings'. The suspicion is that, in spending more on defence, winter fuel payments and child poverty, Sir Keir and Ms Reeves are willing the ends without providing the means. They should level with the public about how their sums will add up. For now, they may be tempted to adopt a Micawberish approach in the hope that the fiscal picture improves by Ms Reeves's second Budget in the autumn. Again, that is far from certain: more holes might be blown in her headroom against her rules by an uncertain global economic outlook in the age of Trump 2.0 and the Office for Budget Responsibility downgrading its optimistic forecasts for productivity growth. Unless she changed her rules to allow more borrowing, the chancellor would then have to implement tax rises or spending cuts or a combination of both. When things might get even worse, the chancellor needs more than a strategy of hoping for the best.
Daily Mail
35 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Jeremy Clarkson, 65, opens up about his eight-hour hospital visit to undergo a prostate exam after suffering a health scare
has opened up about his eight hour hospital visit as he underwent prostate exams to check for cancer. The presenter, 65, has been keeping a close eye on his health following his hospital scare last year, where he was 'days away from death'. Jeremy revealed that he now gets a medical MOT 'every couple of years', and his last one was 'eight solid hours of thoroughness'. He shared that he underwent a cardiovascular and liver test, an ultrasound, MRI scan, none of which gave him any cause for concern until it came to the prostate exam. A prostate exam is where a doctor checks the prostate by inserting their finger into the rectum. From A-list scandals and red carpet mishaps to exclusive pictures and viral moments, subscribe to the DailyMail's new Showbiz newsletter to stay in the loop. The presenter has been keeping a close eye on his health following his hospital scare last year, where he was 'days away from death' And the Clarkson's Farm star admitted that he couldn't understand how machines can 'spot what's happening in every part of your body, apart from your bottom'. Writing in his Sunday Times column, Jeremy said: 'They can photograph your ventricles and every bit of your brain, but if they want to know what's going on with your prostate, which lives in the anus, for some reason, the doctor has to put his finger in there. I can only assume it's because he likes it.' But the former Top Gear star added that he knows the check is for his own good, and said he is happy doing the exam to make sure 'he's not going to drop dead in the morning'. He continued: 'The truth is, we do need to know this stuff. I've had too many friends go down with prostate cancer, and all it takes to get on top of the situation early is a moment or two of being a bit cross-eyed. You get the all-clear and the doc goes home happy. What's not to like? 'I went home very happy, because the initial probing and photographing suggests all is well. And let me tell you, nothing makes you feel better than knowing for sure you're not going to drop dead tomorrow morning.' Jeremy's own Gerald Cooper, who is a frequent star on his Amazon Prime show Clarkson's Farm, was treated for prostate cancer and underwent surgery in 2023. Gerald revealed in June last year that he had been given the all clear from doctors. It comes after Jeremy revealed the very unlikely reason he was arrested and thrown into a French prison aged just 19. Speaking during the new series of his Clarkson's Farm, the broadcaster blamed his brush with the law on a slug. He said: 'I once had to go to prison in France because of a slug. True story. I went to a restaurant called La Pomme d'Amour and there was a slug in my lettuce'. Jeremy explained that the apologetic waiter then offered him as much as he could drink in a bid to quickly smooth over the situation. 'I was only 19 so I thought: "I will then" And I did. I was arrested a bit later because I was a bit wobbly. I was trying to explain to the policeman that I'd eaten a slug and the man had given me a lot of drink'. 'But I couldn't think what the French for slug was. I said: "Je mange un escargot sans maison" [I eat a snail without a home]. 'They just thought: "This man is definitely paralytic", I got thrown into prison because I didn't know the French for slug.' Elsewhere during the latest episodes, Jeremy was left choked up as he thanked his farm assistant Harriet Cowan for 'saving his life' during an emotional send-off. The Top Gear legend praised Harriet, 24, - who had been stepping in for fan favourite Kaleb Cooper, 26 - was heading back to Derbyshire after lending a helping hand at Diddly Squat Farm. Getting visibly emotional, Jeremy told Harriet: 'Listen, you've been an absolute star. Thanks ever so much for everything. 'Absolutely brilliant, and best of luck, and I'll send you pictures of the barley when it's growing.' Quick as a flash, Harriet quipped: 'If there are any f**k ups don't send them to me.' Jeremy replied: 'No, I'm not. I'm not going to tell Kaleb either. That's the important thing. Saved my life, you did. You were brilliant.' As she packed up to leave the caravan she'd been living in, Jeremy quickly asked if he could call on her again if he ever got 'stuck' to which she assured him he could. Speaking directly to camera, the telly star summed it all up with: 'She's a superstar, that one.' Clarkson's kind words came after weeks of chaos at the farm following Kaleb's absence. The young farmer was away touring with his live show, The World According to Kaleb, leaving Jeremy to tackle most of the graft alone. In one scene, the TV presenter is seen stranded in the dark, stuck in a tractor and completely overwhelmed. 'I don't know anything,' he says, flustered. 'The fuse has blown [in the tractor], Lisa's in London, Kaleb's off wherever the b****y hell he is. 'It's coming up for six o'clock and all I've drilled in a whole day is a tenth of the field.' Struggling to stay afloat, he turns to land agent Charlie Ireland for help. 'I'm thinking while Kaleb is away I'm going to need a hand,' he admits. 'Is it possible for you to go away and find someone to give me a hand? Because I'm properly struggling.' Full-time farmer and nurse Harriet soon stepped in and after the fourth series dropped, fans raved 'a star is born' at the newcomer.
