Latest news with #UnemploymentBill
The Independent
27-03-2025
- Business
- The Independent
New workers' rights plan is anti-business and will harm growth, critics warn
The Government's new workers' rights legislation is anti-business and will undermine economic growth, critics have warned. Shadow business minister Lord Hunt of Wirral argued that Labour's 299-page Employment Rights Bill should be called the Unemployment Bill, as it will over-burden companies and reduce hiring. The proposed new law includes a right to guaranteed hours, cracking down on zero-hour contracts without the offer of work, as well as introducing new restrictions on 'fire-and-rehire' processes when employees are let go and then re-employed on new contracts with worse pay or conditions. The Bill also strengthens trade unions and gives workers certain 'day one' rights, like sick pay, paternity leave and the right to request flexible working. Lord Hunt, who served as employment secretary in John Major's government, told peers that trade unions 'all but brought the country to its knees' in the 1970s and that the Bill is set to undo successive Conservative governments' work to redraw the social contract between employers, employees and trade unions. As peers debated the Bill in its second reading in the House of Lords, Lord Hunt predicted that it will result in a stagnating economy and worse outcomes for the very people the Government is trying to help. The Tory frontbencher said: 'Their own declared primary mission is economic growth, and yet they've put forward a policy that actively undermines it. 'This Bill is not only anti-business, in my view it is anti-worker. If it passes in anything like its current form, it could be more appropriate to call it an Unemployment Bill. 'The measures in this Bill will make it harder for existing businesses to thrive and near impossible for new ones to emerge. 'The result: a stagnating economy, diminished opportunities and worse outcomes for workers right across the country. 'The only growth this Bill would deliver is growth in industrial strife, growth in administrative costs for business, growth in uncertainty and, ultimately, growth in unemployment. 'Unless it can be seriously improved, we will oppose this Bill all the way in the best interests of the working people of this country.' Entrepreneur and start-up investor, Lord Londesborough, agreed, claiming that the Employment Rights Bill represents 'another vampire squid sucking the life out of our economy'. The independent crossbench peer highlighted warnings from the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) that the Bill may have an overall negative economic impact. He said: 'This Bill is fundamentally misguided, out of date and out of touch and will wreck the spirit of enterprise. 'It will damage jobs, productivity and wages across both the public and private sectors – and that's not just my view, but the OBR's. 'The impact assessment claiming the Bill will have a net positive impact on growth is guilty of fantasy economics, suggesting its authors have little feel for or experience of creating jobs, developing careers or even meeting payroll.' However, Labour peer Lord Davies of Brixton argued the workers' rights legislation would, in fact, help bolster economic growth. He said: 'Economic growth depends on the workers. It depends on them having good conditions of work. 'It depends on them having security, and that's why this Bill is in favour of economic growth.' Treasury minister Lord Livermore said that Labour's plan will put more money in people pockets and give them the security to spend it. He said: 'We are confident that it will result in ordinary working people having more money in their pockets, but also having the security to spend that money, because they don't have to worry from week to week whether or not they will be in work or how many hours they will get.' The OBR said it had not yet been able to take account of the Employment Rights Bill in its forecasting as there was not enough detail available on the policy. However, in its forecast released on Wednesday, it said regulations which 'affect the flexibility of businesses and labour markets' are likely to have 'material and probably net negative, economic impacts on employment, prices, and productivity'. As well as flagship changes around issues like 'fire and rehire', zero-hours contracts and 'day one' rights, the Employment Rights Bill also introduces a new statutory right to bereavement leave and a duty on employers to prevent sexual harassment at work. A Fair Work Agency would enforce this package of measures 'by bringing together' existing authorities, according to a Government explainer.
Yahoo
27-03-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
New workers' rights plan is anti-business and will harm growth, critics warn
The Government's new workers' rights legislation is anti-business and will undermine economic growth, critics have warned. Shadow business minister Lord Hunt of Wirral argued that Labour's 299-page Employment Rights Bill should be called the Unemployment Bill, as it will over-burden companies and reduce hiring. The proposed new law includes a right to guaranteed hours, cracking down on zero-hour contracts without the offer of work, as well as introducing new restrictions on 'fire-and-rehire' processes when employees are let go and then re-employed on new contracts with worse pay or conditions. The Bill also strengthens trade unions and gives workers certain 'day one' rights, like sick pay, paternity leave and the right to request flexible working. Lord Hunt, who served as employment secretary in John Major's government, told peers that trade unions 'all but brought the country to its knees' in the 1970s and that the Bill is set to undo successive Conservative governments' work to redraw the social contract between employers, employees and trade unions. As peers debated the Bill in its second reading in the House of Lords, Lord Hunt predicted that it will result in a stagnating economy and worse outcomes for the very people the Government is trying to help. The Tory frontbencher said: 'Their own declared primary mission is economic growth, and yet they've put forward a policy that actively undermines it. 'This Bill is not only anti-business, in my view it is anti-worker. If it passes in anything like its current form, it could be more appropriate to call it an Unemployment Bill. 'The measures in this Bill will make it harder for existing businesses to thrive and near impossible for new ones to emerge. 'The result: a stagnating economy, diminished opportunities and worse outcomes for workers right across the country. 'The only growth this Bill would deliver is growth in industrial strife, growth in administrative costs for business, growth in uncertainty and, ultimately, growth in unemployment. 'Unless it can be seriously improved, we will oppose this Bill all the way in the best interests of the working people of this country.' Entrepreneur and start-up investor, Lord Londesborough, agreed, claiming that the Employment Rights Bill represents 'another vampire squid sucking the life out of our economy'. The independent crossbench peer highlighted warnings from the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) that the Bill may have an overall negative economic impact. He said: 'This Bill is fundamentally misguided, out of date and out of touch and will wreck the spirit of enterprise. 'It will damage jobs, productivity and wages across both the public and private sectors – and that's not just my view, but the OBR's. 'The impact assessment claiming the Bill will have a net positive impact on growth is guilty of fantasy economics, suggesting its authors have little feel for or experience of creating jobs, developing careers or even meeting payroll.' However, Labour peer Lord Davies of Brixton argued the workers' rights legislation would, in fact, help bolster economic growth. He said: 'Economic growth depends on the workers. It depends on them having good conditions of work. 'It depends on them having security, and that's why this Bill is in favour of economic growth.' Treasury minister Lord Livermore said that Labour's plan will put more money in people pockets and give them the security to spend it. He said: 'We are confident that it will result in ordinary working people having more money in their pockets, but also having the security to spend that money, because they don't have to worry from week to week whether or not they will be in work or how many hours they will get.' The OBR said it had not yet been able to take account of the Employment Rights Bill in its forecasting as there was not enough detail available on the policy. However, in its forecast released on Wednesday, it said regulations which 'affect the flexibility of businesses and labour markets' are likely to have 'material and probably net negative, economic impacts on employment, prices, and productivity'. As well as flagship changes around issues like 'fire and rehire', zero-hours contracts and 'day one' rights, the Employment Rights Bill also introduces a new statutory right to bereavement leave and a duty on employers to prevent sexual harassment at work. A Fair Work Agency would enforce this package of measures 'by bringing together' existing authorities, according to a Government explainer.
Yahoo
29-01-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
The Tories remain hamstrung on migration
Kemi Badenoch had a big choice to make before Prime Minister's Questions today. She could have chosen to press Keir Starmer on those shocking official projections about further immigration-fuelled population growth or opted instead to hammer him on Labour's already very dodgy economic record. The first subject undoubtedly had more potential emotional resonance, especially among right-of-centre voters flirting with the idea of jumping on board the Reform bandwagon. But the second had the advantage of uniting her entire parliamentary party around its traditional objections to Labour's tendency to over-tax and over-regulate. This is one of the key narratives that the Conservatives hope to build in the public mind over the next few years – how Labour is dragging down the economy because of its ideological flaws and prejudices. And it was this latter line of attack that Badenoch followed with a perfectly serviceable degree of competence. Pointing out that last week Starmer had not been on top of the detail of his Education Bill, she then tested him on the specifics of his new Employment Bill, which she branded 'an Unemployment Bill'. Badenoch used the element of surprise a leader of the opposition has in these sessions to test Starmer's knowledge of particular clauses in the legislation currently being steered through Parliament by the leftist Deputy PM Angela Rayner. The Tory leader cited its estimated £5bn regulatory cost to business, the growing concerns of the small business sector about it, the extra sick pay costs it loads onto employers, the instant employment tribunal rights it grants to new staff and the reduction in the notice period required before workers go on strike. Starmer seemed buffeted by this blizzard of detail and tried a variety of methods to fend Badenoch off. First he mentioned the accountancy giant PwC rating Britain the second best place in the world to invest and the IMF upgrading its UK growth forecast. Then he donned the mantle of an unapologetic old Labourite by declaring: 'We believe in giving people proper dignity and protection at work.' Next, he claimed that the measures in the Bill would be 'good for workers and growth' without explaining how raising the costs and risks inherent in employing people could possibly be that. Finally, Starmer used his bully pulpit and his home crowd weight of numbers – 402 Labour MPs versus 121 Tories – against Badenoch by resorting to some fairly mindless abuse: 'She is talking nonsense…if she carries on like this she is going to be the next lettuce.' (a reference to a tabloid newspaper's depiction of Liz Truss back in the autumn of 2022). Badenoch by contrast didn't have a memorable closing soundbite, relying instead on pointing out that Starmer was backing measures that obviously fail his own purported growth test and asking: 'What's the point?' So, today was another instance of attritional political combat: unspectacular punches to the prime ministerial body rather than the kind of rhetorical knockout blows to the jaw that millions of us would love to see Starmer suffering. Right at the end of PMQs, the Tory backbencher Andrew Rosindell tried out the alternative line of attack, the one about the Office for National Statistics projecting that the population will hit 72.5 million in just seven years thanks to ongoing mass immigration. 'Who voted for that? There's no mandate for such colossal increases,' complained Rosindell. Starmer's reply was confident and brutal: Rosindell should talk to his own leader, he said, because net immigration had 'gone through the roof' under the Tories and Badenoch had been one of those cheering it on. There had been a loss of control under the last government and Labour would restore control, he added. It is an understatement to observe that had Badenoch chosen this line of questioning it would probably not have gone well for her. Hence the Tories remain hamstrung on what pollsters tell us is the number one concern of their potential voters. Until she has new policy ready to roll on this, Badenoch's angles of attack are going to remain severely constrained. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
