Labour proposes new legislation to reform zero-hours contracts, requiring regular contracts after three months.
- The push aims to address ‘exploitative’ practices, but specifics are still under discussion.
- Inspired by McDonald’s 2017 model, the three-month threshold seeks to balance worker protection with business needs.
- Concerns from businesses highlight potential growth and job costs amid the reforms.
- Conflicting opinions within the government focus on probation periods for new employment rights.
The Labour Party has announced plans for new legislation that would require employers to offer zero-hours staff regular contracts with guaranteed hours after a three-month period. This initiative, spearheaded by Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner and Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds, is seen as part of a broader effort to address what Labour describes as ‘exploitative’ employment practices.
Details regarding the implementation of this measure remain under discussion. The three-month timeframe follows a precedent set by McDonald’s in 2017, where employees were given the choice to switch to contracts with guaranteed minimum hours. While the majority chose to retain flexible terms, this model has been noted for its attempt to strike a balance between worker protections and the operational needs of businesses.
Feedback gathered during private meetings with business leaders and unions revealed divergent views. Some business representatives have argued for a longer qualifying period, whereas union officials have advocated for a shorter timeframe to provide quicker security for workers. A government insider noted that the proposed three-month period aims to elicit clearer commitments from firms, with additional details to be refined ahead of the bill’s introduction.
Labour’s commitment to tackling ‘one-sided flexibility’ includes proposals for compensating workers for late-notice shift cancellations, ensuring that sudden schedule changes do not cause financial harm to employees. Although Labour initially considered a complete prohibition on zero-hours contracts, it has since retracted this stance due to resistance, particularly from the hospitality and leisure sectors, where such contracts are valued for their flexibility.
The discussion surrounding zero-hours contracts is a critical component of Labour’s pledge to deliver the most substantial overhaul of workers’ rights in recent decades. Despite this commitment, business leaders have voiced concerns regarding the potential financial burden these reforms could impose. The Confederation of British Industry (CBI) disclosed that only 26 percent of firms are confident in their ability to absorb the financial impact without compromising growth, investment, or employment.
Policy disagreements have also surfaced within government ranks, specifically concerning the duration of probation periods under the new employment rights framework. Rayner has advocated for full employment rights to be available from the first day, subject to a brief probationary period. Conversely, Reynolds has reportedly supported a longer probationary span, possibly extending up to nine months. The employment rights bill is anticipated to be introduced in the coming weeks, as the government seeks to balance business apprehensions with its dedication to enhancing worker protections.
The impending employment rights bill aims to reconcile business concerns with Labour’s commitment to improving worker protections.
