Gransnet forums

News & politics

The extension of employers rights.

(101 Posts)
Whitewavemark2 Thu 10-Oct-24 10:57:35

Day-one rights

Workers will qualify for protection against unfair dismissal from day one – a benefit for 9 million people. Previously, employees must have been at their place of work for at least two years in order to qualify.
There will also be day-one rights for paternity leave and unpaid parental leave. Maternity leave is already a day-one right. A full review of all parental-leave rights is promised alongside the bill.

Sick pay
There will be a universal entitlement to sick pay from the first day of illness for employees. Workers will get rights to sick pay from day one, rather than from day four.
Statutory sick pay is £116.75 a week and can be paid for up to 28 weeks, as long as the employee is earning an average of at least £123 a week. The government says this will be “strengthened” by removing the lower earnings limit for all workers; though the rate could be lower for workers who aren’t eligible for sick pay at all.

Probation
The government will consult on a statutory probation period for new hires; employees will still be able to claim for unfair dismissal. Ministers say this means there will be a “lighter touch” approach to letting an employee go during the probation period if the role is not working out.
The probation period will be consulted on and introduced in autumn 2026 to coincide with the enforcement of the new rights. The government now favours a limit of nine months– lengthened after pressure from businesses – which caused some disquiet among trade unions which had asked for a limit of six months.

Zero-hours contracts
More than 1 million people on zero-hours contracts will gain guaranteed working hours if they want them. Those workers, along with those on low-hours contracts, will have the right to a guaranteed-hours contract if they work regular hours over a defined period, which Labour’s original proposal said would be 12 weeks. Employees can also request to remain on zero-hours contracts if that is what they would prefer.

Fire and rehire
Fire and rehire practices will be banned in all but the most extreme circumstances, meaning employers cannot sack employees and rehire them on worse terms and conditions. There will be carve-outs, however – a move that has caused consternation from unions. Businesses at risk of complete collapse may be able to alter terms and conditions if it is the difference between going bust.

Flexible working
The law will change to make flexible working the default “where practical”, and action plans must be drawn up to address gender pay gaps and to support female employees through menopause.
There will also be stronger protections against dismissal during pregnancy and after returning to work from maternity leave.

Enforcement
The bill will establish an enforcement body called the Fair Work Agency, bringing together existing enforcement bodies, which will also enforce rights such as holiday pay. The remit of the new body is not likely to be fully clear until all the measures in the bill have been consulted on or enacted.

Minimum wage
The government plans to change the remit of the Low Pay Commission so it must take into account the cost of living when setting the minimum wage and remove all the age bands that set lower minimum wage for younger staff. It will mean a pay rise for hundreds of thousands of young workers.

BigBertha1 Thu 10-Oct-24 11:10:31

Whilst I applaud much of this I don't see how all companies can afford it. I think we will see greater automation and tech solutions rather than staff with improved rights..

GrannyGravy13 Thu 10-Oct-24 11:11:46

As an employer, I agree (and have had most of the above for many years)

I am concerned about maternity/paternity leave entitlements from day one. Reason being someone can be hired, knowing full well they are pregnant and not disclosing this fact. Small businesses will find this extremely hard both financially and physically (planning and managing workforce)

The probation period is there for a reason. Despite vigorous interview procedures and reference checking it is still in the first six months of employment that an employer gets the feel of whether or not the employee is the correct fit for their position, and in a SME that is vital.

fancythat Thu 10-Oct-24 11:23:34

We partly closed one of our businesses because of all the "rights".

While we agreed with some, and I do some of the above, in total, some meant we felt the workers were better off than we were, In an increasing number of ways.
We questioned why we were taking all the risks.
It became not worth it for us.

So we quit.

DH now has opened another business, and the only employee is himself.
Especially at our age, we have no desire to employ anyone, ever again.

Ilovecheese Thu 10-Oct-24 11:30:35

How good to see you posting again ww2

GrannyGravy13 Thu 10-Oct-24 11:33:16

Ilovecheese

How good to see you posting again ww2

I second that 👍

ExDancer Thu 10-Oct-24 11:37:27

We did the same, fancythat, now with DH as the sole owner and worker, and a smaller enterprise, we are better off than we were with a larger business employing staff.

I'm being pedantic, but shouldn't the title read 'EmployEE's rights' and not 'EmployER's'?

Whitewavemark2 Thu 10-Oct-24 11:41:21

I'm being pedantic, but shouldn't the title read 'EmployEE's rights' and not 'EmployER's'?😳😳

Not used to posting😊😊

Sara1954 Thu 10-Oct-24 11:46:20

As employers we are concerned, we had already decided that if we lose some people, we won’t replace them, some are absolutely vital to the running of the company, others we feel we could do without.
We have one person who has a lot of time off sick, and to have to pay her from day one, will be annoying.
The protection from unfair dismissal from day one makes me never want to risk taking on anyone else, frequently we’ve employed someone only to find they’re really not suited, and after three months we’ve let them go
My husband hates all this, we’re a family business, we always try to be fair and flexible, we have struggled to survive post Covid, brexit has also made things more difficult we have made cuts in director’s salaries, which incidentally were never big, we have used all our personal money to prop it up during bad times, but still we are the bad guys.

fancythat Thu 10-Oct-24 11:49:36

Whitewavemark2

I'm being pedantic, but shouldn't the title read 'EmployEE's rights' and not 'EmployER's'?😳😳

Not used to posting😊😊

I presumed it was deliberate.

Vito Thu 10-Oct-24 11:49:57

Thank you ww2, very informative.

MaizieD Thu 10-Oct-24 11:53:12

Businesses at risk of complete collapse may be able to alter terms and conditions if it is the difference between going bust.

That's a bit of a cop out, isn't it? I can see that loophole being well exploited.

I wonder if there will be any conditions which the business would have to comply with before being permitted to alter terms and conditions, such as producing a realistic Business Plan showing how the business intends to return to viability within a specified period?

I question whether it is worth it in the long run to prop up a failing business just for the sake of keeping its employees in work.

eggplant Thu 10-Oct-24 11:53:47

Zero hours contracts, especially in the Care field are an absolute disgrace. Those who put up with whatever the agency throws at them get the work.
Terrible.

kittylester Thu 10-Oct-24 11:56:17

I agree with Gg13.

And the bit about it being nice ro see you posting WWM2.

MaizieD Thu 10-Oct-24 11:56:23

The protection from unfair dismissal from day one makes me never want to risk taking on anyone else, frequently we’ve employed someone only to find they’re really not suited, and after three months we’ve let them go

Would that count as 'unfair dismissal'?

I can see Employment Tribunals getting very busy, though...

Visgir1 Thu 10-Oct-24 11:57:04

This could backfire? An employer might think twice in hiring a younger woman if they think they, will be off in Maternity leave within months, then off for a year.

Zero hours that's not going to be helpful in the NHS. Most Bank staff are in that contract, overtime in some Trusts has to go via Bank as well.

I feel sorry for small companies.

Cossy Thu 10-Oct-24 12:27:49

Sara1954

As employers we are concerned, we had already decided that if we lose some people, we won’t replace them, some are absolutely vital to the running of the company, others we feel we could do without.
We have one person who has a lot of time off sick, and to have to pay her from day one, will be annoying.
The protection from unfair dismissal from day one makes me never want to risk taking on anyone else, frequently we’ve employed someone only to find they’re really not suited, and after three months we’ve let them go
My husband hates all this, we’re a family business, we always try to be fair and flexible, we have struggled to survive post Covid, brexit has also made things more difficult we have made cuts in director’s salaries, which incidentally were never big, we have used all our personal money to prop it up during bad times, but still we are the bad guys.

I think that if the employee is not capable of doing the job, providing you’ve given sufficient feedback and training, it won’t be “unfair dismissal”

Cossy Thu 10-Oct-24 12:28:24

Visgir1

This could backfire? An employer might think twice in hiring a younger woman if they think they, will be off in Maternity leave within months, then off for a year.

Zero hours that's not going to be helpful in the NHS. Most Bank staff are in that contract, overtime in some Trusts has to go via Bank as well.

I feel sorry for small companies.

Bank staff, I believe, will be treated slightly differently.

Dee1012 Thu 10-Oct-24 12:32:57

GrannyGravy13

As an employer, I agree (and have had most of the above for many years)

I am concerned about maternity/paternity leave entitlements from day one. Reason being someone can be hired, knowing full well they are pregnant and not disclosing this fact. Small businesses will find this extremely hard both financially and physically (planning and managing workforce)

The probation period is there for a reason. Despite vigorous interview procedures and reference checking it is still in the first six months of employment that an employer gets the feel of whether or not the employee is the correct fit for their position, and in a SME that is vital.

I'm a manager and totally in agreement with this.

We work with extremely vulnerable people and the probationary period is so valuable...yes, we follow all the responsible checks and measures but that period is a much needed 'safety net'

LizzieDrip Thu 10-Oct-24 12:40:36

There will still be a probationary period:

“ The probation period will be consulted on and introduced in autumn 2026 to coincide with the enforcement of the new rights. The government now favours a limit of nine months– lengthened after pressure from businesses – which caused some disquiet among trade unions which had asked for a limit of six months.”

Many thanks WW👏👏👏

Whitewavemark2 Thu 10-Oct-24 12:55:58

Remember the scandal of the P&O sackings?

The transport secretary, Louise Haigh, said the new laws would close the loopholes exploited by P&O when it fired 800 crew without warning in 2022, and any company would now face unlimited fines for acting in such a way.
Provisions in the employment rights bill designed for seafarers will toughen laws around collective dismissal. The government will also pass regulations making cross-Channel ferry operators pay the national minimum wage of £11.44 an hour from 1 December under the Seafarers’ Wages Act.

Wyllow3 Thu 10-Oct-24 13:24:02

Brilliant to see you back WWM2, and thank you so much as ever for simply laying out the facts to allow discussion. Particularly glad to see minimum wage and fire/rehire addressed.

From the employers POV I looked at GG13's point

"I am concerned about maternity/paternity leave entitlements from day one. Reason being someone can be hired, knowing full well they are pregnant and not disclosing this fact. Small businesses will find this extremely hard both financially and physically (planning and managing workforce)"

I take the point, not sure how this can be addressed fairly.

Wyllow3 Thu 10-Oct-24 13:29:59

Surely having a probationary period with clear guidelines balances employers concerns about being able to dismiss someone? But yes, Maisie the Tribunals will be kept busy

Casdon Thu 10-Oct-24 13:31:26

Whitewavemark2

Remember the scandal of the P&O sackings?

The transport secretary, Louise Haigh, said the new laws would close the loopholes exploited by P&O when it fired 800 crew without warning in 2022, and any company would now face unlimited fines for acting in such a way.
Provisions in the employment rights bill designed for seafarers will toughen laws around collective dismissal. The government will also pass regulations making cross-Channel ferry operators pay the national minimum wage of £11.44 an hour from 1 December under the Seafarers’ Wages Act.

Welcome back WWM2, we’ve missed you. I’m particularly pleased to see this, the terrible treatment of the P&O staff showed how inadequate the previous law was at stopping exploitation of workers.

petra Thu 10-Oct-24 13:38:18

Visgir1

This could backfire? An employer might think twice in hiring a younger woman if they think they, will be off in Maternity leave within months, then off for a year.

Zero hours that's not going to be helpful in the NHS. Most Bank staff are in that contract, overtime in some Trusts has to go via Bank as well.

I feel sorry for small companies.

A lot of employers have been thinking this way for ( in my experience) 10 years.