Ban on ‘exploitative' zero-hours contracts to come into effect in 2027
Ministers have opted for a 'phased' rollout of the changes, which were a Labour manifesto promise, in order to balance safeguards for employees with 'the practical realities' of running a company.
Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has hailed the Government's flagship Employment Rights Bill, which is making its way through Parliament, as 'the single biggest upgrade to workers' rights in a generation'.
Its measures include bolstered rights to parental leave, a crackdown on 'fire and rehire' practices and the removal of the lower earnings limit and waiting period for statutory sick pay.
Under plans outlined in a 'roadmap' published by the Government on Tuesday, some changes will be implemented immediately after the Bill receives royal assent but others will take two years to come into effect.
After the legislation has passed, Conservative-era rules restricting industrial action in sectors including health and education will be abolished as the Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Act 2023 will be instantly appealed.
New protections against dismissal for striking workers will also come into effect after the Bill makes it onto the statute books.
Changes to sick pay, protections for whistleblowers, 'day-one' paternity leave and unpaid parental leave and reforms to strengthen financial security for staff facing mass redundancies will take effect in April 2026.
In October 2026, measures to end 'unscrupulous' fire and rehire practices, tightened tipping laws aimed at ensuring workers take home a fair proportion of gratuity will be implemented, the Government said.
Measures to strengthen right of access for trade unions and protect employees from harassment are now also due to come into effect next October under the roadmap.
Finally in 2027, the Government says it will have implemented:
– Full gender pay gap and menopause action plans, which aim to support women in the workplace and will be introduced on a voluntary basis from next April
– Bereavement leave
– A ban on the 'exploitative' use of zero-hours contracts
– 'Day-one' rights to protection against unfair dismissal
– Improved access to flexible working, for example by allowing people to work from home
– Strengthened protections against dismissal for pregnant women and new mothers.
Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner said the Government was 'working fast' to deliver the reforms, with some due to kick in 'within months'.
Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds said: 'By phasing implementation, our collaborative approach balances meaningful worker protections with the practical realities of running a successful business, creating more productive workplaces where both employees and employers can thrive.'
The Department for Business and Trade said that providing a 'structured timeline' would allow stakeholders to plan their time and resources to ensure they are ready for the changes.
The Government will continue to consult with 'business groups, employers, workers and trade unions' in phases on the detail of the measures, beginning this summer and continuing into the new year, it said.
Hospitality and recruitment bodies welcomed the time to prepare, while union leaders urged employers 'not to wait' for the law change before implementing the reforms.
TUC general secretary Paul Nowak said: 'It's welcome that workers will start to benefit from these long overdue changes from later this year – but this timetable must be a backstop.
'We need to see these new rights in action as soon as possible. Decent employers don't need to wait for the law to change.
'They should be working with staff and unions right now to introduce these changes as quickly as possible.'
GMB general secretary Gary Smith said: 'GMB members now know when these much-needed improvements will happen – we urge good employers not to wait; do the right thing and make these changes a reality today.'
Kate Nicholls, chief executive of UKHospitality, said: 'Clear and precise timelines on when aspects of this legislation, and the processes to deliver them, will come into force is essential, and it was important that the Government embark on providing clarity.
'There are substantial changes for businesses in the Employment Rights Bill and it's right that the Government is using the appropriate implementation periods for the most complex issues for hospitality, in order to get the details right for both businesses and workers.'
Neil Carberry, Recruitment and Employment Confederation (REC) chief executive, said: 'This clear timeline on the Employment Rights Bill gives room for full and frank consultation on how the new rules will be structured. It also gives businesses important time to plan.
'Now we have the roadmap, ongoing and meaningful engagement will be critical to ensuring new regulations allow the flexibility workers and companies value to remain.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News
18 minutes ago
- Sky News
King to warn of 'complex threats' facing UK and France - as Macron begins his first state visit
The King will refer to the "complex threats" facing the UK and France - stressing "these challenges know no borders" - as he delivers a speech to welcome President Emmanuel Macron to his first state visit. It's understood that the monarch will be referring to issues around defence, artificial intelligence and the climate crisis when he speaks during tonight's glittering state banquet in Windsor. But with political discussions in the run up to this dominated by the issue of immigration and small boats crossing from France, the King's use of the word "borders" will be seen by some as particularly interesting. King Charles will say: "Our two countries face a multitude of complex threats, emanating from multiple directions. As friends and as allies, we face them together. "These challenges know no borders: no fortress can protect us against them this time." Emphasising how the UK and France can lead the way in confronting them, he will add: "Our two nations share not only values, but also the tireless determination to act on them in the world." King Charles and the Queen are set to welcome the French leader and his wife Brigitte to Windsor Castle. It is the first state visit to take place in Windsor in more than 10 years, and marks the first state visit to the UK by an EU leader since Brexit. Today, Mr Macron will address parliamentarians in the Palace of Westminster's Royal Gallery - and on Thursday, join a UK-France summit with Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer. Defence, growth, security, migration and French tactics on tackling small boats will be discussed, with the two leaders expected to dial in to speak to other allied looking to support any future peace deal in Ukraine. Yesterday, Downing Street said that the UK's relationship with France was "key" to dealing with boat crossings, following reports French police officers had used knives to puncture a boat off the coast. Lord Ricketts, who was the Uk's ambassador to France until 2016, told Sky News that it is not the King's role to get bogged down in issues like the migration crisis. "The King won't get involved in the controversial political discussions, no, I think he's been brought up from birth to avoid that," he said. "I'm sure he has personal views and he will talk about the broader relationship but I think his job is to set the scene, to remind everyone that Britain and France are old nations, they have an enormous amount to share, the history is there and depth of personal relationships and that is the backdrop for Keir Starmer to get into the questions where maybe there are still differences." With the closeness between the two men, and the huge interest in the royals generally in France, journalist Maud Garmy from Pont de Vue magazine told us this trip will certainly attract more attention than your average political visit. "I have to admit, for French media, one of the main things about this visit is going to be the images from Windsor - because of the glamour, because of the pomp, because of the pageantry," she said. "There will be more images on French television about President Macron meeting the King in Windsor rather than him being in London for speeches with the prime minister because those images are much more glamorous, there will be a strong friendship shown, and for the media that's just pure gold." It will be the welcome from their royal hosts that will make the visit particularly special for the president and his wife Brigitte. The Prince and Princess of Wales will travel to RAF Northolt to meet the Macrons before travelling with them to Windsor, where the King and Queen will be waiting to accompany them on a carriage procession to Windsor Castle. The King and Queen paid a state visit to France in September 2023 and enjoy a warm rapport with the Macrons, who will stay in the castle during their trip.
Wales Online
39 minutes ago
- Wales Online
Nigel Farage is UK's 'most respectful' political leader, new poll shows
Nigel Farage is UK's 'most respectful' political leader, new poll shows Pollsters took the mood of the nation a year after Labour took charge Reform UK Leader Nigel Farage (Image: Getty Images ) A third of people in Britain believe Nigel Farage is the "most respectful" politician, pollsters say. Polling of more than 7,000 people and research since the general election a year ago has shown bad news all round for Labour, with a loss of support from new and existing Labour voters. Broken promises and policy u-turns were big reasons for a loss of support, the research found. Nigel Farage came out above Prime Minister Keir Starmer and Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch in questions about which leader respects people more. Research by More in Common and UCL Policy Lab asked people about the big political parties, leaders and respect and found: Most think little has changed since the 2024 General Election Two thirds of Britons think Labour lacks respect for them U-turns on winter fuel payment, welfare changes and immigration have undermined Labour's voter base Asked to give Labour a report card, Britons give them an E Since the General Election, the proportion of Britons who think that Keir Starmer does not respect people like them has more than doubled: 63% now say that the Prime Minister lacks respect for them. For our free daily briefing on the biggest issues facing the nation, sign up to the Wales Matters newsletter here Prime Minister Keir Starmer (Image: PA ) Article continues below And similarly, they feel the party he leads lacks respect too. In May 2024, 40% of Britons said the Labour Party respected them, and only 34% disagreed. Looking at Reform UK, the party led by Nigel Farage, there were high figures among those who identify as Reform voters for statements like "politicians do not respect my contribution to society" and "my values are not represented by politicians". Britons are more likely to say that Nigel Farage - rather than Keir Starmer or Kemi Badenoch - respects people like them. While a third said Nigel Farage is the figure who is most respectful, just 24% answered the same for the Labour or Conservative leader. Asked why they were turning away from Labour, the main reason voters gave - regardless of who they would vote for instead - is broken promises and u-turns on previous commitments. More than a third (36%) select this as a reason. Also high on the list is failing to deliver on the cost of living (31%), and their changes to the Winter Fuel Allowance (27%). Labour's defectors to Reform cite failures on immigration as a driving factor, while Labour's progressive defectors point to cuts to disability benefits. The polling found Labour is losing voters. Only three in five of those who previously voted for Labour would still in a general election held tomorrow but the rest are defecting across the board - 11% to Reform, 8% to Lib Dem, 4% to the Greens and 4% to the Conservatives. A further one in ten say they don't know how they would vote. There is further bad news looking at the people who backed Labour for the first time at the two most recent general elections. Of the voters Labour gained between 2019 and 2024, only 43% would back them now showing a dramatic loss among first time voters but there are also serious questions about the support among previously lifelong supporters. Article continues below Marc Stears, Director, UCL Policy Lab, said: "What voters want to know most of all is: who does this government stand for? What kind of people does it most respect? Whose interests does it put first? A lot of the electorate thought they knew the answer to that one year ago. Now they're not so sure."
Times
an hour ago
- Times
Times letters: Junking juries and the pursuit of swift justice
Write to letters@ Sir, I agree with Frances Gibb ('Don't assume that junking juries will speed up justice', comment, Jul 7) and unless strong and immediate opposition is mounted to resist any further attempts to dilute trial by jury, in my opinion it can only be a matter of time before it is abolished altogether. Chronic under-funding is not solved by creating a parallel system with inadequate resources, human and financial, as well as fewer safeguards against miscarriages of justice. Trial by jury is slower and more expensive than trial by judge and magistrates, but we should cherish and protect a system that puts the right to a fair trial by an impartial tribunal — the jury — before anything else. Ronald Thwaites KC Esher, Surrey Sir, I prosecuted many fraud cases during my career at the Bar ('Fraud suspects 'will lose their right to jury trial' ', news, Jul 5). The essential question in all of these cases was the same: namely, was the defendant behaving honestly or not. That is classically a question for a jury to use their varied worldly knowledge and experience to determine and my experience was that they did so very well. Of course, they were always directed that they must be sure of guilt to convict and must acquit in cases of reasonable doubt, which sometimes produced acquittals in cases where a single judge (or I) would probably have convicted. Cost and delay are, no doubt, concerns, but I would be very reluctant to make fundamental changes to a system which has served the interests of justice so well for so many years. Lawrence Griffiths Prosecuting counsel to HM Inland Revenue, 1969-93; standing counsel to HM Customs and Excise, 1989-93 Sir, The indication that specialist judges might in future preside over fraud trials represents common sense, not simply a means of reducing the huge backlog of cases. Some years ago I followed closely a particular trial at Southwark crown court. The first day was mostly taken up with the selection of a jury for a trial expected to last for at least two months. The judge heard pleas from potential jurors who had holidays booked and various medical appointments to attend, but the day was crowned by one candidate who stood up and said she simply could not concentrate for that amount of time. She was excused. When the trial began, there were long explanations about how a profit and loss account is compiled, accrual accounting and revenue recognition in a technology business. It became obvious to those of us in the visitors' gallery that three or four of the jurors had little idea of what was going on. Sure enough, many weeks later the jury failed to reach a verdict and the trial collapsed. Several years later I met someone at the Financial Conduct Authority, who explained that this had been one of the simpler cases and it could not contemplate taking many of the more complex ones to court. John White Petworth, W Sussex Sir, I have had more than 50 years' practice in the criminal courts (both prosecuting and defending, and also as a judge). I think it is quite wrong for any one person to be able to decide on guilt or innocence followed by a potentially long sentence of imprisonment and criminal bankruptcy. Most English judges are fair, but some are notorious for their prejudice in favour of the prosecution. The jury system is essential to protect the public against oppressive judges, police officers or even governments. As that great judge Lord Devlin wrote: It is the lamp that shows that freedom lives. Robert Rhodes KC London WC2 Sir, I am sure that Lord Evans of Weardale is doing his very best within the confines of whatever guidelines and time he has been given to find a new Archbishop of Canterbury (news, Jul 5, and letter, Jul 7), but the committee he chairs seems to have arrived at a situation where they have decided not to decide what to decide until they have decided what to do. I had a discussion a month ago with a senior churchman and suggested that six months is a long time to leave the Church of England leaderless and rudderless, and we should copy the example of the Catholic Church, who found their new Pope in less than three weeks. The CofE should set up a conclave of bishops. The conduct of it should be the same, with the bishops out of contact with the outside world until they reach a decision. It was suggested that I should write to the King, as head of the Church, to make that proposal. I have not yet done that but I am sure that he reads The Times. Alastair Stewart Nunnington, N Yorks Sir, Why does the letter from former ambassadors ('Recognise Palestine', Jul 7) fail to mention Hamas, the October 7 attacks that started this latest conflict or the hostages that were kidnapped and are still being held, but instead heaps all the blame on Israel, when the biggest barrier to peace in the Middle East has always been the threats its enemies pose to Israel's security? I too want to see a Palestinian state and have campaigned for that for decades, but the 'unconditional' recognition the letter calls for would mean doing so before any negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians on security, borders, Jerusalem or the status of settlements and would, of course, leave Hamas in place, something to which Israel can obviously not agree. Lord Austin of Dudley House of Lords Sir, It is telling that the letter signed by some two dozen former ambassadors does not include one who formerly served as an ambassador to Israel. They would understand the impractical and unhelpful nature of this suggestion and presumably refused to sign. Lord Leigh of Hurley House of Lords Sir, It is clear that, with the burgeoning numbers, there needs to be a redefinition of children's learning difficulties and disabilities ('PM facing fresh revolt over special needs help', news, Jul 7). We first need to recognise that most conditions are on a continuum; yet there is an increasing tendency to attribute a fixed label to those conditions, whatever the degree, and often after constant pressure from importunate parents. Moderate needs can and should be addressed within mainstream schools, with more specialist teachers and earlier intervention, as Bridget Phillipson, the education secretary, states. Those on the severe end of the spectrum only should require a special school. The current route to this is through an EHCP (education, health and care plan). This is a lengthy and costly process for local authorities who, understandably, wish to avoid parents taking them to tribunals. Phillipson is looking into ways of reforming the unwieldy system of special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) support. We must hope that she will not be impeded by the Labour backbench brigade. Susan Bickley Ret'd teacher; Huntingdon, Cambs Sir, Before the EHCP was introduced in 2014, the school where I taught had a thriving special needs department with teaching assistants who could work with teachers on lesson material and assist a wide number of students with various needs. The department was decimated by the change in funding, leaving certain students with full-time help but all others with none. The year I retired, in 2019, the school even lost its nurture teacher due to a lack of funding. Meanwhile, the school was paying for a 'super head' and accountants at vast expense due to the switch to becoming an academy trust. Much needs reform, not only special needs help, but parents are not going to want to lose the support for their child. The government is in an impossible position until everyone accepts the reality of what we all face and that no system is ever perfect. Amanda Walker Ret'd teacher; Walkington, East Riding Sir, Your correspondents (letters, Jul 7) focused on the impact of AI on older children and young adults. As a preparatory school headmaster (now retired 12 years), I was often asked what was my school's academic focus in the primary years. I used to say with conviction that a core aim was to equip our pupils with the academic skills that would sustain them for life if they did not have access to computers and calculators 'if the lights went out': the four rules of number; times tables; percentages; a love of reading; accurate spelling; and cursive handwriting — the last enabling them to write from the heart a love letter or a letter of condolence. Nicholas Allen Chairman, Independent Association of Preparatory Schools, 2012-13; Ipswich Sir, Specialists value hospital resources (letter, Jul 7), but in the first instance the public crave prompt access to a medical opinion, with onward referral only if necessary. A 'neighbourhood health service' and enhanced technology (the NHS app and AI especially) could facilitate this and also free up hospitals to concentrate on delivering high-class tertiary care. Many community hospitals have closed and 'Darzi centres', modelled on Continental polyclinics, were never fully implemented. Let's give Wes Streeting the chance to restore quick, effective local primary healthcare. Tim Williams Ret'd consultant surgeon; Waldron, E Sussex Sir, Matthew Parris (comment, Jul 7) refers to economics as a dismal science. Dismal, yes. Science, no. The Rev Dr JE Roulston Bonnyrigg, Midlothian Sir, Further to your leading article on village cricket (Jul 7), judges have considered similar issues in the past and agreed with your views. Perhaps one of the most memorable is Lord Denning's dissent in Miller v Jackson (1977) where he found that it was not a nuisance that cricket balls were occasionally hit on to the property neighbouring the Lintz cricket club in Co Durham. He may have got some things (dreadfully) wrong in the past, but he got this right, saying 'in summertime, village cricket is the delight of everyone' and arguing that the cricketers of Lintz should continue to play. Quite apart from all the personal benefits of playing the sport, cricket is quintessentially British; it should be allowed to thrive. Anthony Philips London, W11 Sir, Those complaining about the possibility of cricket balls hitting them or their property might consider the example of Sir William Worsley, who captained Yorkshire County Cricket Club in the 1920s. He gave a monetary reward to any batsman who broke his library window in Hovingham Hall, thus encouraging local talent. Complainants might also consider who was there first. Ann Gray Beverley, East Riding Sir, As a parent whose eldest son went to Eton and youngest to Michaelhouse in KwaZulu-Natal in South Africa, I've attended my fair share of matches at both schools over the years ('Rugby parents told off for touchline opulence', world, Jul 7). While at Eton, the June 4 celebrations steadily evolved into picnics with unbelievable extravagance, more worthy of being at a grand opera, whereas picnics at Michaelhouse remained reassuringly rustic: a sausage out of a farmer's 4×4 possibly still sizzling from the veld. How things are changing! Louisa Woods Greens Norton, Northants Sir, My parents always claimed to have had three weddings ('To have and to hold two weddings', Jul 7). Living in Chile in the 1930s, the first was the civil wedding, the legal element; next came a church one, a few days before they sailed for Liverpool. While at sea, the captain performed their third. In the 1980s they celebrated their 50th anniversary — but only the once. Alison Rollin Ruislip, Middx Write to letters@
