Campaigning for employment rights Hannah Reed Senior Employment Rights Officer

The Government’s aim Making it easier for employers to sack people Making it harder for workers to enforce their rights Displacement of collective rights by individual rights

Not based on the evidence Not based on genuine consultation Based on ‘perception’ rather than fact

Myths not fact Myth: employment rights stifle growth Fact: UK has one of the lightest regulated labour markets in the world Fact: Economic research reveals no correlation between employment protection and labour market performance Fact: OECD: no one route to full employment Fact: Less regulated economies have higher inequality, more in-work poverty; poorer health outcomes

Myths not fact Myth: employment rights deter employers from recruiting more staff Fact: BIS research: fewer than 6% of SMEs think regulation restricts growth Fact: BIS research: unfair dismissal rights not among top ten of employers’ employment rights concerns Fact: Job insecurity reduces consumer confidence; suppresses demand

We’d like to know your views but … Red Tape challenge Tilting the scales Twitter-sphere Legislation without consultation

The sackers’ charter Extending qualifying period for unfair dismissal (April 2012) –More than 3 million people lose out –Young and BME particularly affected Reducing compensation in UD cases –Legislation without consultation –Impact on older workers, disabled workers, public sector workers

Negotiated settlements?

Beecroft lite  lawyers’ charter?

‘Trading rights for shares’ Consultation document published 18 Oct Closes 8 November Growth and Infrastructure Bill published 18 Oct Inadequate equality assessment No impact assessment published

‘Trading rights for shares’ Unfair dismissal –Except automatic UD; discrimination Statutory redundancy Pay –No ability to make a claim from Redundancy Payments Office Request time to train (only employees) Right to request to work flexibly - except parental leave returners Longer notice periods (8 to 16 weeks) to return early from maternity leave

‘Trading shares for rights’ Rights traded for shares valued at £2,000 - £50,000 No guaranteed voting rights, dividends or assets Forfeited at end of employment Independent valuation?

‘Trading rights for shares’ Creating new employment status Contracting out of rights in return for money Free choice? –Safeguard

Employer response CBI: niche idea CIPD: undermine morale and productivity Justin King, Sainsbury: “not what we should be doing” and could worsen the levels of trust between the public and businesses. “What do you think the population at large will think of businesses that want to trade employment rights for money?”

Costs for business Not practical Watering down equity Complex administration Costs in voluntary exits

Priced out of justice: Fees for ETs Remission scheme limited - many workers on NMW wages will have to pay fees For some ET fees = significant proportion / exceed the value of their claim * Seta Findings 2008; ** ET & EAT Stats Type of claimMedian award Total fee if claim goes to hearing Wages Act£850 * £390 Unfair dismissal£4,560 ** £1,200 Race discrimination£5,256 ** 8% success rate £1,200

Collective redundancy & TUPE rights Redundancy consultation to be reduced from 90 days to 45 / 30 days TUPE review: –Making it cheaper and easier to outsource / privatise services –Erosion of pay and conditions post transfer –Better information & consultation rights for TUs

Restricting the right to strike Voting thresholds: majority yes vote + 40% or 50% of members voting Limits on strike in essential services –Maintaining minimum level of services

Countering the attacks TUC campaign: Employee rights stop employment wrongs Agency worker rights Defending the right to strike in the European Court for Human Rights Building stronger unions in UK workplaces