The government has been warned against allowing amendments from Lords to extract its flagship employment rights bill, with seven leading female organizations arguing that this would inhibit efforts to tackle gender inequality.
In a joint letter to the new business secretary, Peter Kyle, seen by The independentThe Women’s Budget Group, Fawcett Society, Young Women’s Trust, Rights of Women, Women’s Resource Center, Substant Screwed and Maternity Action has warned that the measures included in the bill are “crucial to improve women’s material living conditions and to reduce the gender -based pay gap.”
The letter responds to a number of changes made by the legislation of House of Lords before the summer savings, including proposals to introduce a six-month qualifying period for unreasonable dismissal and to make a guaranteed hour contract to a right to request, rather than a right to be offered.
The employment rights bill, which is in its last parliamentary phases, was advanced by former Vice Prime Minister Angela Rayner and former Minister of Employment Rights Justin Madders.
Both have left the positions they were in when the legislation was taken through commons, which has raised concerns among campaign groups and unions.
Ominous for Sir Keir, Madders, whom he fired as Minister of Employment, is now chairman of the deputy leadership campaign for Lucy Powell, who was also fired and is the anti-leadership athlete to replace Mrs. Rayner.
As Commons Gears up to consider Lords change proposals on Monday, the collection of female organizations warned that “any delay or dilution would undermine both gender equality and the government’s promise of working people” and says the legislation is a “one-time-in-a-generation chance to help close the sex pay”.
Bridget Phillipson, the Education Secretary and the Minister of Women and Equality, insisted last week that the government planned to fully provide the Bill on Employment Rights, “No IFS, No Buts”.
However, there is fear that Lord’s changes could be accepted by concern that the legislation as it stood could inhibit the business.
The letter points to figures from the Trades Union Congress, which indicates that women are 34 percent more likely than men to be at zero-hour contracts and reach 103 percent for black and minority ethnic women compared to white men and 49 percent for disabled women. Tall from Women’s Budget Group also shows that of the 1.3 million people who do not qualify for statutory sick wages, 70 percent are women.
The letter argues that “unpacking utilizing zero-hour contracts, including for agency workers, and providing protection to workers whose shifts are canceled at the last minute” are important to promote gender equality and that such measures would mean that women “will not be out of the pocket of childcare costs that allow them to work”.
It is also stated that the day-to-be rights to request flexible work, paternity leave and statutory sick wages without a lower earnings limit are all measures that women would disproportionately benefit from.
The campaign groups said that “unpublishing utilizing zero -hour contracts, including for agency workers, and providing protection to workers whose shifts are canceled at the last minute means that women will not be out of pocket for childcare costs that allow them to work”, while “protection for the 54,000 pregnant women and new mothers a year experiencing a distinction,”
Dr. Sara Reis, Deputy CEO of Women’s Budget Group, said: “Women still make up the majority of low -wage and uncertain workers and are in favor of most of the employment rights bill.
“This legislation is a one-time-in-one-generation chance to help close gender-determined wage differences, lift the standard of living and strengthen the economy by giving these workers stronger rights and more security. But this ambition must be seen why we have written to the new minister Peter Kyle. Any delay or dilution would undermine both gender equality and the government’s promise to work people.”
The letter adds: “Women’s position in the labor market remains affected by systems and structures that disadvantages them, largely driven by the 75 percent more unpaid care work they perform than men.”
Paul Nowak, Secretary -General of TUC, has also called on the government not to dilute the bill after ministerial changes in recent days and say people expect Labor to deliver the promises it made during the ordinary election campaign.
“The government must and should deliver the promises it gave the British people last July,” he said. “Tory and Lib De Peers are desperately trying to dilute this bill. We have the shameful view of hereditary comrades blocking carers and cleaning products from getting fair treatment at work. This is not the 1800s. It is 2025.”
Bridget Phillipson, who was tackling the TUC conference last week, said, “Let there be no doubt. A year ago we were chosen to provide this law on employment rights and, Congress, that’s what we want to do.
“We will not accept any watering of the gentlemen. Forward with the Law on Employment Rights in full. No IFS, No Buts – Forward. Let’s change this country together.”
On Monday morning, Sir Keir said: “This government delivers the biggest upgrade to workers’ rights in a generation.
“Our law on employment rights is good for workers, good for businesses and good for the economy. It is a core part of our agenda to make people better off and will make a real difference in people’s lives.”