Ministers argued that attempts to dilute day-one protection from unfair dismissal and narrow the scope of the ban on exploitative zero-hours contracts risked undermining the Bill’s intent, as per the British media reports.
Responding to the rejection of the Lords’ amendments, Helen Dickinson, chief executive of the British Retail Consortium (BRC), warned that the Bill in its current form could have unintended consequences for part-time and flexible roles, which are crucial in retail. Nearly half of the three million retail workers are part-time, many of whom rely on job flexibility to balance family or caring responsibilities.
“Retailers will be very disappointed that government has voted down the practical amendments laid down by the House of Lords, which would have maintained protections for workers while removing some of the risk of the Bill backfiring,” said Dickinson.
A BRC survey showed 52 per cent of retail HR directors expect the Bill to trigger job losses, while 61 per cent believe it will cut workplace flexibility. The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) has further cautioned that the Bill could have “material, and probably net negative, economic impacts on employment, prices and productivity”.
Dickinson stressed that while the aim of clamping down on exploitative employers is vital, responsible businesses must not be penalised in the process. With consultation on implementation due this autumn, retailers will continue to push for changes to ensure the Bill is “fit for purpose”.
ALCHEMPro News Desk (SG)
Receive daily prices and market insights straight to your inbox. Subscribe to AlchemPro Weekly!
marketing@alchempro.com
