Division · No. 23Monday, 21 October 2024Commons Employment

Employment Rights Bill: Second Reading

386
Ayes
105
Noes
Passed · Government won
158 did not vote
Analysis
Commons

**What happened:** The House of Commons voted on 21 October 2024 to approve the Employment Rights Bill at its Second Reading, passing by 386 votes to 105. Second Reading is the stage at which MPs debate and vote on the general principles of a bill, before it proceeds to detailed scrutiny in committee. The bill, introduced by the new Labour government, represents one of the most significant overhauls of employment law in a generation. **Why it matters:** The bill introduces or strengthens a wide range of protections for workers across Great Britain. Key measures include making unfair dismissal protections apply from the first day of employment, restricting the use of zero-hours contracts, strengthening trade union rights and recognition procedures, and reforming statutory sick pay. In practical terms, the legislation affects millions of workers currently employed on flexible or insecure contracts, as well as employers who will face new obligations. Businesses, particularly in sectors relying heavily on flexible labour such as hospitality and retail, would be required to adapt their working practices significantly. **The politics:** The vote divided almost entirely along party lines. All voting Labour and Labour and Co-operative MPs backed the bill, joined by the SNP, the Greens, Plaid Cymru, and the SDLP. All voting Conservatives and Reform UK MPs opposed it. There were no Conservative rebels voting in favour, and no Labour rebels voting against. The bill fulfils a central Labour manifesto commitment, and its passage at this stage was never seriously in doubt given Labour's commanding Commons majority. The Conservatives framed their opposition around concerns about the impact on business competitiveness and flexibility, a position they maintained consistently through related economic legislation such as the National Insurance Contributions Bill debated later in December 2024.

Voting Aye meant
Support passing the Employment Rights Bill, backing stronger protections for workers including new rights and entitlements as part of Labour's 'new deal for working people'
Voting No meant
Oppose the Bill, arguing it imposes excessive costs on employers (estimated at £4.5 billion per year), risks harming small businesses, and could damage growth and job creation
§ 01Who voted how.491 voting members · 158 absent
Aye387No104DID NOT VOTE · 158

491 voting MPs. Each dot is one vote; left-to-right by party. Grey dots in the centre are the 158 who did not vote.

Aye
No
Absent
Labour PartyWhipped Aye
321
0
41
Conservative and Unionist PartyWhipped No
0
95
21
Liberal Democrats
0
0
72
Labour and Co-operative PartyWhipped Aye
39
0
3
Independent
8
3
3
Scottish National PartyWhipped Aye
9
0
Reform UKWhipped No
0
5
2
Sinn Féin
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
0
0
5
Green Party of England and WalesWhipped Aye
4
0
Plaid CymruWhipped Aye
3
0
1
Social Democratic and Labour Party
2
0
Alliance Party of Northern Ireland
0
0
1
Speaker
0
0
1
Traditional Unionist Voice
0
1
Ulster Unionist Party
0
0
1
Your Party
1
0
§ 02From the debate.8 principal speakers
Angela RaynerSupportiveAshton-under-Lyne
Bill delivers biggest upgrade to workers' rights in a generation, is pro-growth and pro-business, and extends protections to over 10 million workers while respecting small business concerns through consultation and probation periods.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (4,624 words)
Kevin HollinrakeOpposedThirsk and Malton
Bill is a rushed trade union charter that will terrify small businesses, cost £4-5 billion annually, increase strikes, and drive unemployment and price inflation without delivering growth benefits.Conservative · Voted no · Read full speech (4,429 words)
Sarah GibsonNeutralChippenham
Broadly supportive of modernising employment rights but Bill lacks detail on carer's leave, parental support, and small business viability; urges greater consultation and business rates reform.Liberal Democrat · Voted no_vote_recorded · Read full speech (1,143 words)
Graham StuartOpposedBeverley and Holderness
Impact assessment shows only marginal growth benefits while imposing serious costs on small businesses; questioned how day-one unfair dismissal rights would prevent spurious claims from being used against employers.Conservative · Voted no · Read full speech (1,248 words)
Dr Andrew MurrisonOpposedSouth West Wiltshire
Small and medium-sized enterprises lack HR resources to handle compliance; Bill will damage them disproportionately and thus undermine claimed growth benefits.Conservative · Voted no · Read full speech (105 words)
Mike AmesburySupportive
Bill represents landmark change for labour movement; delivers manifesto commitment within 100 days and marks end of exploitative practices like zero-hours contracts and fire-and-rehire.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (605 words)
Stella CreasySupportiveWalthamstow
Bill tackles harassment and insecurity; urges government to go further on paternity leave to address motherhood pay gap and create genuine gender equality in the workplace.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (820 words)
Shivani RajaOpposedLeicester East
Bill threatens entrepreneurial spirit in Leicester by imposing costs and regulations that discourage small business creation and innovation.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (1,330 words)
§ 03Related divisions.Same topic · recent
Sources
Division dataUK Parliament Votes API
DebateHansard · Commons
Stance analysisAI analysis · Claude 4.x
LicenceOpen Parliament Licence v3.0