Employment Rights Bill: Third Reading

**What happened:** The House of Commons passed the Employment Rights Bill at its Third Reading on 12 March 2025, by 333 votes to 100. Third Reading is the final stage in the Commons, representing the House's definitive approval of the Bill before it moves to the House of Lords. The vote confirmed the Bill's passage in its amended form after two days of debate on government and opposition amendments covering industrial relations, enforcement powers, trade union political funds, and minimum wage compliance. **Why it matters:** The Employment Rights Bill is one of the most substantial pieces of employment legislation in a generation, covering a wide range of worker protections. Key provisions include strengthened rights against unfair dismissal, improved statutory sick pay, extended rights around flexible and zero-hours working, enhanced parental leave, and expanded union recognition and industrial action rules. The Bill also establishes a new Fair Work Agency to enforce minimum wage, holiday pay, and statutory sick pay obligations. These measures affect millions of workers, particularly those in low-paid, part-time, or precarious employment, as well as employers of all sizes who will need to comply with revised obligations. **The politics:** The vote divided almost entirely along party lines. All 277 Labour MPs and 31 Labour and Co-operative MPs who voted supported the Bill, as did all voting members of the SNP (8), Plaid Cymru (4), the Green Party (4), and a majority of independents (7). All 94 Conservative MPs who voted opposed it, joined by all 5 voting Reform UK members and all 3 voting DUP members. The Liberal Democrats did not appear in the division, though Daisy Cooper spoke in the debate indicating conditional support for many provisions. There were no reported rebels on either side. The Bill sits within a broader government programme that has faced business criticism alongside other measures including changes to employer National Insurance contributions, with Conservative opponents framing the combination as damaging to growth and investment.