Salaried workers could be paid illegally low wages as minimum wage set to go up tomorrow
The TUC has warned that office workers and other salaried workers could be at risk of being “cheated” out of the minimum wage by their employer.
The warning comes ahead of the introduction of the new rate of the minimum wage from Monday 1 April.
A salaried worker – many of whom are office workers – is paid an annual salary which stays the same regardless of fluctuations in the hours they work. This is paid in equal payments, usually monthly or 4-weekly.
The TUC analysis shows that for an employer to be minimum wage compliant as of 1 April:
Workers doing 35 hours per week will have to be paid at least £20,821 a year
Workers doing 37.5 hours per week will have to be paid at least £22,308 a year
Workers doing 40 hours per week will have to be paid at least £23,795 a year
Workers doing 42.5 hours per week will have to be paid at least £25,282 a year
The TUC was easily able to find online adverts for salaried jobs still advertised below the incoming minimum wage in roles.
Minimum wage non-compliance is usually associated with jobs paid at an hourly rate where non-compliance is more prevalent.
The Low Pay Commission estimates that over 430,000 salaried workers are on the minimum wage or less. But as the minimum wage rises, many more salaried workers may be within scope – and will find that they are being illegally underpaid if their salaries do not rise.
Salaried jobs have almost doubled as a proportion of minimum wage jobs since 2015. LPC analysis finds that 14.6% of minimum wage jobs were salaried in 2015 compared to 28.8% in 2023.
Unpaid overtime
Even where salaries do go up, the TUC says many salaried workers could still be facing an additional risk of underpayment. This is because many will also be putting in hours of unpaid overtime. Although they might be paid the minimum wage or above for their contracted hours, their unpaid overtime could mean they are working hourly for less than the minimum wage.
UK employers claimed £26billion of free labour last year because of workers doing unpaid overtime, according to TUC analysis. The average weekly unpaid overtime is just over 7 hours.
That means a British salaried worker who is contracted 35 hours per week who does the typical amount of overtime would need to be paid £25,000 to be paid the minimum wage at an hourly rate.
The law sets out that employers must pay at least the minimum wage for all hours actually worked, even if they are in addition to the hours in the worker’s contract.
The TUC warns desk-based office workers are often expected to put in hours of overtime as part of their job.
Underpayment in the first month
The TUC has today warned April will likely see more than a quarter of a million workers paid less than the minimum wage this month, as the new rate of the minimum wage comes into force.
The union body says the significant scale of underpayment when a new rate comes in underlines the “urgent need for investment in our enforcement system”.
TUC General Secretary Paul Nowak said: “The minimum wage is the very least employers should pay their workers. It’s their legal duty.
“But too many workers are cheated out of pay by bad bosses, who choose to pay staff illegally low rates.
“Minimum wage cheats exploit workers from a range of jobs – and desk-based office jobs are no exception.
“And to make matters worse, many desk-based workers are expected to put in hours of overtime for free. That’s not right.
“It’s time for a New Deal for Working People – like Labour is proposing – which will deliver a real living wage, boost wages across the board and beef up our enforcement system so that bad bosses can’t get away with failing to pay their staff the minimum wage.”
New TUC analysis for our 2024 Young Workers Conference shows that more than 700,000 workers aged 18-20 across the UK are set to be left out of pocket as they are paid a lower rate of the minimum wage (writes TUC’s ALICE ARKWRIGHT).
On 1 April, the National Living Wage will go up to £11.44 per hour and be extended to workers aged 21 and over. But workers under 21 will still be paid less for the same work, simply because of their age and as many as seven in ten workers aged 18-20 could lose out.
Over 700,000 18-20 year olds are paid less than this rate and they miss out on a huge £2,438 per year, or £47 per week, at a time when the cost of living is still sky high. This is completely unfair.
Young workers have been let down time and time again by this Tory government.
They have entered the labour market at a time when insecure work has exploded. Insecure work is characterised by low pay, less training and development, uncertainty in hours and fewer employment rights.
Despite only making up 11 per cent of the total workforce, young workers make up 40 per cent of the 1.18 million workers employed on a zero hours contract.
And young women and young BME workers are more likely to be on them.
Some young workers are not even being paid – a quick search of recruitment sites finds multiple internship adverts with no mention of pay, including one asking for 3 years’ experience.
Imagine working hard in a job for nearly two years – only to be let go with no recourse.
Young people are always hit hardest during times of uncertainty, which they’ve faced time and time again in the last 14 years. Youth unemployment rose dramatically after the financial crisis and more recently during the pandemic. And we are seeing it rise again. The unemployment rate is highest for young BME and young disabled workers.
A lack of decent work, training opportunities including good quality apprenticeships and careers services are keeping unemployment rates higher than they need to be and increases the risk of longer-term unemployment, which has significant scarring effects on young people’s future living standards and wellbeing.
Every day we hear stories about sexual harassment in our workplaces. 2 in 3 young women have experienced harassment at work and they are particularly at risk of harassment from third parties such as clients, customers and patients.
Last year, ministers promised to bring in a new law to put the onus on employers to keep their staff safe from this type of abuse.
But instead, they buckled to Tory backbenchers, massively watered down the legislation and let down young women across the country.
Alongside this failure to protect workers, this government have also introduced new anti-strike laws which mean a generation of young people could lose their right to strike.
We must give young people a good start at working life.
Labour’s New Deal for Working People stands in stark contrast to the Conservatives’ dire record on workers’ rights. It would:
Ban zero-hours contracts to help end the scourge of insecure work.
Ensure all workers get reasonable notice of any change in shifts or working time
Give all workers day one rights on the job, scrapping qualifying time for basic rights, such as unfair dismissal, sick pay, and parental leave for all workers.
Remove the discriminatory age bands from the minimum wage to ensure every adult worker benefits from fair pay.
Ban unpaid internships; and
Require employers to ensure workplaces are free from harassment, including by third parties.
And Labour have committed to reform the National Careers Service and the failed Apprenticeships Levy into a ‘Growth and Skills Levy’ that works across all nations and regions.
At Young Workers Conference, members from across our movement will debate what a better future for young people looks like and the need for this transformative New Deal.
On 18 March, the TUC wrote to Business and Trade Secretary Kemi Badenoch in response to the news that the UK continues to be in active trade talks with Israel (writes TUC’s Rosa Crawford).
The government concluded the latest round at the end of February.
The TUC believes trade negotiations must be used to ensure respect for human rights and international law.
Since the UK launched trade talks on an updated trade agreement with Israel in March 2022, the TUC has consistently stated it does not believe the government should engage in these negotiations, given Israel’s persistent violation of international law, UN resolutions and systematic violations of Palestinian labour and human rights.
In light of the Israeli government’s military operations in Gaza in recent months where these violations have intensified, our letter calls for the government to:
end trade talks with Israel
end arms sales and military collaboration
end the UK’s trade in goods from the Occupied Palestinian Territories
On 26 January the International Court of Justice (ICJ) found it ‘plausible’ that Israel’s acts could amount to genocide against the Palestinian people in Gaza and issued binding provisional measures.
The UK government has an obligation as a party to the Genocide Convention to take measures to prevent genocide. It is therefore incumbent on the government to ensure Israel acts in accordance with the ICJ ruling.
Our letter follows the TUC’s General Council statement unequivocally condemning the shocking attacks on Israeli civilians by Hamas, calling for the immediate, unconditional release of all hostages unharmed, and calling for an immediate humanitarian ceasefire in Gaza.
In February the TUC wrote to the Foreign Secretary Lord Cameron calling for an immediate ceasefire accompanied by a political process. It expressed disappointment the UK government had so far failed to support such a ceasefire.
The TUC calls on the government to support genuine efforts towards a just, lasting and comprehensive peace that is consistent with international law, and is based on a two-state solution, which promotes equality, democracy and respect for human and labour rights.
controversial two-child limit on benefits a key driver, says CPAG
YESTERDAY’Sofficial poverty statistics show child poverty has reached a record high with an estimated 100,000 more children pulled into poverty last year.
The DWP’s annual Households Below Average Income shows 4.3 million children (30%) were in poverty in the year to April 2023. It shows:
100,000 more children were pulled into relative poverty (after housing costs). That means 4.3 million children (30% of all UK children) were in poverty – up from 3.6 million in 2010-11.
69% of poor children live in working families
46% of children in families with 3 or more children are in poverty, up from 36% in 2011/12.
Poor families have fallen deeper into poverty: 2.9 million children were in deep poverty (i.e. with a household income below 50% of after-housing-costs equivalised median income) 600,000 more than in 2010/11
36% of all children in poverty were in families with a youngest child aged under five
47% of children in Asian and British Asian families are in poverty, 51% of children in Black/ African/ Caribbean and Black British families, and 24% of children in white families
44% of children in lone parent families were in poverty
34% of children living in families where someone has a disability were in poverty
Alison Garnham, Chief Executive of Child Poverty Action Group and Vice-Chair of the End Child Poverty Coalition, said: “In a general election year, nothing should be more important to our political leaders than making things better for the country’s poorest kids.
“But child poverty has reached a record high, with 4.3million kids now facing cold homes and empty tummies.
“We know that change is possible but we need to see a commitment from all parties to scrap the two child limit and increase child benefits. Anything less would be a betrayal of Britain’s children.”
Liv Eren 20, who grew up in poverty, says: “As an 8-year-old I couldn’t go on the school trip, as a 12-year- old I was wearing last year’s school blazer and that feeling – that knock to your self-esteem – never really leaves you.
“People say growing up in hardship can motivate you, but what could I do aged 8 or 12?. It’s awful.”
Schools are seeing the effects of rising child poverty every day.
Tom Prestwich, Headteacher at Jubilee Primary School in Lambeth said: The levels of poverty we are seeing in school now and the numbers of children affected by it, are the worst I have seen.
“This can have a significant impact on our pupils’ ability to learn and on their overall wellbeing. Pupils who are coming to school hungry, pupils who are overtired because they are struggling to sleep in difficult home conditions, pupils who are cold or uncomfortable because of the clothes they have to wear are all at a disadvantage right from the start of their day.
“We do as much as we can to counteract this. We have breakfast clubs, give out fruit and bagels every day, give out old uniforms and support as much as we can with parents battling for improved housing but it does feel like the gap between disadvantaged and non-disadvantaged families is widening.
“This is happening at a time when school budgets are ever more stretched and our capacity to help and support families is reduced as a result.”
Simon Kidwell, head teacher at Hartford Manor Primary School in Cheshire, and president of school leaders’ union NAHT, said: “At my school even working families are accessing local food banks and seeking support with uniform and school trip expenses.
“We hear from our members how schools are increasingly finding themselves having to step in and support pupils and families, with local authority budgets stretched to breaking point.”
In addition to the rise in relative child poverty (measured as living on less than 60% of today’s median income) the DWP’s figures show an increase in the number of children in absolute poverty (measured as living on less than 60% of what the median income was in 2010).
Since absolute poverty should always reduce over time as living standards generally rise, the increase is a clear warning that not only are more children being dragged below the relative poverty line, but living standards for children are falling over time, their hardship deepening.
Commenting on the publication of the latest official figures on UK poverty, which show that the number of people living below the poverty line in working households is 1.6 million higher than in 2010, TUC General Secretary Paul Nowak said:“Hard work should pay for everyone. But millions of working families in this country are struggling to cover even the basics.
“In-work poverty has rocketed over the last 14 years.
“The Tories have presided over epidemic levels of insecure work, brutal cuts to social security and years of feeble wage growth.
“Working people deserve far better.”
Households Below Average Income statistics can be found here:
Latest Accredited Official Statistics and Official Statistics published
Covering the period until March 2023, the latest statistics show little recent change in poverty levels for children and pensioners. Poverty for working-age adults is slightly higher than in recent years, which could be driven by people becoming economically inactive as a result of the pandemic.
The four child poverty measures in the Child Poverty (Scotland) Act (relative and absolute poverty, combined low income and material deprivation, and persistent poverty) are broadly stable over the recent period. These measures are based on single-year figures which tend to fluctuate year on year, and the three-year averages provide a robust indication of trends.
While the poverty risk is much lower for children where someone in the household is in paid work compared to those in workless households, not all work pays enough to lift the household above the poverty line. Over two thirds of children in poverty live in a household with someone in paid work. This proportion has increased markedly over the past decade or so as more people move into employment.
Other key points are:
Working-age adults (21%) and pensioners (15%) are less likely to be in relative poverty after housing costs compared to children (24%).
Relative poverty has been broadly stable for all age groups. Adults under 25 are more likely to be in poverty than older adults.
Minority ethnic households are more likely to be in poverty compared to white British households. Muslim adults have higher rates of poverty compared to adults of Christian and those with no religion. Some of this difference may be explained by these households being younger.
The two full statistical publications are available here:
Poverty and Income Inequality in Scotland contains statistics on poverty, child poverty, poverty risks for various equality characteristics, household income and income inequality for Scotland. This report also includes statistics on household food security.
The data comes from the Department for Work and Pensions’ (DWP) Family Resources Survey, Households Below Average Income dataset. Comparable UK income and poverty figures are published on the same day by DWP.
Figures are presented as three-year averages of each estimate. Three-year estimates best identify trends over time. Data collected during the year between April 2020 and March 2021 are excluded from the most recent estimates as response rates were affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. As a result, estimates covering this period are for two years rather than three.
The four child poverty measures in the Child Poverty (Scotland) Act are based on single-year figures. These are available in the reference tables and in the child poverty summary.
Persistent Poverty in Scotland presents estimates of the proportion of people in Scotland who live in persistent poverty. The data comes from the Understanding Society Survey, and the latest statistics cover the period from 2018 to 2022.
These poverty statistics are used by the Scottish Government and other organisations to monitor progress in tackling poverty and child poverty, and to analyse what drives poverty and what works for tackling poverty and income inequality.
Relative poverty: A person is in relative poverty if their current household income is less than 60% of the current UK median. Increases in the proportion of people living in relative poverty indicate that the gap between the poorest and middle income households is widening.
Absolute poverty: A person is in absolute poverty if their current household income is less than 60% of the UK median in 2010/11, adjusted for inflation. Increases in the proportion of people living in absolute poverty indicate that prices are rising faster than the incomes of the poorest households.
Combined low income and material deprivation identifies the number of children in families that cannot afford basic essential goods and services because of a low income (below 70 percent of the middle household income).
Persistent poverty identifies the number of people in relative poverty for three or more out of four years. People who live in poverty for several years may be affected by it through their lifetime.
Household income is adjusted for household size.
The poverty publications present poverty figures before and after housing costs. Before housing costs figures are a basic measure of household income from earnings and benefits. After housing costs figures subtract spending on rents, mortgage interest payments and other unavoidable housing costs from this basic income.
In Scotland, poverty statistics focus mainly on poverty after housing costs. The poverty estimates in the child poverty summary refer to relative poverty after housing costs.
Warning comes as new analysis shows that public sector pay is lower in real terms than 20 years ago
1 in 4 public sector workers say they have struggled to pay household bills over the last year
TUC calls on Chancellor to “act in the national interest” and invest in public services and its workforce at Wednesday’s Budget
Services will only get worse unless ministers deal with staffing crisis, says TUC
Nearly two-fifths of public sector workers (38%) have already taken steps to leave their profession to get a job in another field, or are actively considering it, according to new TUC polling published this week.
The poll of more than 1,000 public sector workers – conducted by Opinium – comes as the union body warns that public services are facing a “mass exodus” of key workers unless the government invests in public services and the workforce at the Budget.
According to TUC analysis, around 2.2 million public sector workers are seriously thinking about quitting their jobs for good.
Pushed to the brink by years of falling pay
The TUC says the recruitment crisis plaguing public services has been compounded by years of “brutal” real-terms pay cuts.
New TUC analysis shows that 2022 and 2023 was the worst two-year period for public servant pay since records began – with average salaries falling by 7% in real terms.
The union body estimates that median pay across the public realm is now £42 per week (£2.2k a year) lower in real terms than in 2010 and is still worth less now than in 2004.
According to today’s poll:
Over a quarter (27%) of public sector workers have struggled to pay a household bill over the last year – a number that rises to 1 in 3 (33%) for female staff.
A fifth (22%) have taken on additional debt to cope with the cost of living.
1 in 8 (13%) have gone without food.
1 in 10 (10%) have used a foodbank.
Acting in the national interest
The TUC says the Chancellor “must act in the national interest” and invest in public services and the public sector workforce at the forthcoming Budget.
The union body said strong public services are essential for economic growth.
The TUC highlighted that without action to address the pressure on frontline services, economic inactivity would continue to grow.
Nearly three million people in the UK are currently economically inactive due to long-term sickness.
TUC General Secretary Paul Nowak said: “Years of underfunding and mismanagement have left our public services and their workforce at breaking point.
“Every month experienced and dedicated public servants are quitting in droves because they are burned out, feel downtrodden, undervalued and are struggling to pay their bills.
“If the Chancellor does not invest in our public services the staffing crisis will only get worse and communities across Britain will continue to suffer.
“That means dealing with issues like pay and intolerable workloads.
“The idea that the public sector can do more with less has been tested to destruction over the last 14 years.
“The fastest way to get public sector productivity rising is to pay people fairly and invest in the equipment and technology they need to do their jobs.
“Strong public services are vital for growth and for the well-being of the country. Jeremy Hunt must act in the national interest and provide the funding local services desperately need.”
UNISON General Secretary, and chair of the TUC’s Public Services Liaison Group, Christina McAnea said: “The government has consistently starved public services of resources. Most are now in a perilous state, with too few staff to deliver a quality service.
“Across health, education, local government, police forces and social care, workers feel guilty they can’t do more to help those needing help and support because services are so stretched.
“Everything feels broken and no longer functioning as it should. No wonder so many key workers are leaving their jobs.
“The public wants good, properly resourced, well-staffed essential services. Yet more cuts will simply push services to point of collapse.”
Chancellor expected to unveil a Spring Budget that will deliver long term growth
Jeremy Hunt will set out a plan to build a high wage, high skill economy
Sets out path to more investment, more jobs, more productive public services and lower taxes
The Chancellor will today deliver a Spring Budget that will deliver a long-term plan for growth in the United Kingdom.
Since the Prime Minister set out his five priorities for the government last year, inflation has more than halved from 11% to 4%, the economy has recovered more quickly from the pandemic than first thought, and debt is on track to fall.
Thanks to the stability their economic plan has brought, the country is now at a turning point but there is more work to do to bring inflation down further.
Jeremy Hunt will highlight the government’s focus on the long-term decisions needed to strengthen the British economy and give people the opportunity to build a wealthier, more secure life for themselves and their family.
The Chancellor is expected to say:“In recent times the UK economy has dealt with a financial crisis, a pandemic and an energy shock caused by a war on the European continent.
“Yet despite the most challenging economic headwinds in modern history, under Conservative governments since 2010 growth has been higher than every large European economy – unemployment has halved, absolute poverty has gone down, and there are 800 more people in jobs for every single day we’ve been in office.
“Of course, interest rates remain high as we bring down inflation. But because of the progress we’ve made because we are delivering on the Prime Minister’s economic priorities we can now help families with permanent cuts in taxation.
“We do this not just to give help where it is needed in challenging times. But because Conservatives know lower tax means higher growth. And higher growth means more opportunity and more prosperity.
“But if we want that growth to lead to higher wages and higher living standards for every family in every corner of the country, it cannot come from unlimited migration. It can only come by building a high wage, high skill economy. Not just higher GDP, but higher GDP per head.
“And that’s the difference with the Labour Party. They will destroy jobs with 70 new burdens on employers, reduce opportunities by halving new apprenticeships and risk family finances with new spending that pushes up tax.
“Instead of going back to square one, our plans mean more investment, more jobs, more productive public services and lower taxes – sticking to our plan in a Budget for Long Term Growth.”
Mr Hunt will go on to warn:“An economy based on sound money does not pass on its bills to the next generation.
“When it comes to borrowing, some believe there is a choice between responsibility and compassion. They are wrong.
“It is only because we responsibly reduced the deficit by 80% between 2010 and 2019 that we could generously provide £400 billion to help families and businesses in the pandemic.
“The Labour Party opposed our plans to reduce the deficit every step of the way. But at least they were consistent.
“The Liberal Democrats supported controlling spending in office, but now want to prop up a party after the election that will turn on the spending taps. It’s the difference between Labour with no plan and the Liberal Democrats with no principles.
“But we say something different.
“With the pandemic behind us, we must once again be responsible and increase our resilience to future shocks. That means bringing down borrowing so we can start to reduce our debt.”
Chancellor’s promise of “long-term growth” is “farcical”
Responding to the Chancellor’s promise of a “Budget for Long Term Growth” TUC General Secretary Paul Nowak said: “The Chancellor’s promises are farcical.
“The Conservatives have been in power for 14 years. It’s a bit late for them to come up with a plan for long-term growth – especially when our economy is in recession.
“This is desperate spin from a government that has manifestly failed on growth, living standards and public services.”
Nearly 50 organisations including the TUC, Citizens Advice, Joseph Rowntree Foundation, Fawcett Society, Maternity Action, Women’s Budget Group and Liberty call on government to reconsider its plans
Unions, legal networks and rights organisations have today (Monday) slammed the government’s decision to reintroduce employment tribunal fees.
In a joint statement penned by 48 organisations and campaigners including the TUC, Citizens Advice, Maternity Action, Women’s Budget Group, Liberty, Joseph Rowntree Foundation, Fawcett Society, Mother Pukka, the groups call on the government to urgently reconsider its plans.
In 2017, after Unison brought a legal challenge, the Supreme Court quashed the previous tribunal fees regime because it “effectively prevents access to justice and is therefore unlawful.”
The joint statement says the decision will put yet another hurdle in front of those seeking justice, highlighting the existing barriers working people face including:
Lack of awareness of key employment rights and the process for bringing a claim.
Strict time limits on filing claims.
An under-resourced employment tribunal system leading to significant delays in cases being heard.
An under-funded labour market enforcement system that doesn’t have enough inspectors to proactively enforce employment rights.
The groups say that introducing fees will encourage exploitation of workers:
“We believe this will deter many from lodging worthy claims and gives a green light to bad employers to exploit their workers.
“Bad employers are being given the go-ahead to undercut good ones, safe in the knowledge they are less likely to face claims in the employment tribunal.
“Employment rights are only real if they are enforced. Tribunal fees risk pricing many workers out of workplace justice.”
They raise concerns about the impact on workers in the middle of a cost of living crisis:
“Workers seeking recovery of wage theft, unpaid redundancy pay and compensation for unfair dismissal are to be asked to stump up extra money at an incredibly tough moment in their lives.
“Fee exemption procedures are complex and difficult to understand for many, especially within the three months’ time limit for most claims.
“Fees are also being levied at a time when rising inflation and subdued wages are putting pressure on family budgets. Access to justice must never be contingent on your ability to pay.”
And they warn that those at the sharp end includes workers already at high risk of mistreatment
“Tribunal fees risk pricing many workers out of workplace justice, especially workers at greater risk of employment law violations such as pregnant workers, disabled workers and migrant workers.”
TUC General Secretary Paul Nowak said: “All working people should be able to enforce their rights. But introducing fees for tribunals puts yet another hurdle in the way of those seeking justice at their most vulnerable moment.
“The Conservatives have already tried this and failed. Last time they introduced tribunal fees, claims dropped by two-thirds. And the Supreme Court threw fees out – saying they interfered with access to justice.
“That should have been the nail in the coffin for these cynical plans, but ministers have decided to side with bad bosses over workers and resurrect employment tribunal fees.
“Employment tribunal fees give employers a pass to exploit workers – whether it’s discrimination, unfair sackings or withheld wages.
“Working people shouldn’t be picking up the bill for exploitative employers’ poor behaviour. It’s plain wrong. Ministers must halt their plans without delay.”
Rosalind Bragg, Director at Maternity Action Group, said: “For pregnant women and new mothers in the cost of living crisis, every penny counts. Charging fees for employment tribunal claims puts the justice system out of reach for women at a time when they are most in need of protection.
“If the Government is serious about stamping out maternity discrimination, they should be reducing barriers to justice not increasing them. Fees will reduce the deterrent effect of the employment tribunal, reassuring bad employers that they can get away with breaking the law.
“We have laws in place to secure equal treatment of pregnant women and new mothers at work but these are ineffective without the robust operation of the employment tribunal.
“Fees are a step backwards in the fight for gender equality.”
The Joint Statement reads:
As organisations that advocate for workers’ ability to enforce their rights, we strongly oppose the government’s plans to impose fees on people who file an employment tribunal claim.
Following a landmark victory by trade union UNISON, the previous employment fees regime was ruled unlawful by the Supreme Court due to its restriction on access to justice and discriminatory impact.
It appears the government is intent on repeating the mistakes of the past.
We believe reintroducing tribunal fees would block many from lodging worthy claims and give a green light to bad employers to exploit their workers.
There are already considerable barriers to those seeking justice at work:
An under-resourced employment tribunal system leading to significant delays in cases being heard.
An under-funded labour market enforcement system that doesn’t have enough inspectors to proactively enforce employment rights.
Lack of awareness of key employment rights.
A complicated process for bringing a claim.
Difficulty in accessing legal support.
Strict time limits on filing claims.
Workers seeking recovery of wage theft, unpaid redundancy pay and compensation for unfair dismissal are to be asked to stump up extra money at an incredibly tough moment in their lives. Fee exemption procedures are complex and difficult to understand for many, especially within the three months’ time limit for most claims.
Fees are also being levied at a time when rising inflation and subdued wages are putting pressure on family budgets. Access to justice must never be contingent on your ability to pay.
Meanwhile bad employers are being given the go-ahead to undercut good ones, safe in the knowledge they are less likely to face claims in the employment tribunal.
Employment rights are only real if they are enforced. Tribunal fees risk pricing many workers out of workplace justice, especially workers at greater risk of employment law violations such as pregnant workers, disabled workers and migrant workers.
We urge the government to reconsider its plans.
Signatories:
Trades Union Congress
Focus on Labour Exploitation (FLEX)
Maternity Action
Pregnant Then Screwed
Young Women’s Trust (Clairee Reindorp, CEO)
Liberty
Mother Pukka, Anna Whitehouse
Inclusion London
BARAC UK
Citizens Advice
Anti Trafficking and Labour Exploitation Unit (ATLEU)
The William Gomes Podcast
After Exploitation
Latin American Women’s Rights Service (LAWRS) for Refugees
Migrant Voice
Kalayaan
Work Rights Centre
Southeast and East Asian Centre (SEEAC)
Kanlungan Filipino Consortium
Immigration Law Practitioners’ Association (ILPA)
Community Policy Forum
Right to Remain
Advice Services Alliance
Anti-Slavery International
Migrants’ Rights Network
Disability Rights UK
Legal Action Group
Protect
Fawcett Society
Your Employment Settlement Service
Just Fair
Labour Behind the Label
Legal Aid Practitioners Group
Highfields Centre
War on Want
The Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants (JCWI)
NEW ANALYSIS reveals 2 in 3 zero hours contract workers have been with their current employer for over a year
TUC says a ban on zero-hours contracts is “long overdue”
Union body says “employers need to get on board with the New Deal”- following business calls to scale back the package.
The overwhelming majority of zero-hours contract workers are “stuck” on zero hours contracts in the long-term, the TUC has warned.
The union body warns hundreds of thousands of workers are being trapped in low-pay and insecurity, with bad employers “parking workers on zero-hours contracts for years on end”.
The new analysis reveals:
2 in 3 (66%) zero-hours contract workers have been with their current employer for over a year.
Almost half (46%) of zero-hours contract workers have been with their current employer for over 2 years.
Astonishingly, 1 in 8 (12%) zero-hours contract workers have been with their current employer for over 10 years.
Only a minority of zero hours contract workers are on the precarious contracts as a stop gap, temporary measure. Just 7% of zero-hours workers have been with their current employer less than 3 months.
TUC polling in 2021 showed that by far the most important reason that people take zero-hours contract work is because that is the only work available.
Almost half (45%) of respondents said that this was the most important reason for them being on zero-hours contracts while 16% said it was the typical contract in their line of work.
Just 9% cited work-life balance as the most important reason – and the TUC says many in this group would prefer the opportunity to work flexibly within a secure job.
Structural racism in action
The latest available data show there are 1.15 million people on these contracts.
Black and minority ethnic (BME) women are nearly three times as likely to be on zero-hours contracts as white men (6.8% compared to 2.5%),
TUC analysis published in August revealed the number of BME workers in insecure work more than doubled from 2011 to 2022 (from 360,200 to 836,300).
The TUC says this increase in zero-hours contracts for BME workers reflects “structural racism in the jobs market”.
Lack of control
The TUC says zero-hours contracts hand the employer total control over workers’ hours and earning power, meaning workers never know how much they will earn each week, with their income subject to the whims of managers.
The union body argues that this makes it hard for workers to plan their lives, budget and look after their children.
And it makes it harder for workers to challenge unacceptable behaviour by bosses because of concerns about whether they will be penalised by not being allocated hours in future.
Such insecurity can be particularly challenging for those who have caring responsibilities, who are overwhelmingly women, says the TUC.
New deal
The TUC says a ban on zero-hours contracts is “long overdue” – and is calling for all workers to have a right to a contract that reflects their regular hours.
Recent TUC polling revealed 6 in 10 (63%) already support a ban zero-hours contracts – including 60% of Conservative 2019 voters.
Labour is promising a ban on zero-hours contracts as part of its New Deal for Working People – which it says it will deliver with an employment bill in its first 100 days, if elected.
The union body says “employers need to get on board with Labour’s New Deal”- following business calls to scale back the package.
TUC General Secretary Paul Nowak said: “Everyone should be treated fairly at work. But too many workers – especially Black and ethnic minority women – are trapped in low-paid jobs on zero-hours contracts, with few rights and protections and no guarantee of shifts.
“Bad employers are parking workers on zero hours contracts for years on end. It’s not right.
“These precarious contracts hand almost total control over workers’ hours and earning power to managers – making it nigh on impossible to plan budgets and childcare.
“Insecure work has boomed on the Conservatives’ watch over the past 14 years – with the number of workers on zero hours contracts hitting the one million mark.
“That’s why a ban on zero hours contracts is long overdue. Working people should have a right to a contract that reflects their regular hours of work.
“It’s time for a New Deal for Working People, like Labour is proposing – which includes a ban on zero hours contracts, ensuring workers get reasonable notice of shifts and an end to fire and rehire.”
Commenting on reports in The Times on business calls to scale back Labour’s New Deal for Working People, alongside a poll showing the plans are “extremely popular” with the public, TUC General Secretary Paul Nowak said: “Employers need to get on board with Labour’s New Deal for Working People – and good employers will.
“The UK’s long experiment with a low-rights, low-wage economy is a complete failure. The Tories’ lack of an economic plan for jobs, growth and living standards has cost workers and industry dear.
“Labour’s New Deal for Working People stands in stark contrast to the Conservative’s dire record.
“And it would be good for our economy too. Decent, secure jobs are essential to building a motivated, healthy, innovative workforce – all vital for high productivity growth.”
New TUC analysis reveals Women’s Pay Day – the day when the average woman stops working for free compared to the average man – is today (Wednesday)
In some industries and in some parts of the country where the gender pay gap is wider, women effectively work for free for even longer
Union body says Labour’s New Deal for Working People would be “huge boost” for working women, by introducing fair pay agreements in social care, banning zero-hours contracts and giving all workers a day one right to flexible work
New TUC analysis published today (Wednesday) reveals that the average woman effectively works for free for nearly two months of the year compared to the average man.
This is because the gender pay gap for all employees currently stands at 14.3%.
This pay gap means that working women must wait 52 days – nearly two months – before they stop working for free on Women’s Pay Day today (Wednesday).
And the analysis also shows that at current rates of progress, it will take 20 years – until 2044 – to close the gender pay gap.
Industrial gender pay gaps
Gender pay gap reporting was introduced back in 2017. However, the TUC analysis shows that – some seven years later – there are still big gender pay gaps in many industries.
And this gap persists even in jobs dominated by female workers like in education and care.
The union body says this is partly because women are more likely to work part-time, where working fewer hours means they earn less overall. And also, because women tend to be employed in lower-paid roles than men.
In education the gender pay gap is 21.3%, so the average woman effectively works for free for nearly a fifth of the year (78 days) until St Patrick’s Day, 17 March 2024.
In health care and social work, where the gender pay gap is 12.6%, the average woman works for free for 46 days until Valentine’s Day, 14 February 2024.
The longest wait for Women’s Pay Day comes in finance and insurance. The gender pay gap (27.9%) is the equivalent of a whopping 102 days, meaning women work for free until Wednesday 10 April 2024.
Gender pay gap by age
The TUC analysis shows that the gender pay gap affects women throughout their careers, from their first step on the ladder until they take retirement.
The gender pay gap is widest for middle aged and older women:
Women aged 40 to 49 have a gender pay gap of 17%, so work 62 days for free until Tuesday 2 March 2024.
Women aged between 50 and 59 have the highest pay gap (19.7%) and work the equivalent of 72 days for free, until Monday 11 March 2024.
Women aged 60 and over have a gender pay gap of 18.1%. They work 66 days of the year for free before they stop working for free on Wednesday 6 March 2024.
The TUC says the gender pay gap widens as women get older, due to women being more likely to take on caring responsibilities. And that older women take a bigger financial hit for balancing work alongside caring for children, older relatives and/or grandchildren.
Regional gender pay gaps
The analysis shows that in some parts of the country gender pay gaps are even bigger, so their Women’s Pay Day is later in the year.
The gender pay gap is largest in the South East of England (18.9%). Women in this region work 69 days for free and they work for free until Friday 8 March 2024.
Women in the East of England (17.7% pay gap) and the East Midlands (17.4%) also work for free until next month (Monday 4 March and Sunday 3 March 2024).
The TUC explains that regional variations in the pay gap are likely to be caused by differences in the types of jobs and industries that are most common in that part of the country, and gender differences in who does these jobs.
TUC General Secretary Paul Nowak said: “Everyone should be paid fairly for the job that they do.
“It’s shameful that working women don’t have pay parity in 2024. And at current rates of progress, it will take another two decades to close the gender pay gap.
“That’s not right. We can’t consign yet another generation of women to pay inequality.
“It’s clear that just publishing gender pay gaps isn’t working. Companies must be required to publish and implement action plans to close their pay gaps. And bosses who don’t comply with the law should be fined.
“Labour’s New Deal for Working People would be a huge boost to working women.
“It would introduce a day one right to flexible working and fair pay agreements to boost pay and conditions in social care – which we know is a predominantly female workforce.
“It would also see mandatory action plans to close the gender pay gap and extending reporting to disability and ethnicity pay gaps.”
UK Government acts against controversial dismissal tactics through a new statutory Code of Practice.
Employment tribunals will have the power to apply an uplift of up to 25 percent of an employee’s compensation if an employer unreasonably fails to comply with the code.
Code protects workers’ rights whilst respecting business flexibility.
Action against unscrupulous employers to tackle the use of controversial ‘fire and rehire’ practices have been rolled out by the Westminster Government.
Dismissal and re-engagement, also known as ‘fire and rehire’, refers to when an employer fires an employee and offers them a new contract on new, often less favourable terms.
The Government has been clear that it firmly opposes this practice being used as a negotiating tactic. Today, a new statutory Code of Practice has been published making clear how employers must behave in this area.
This new Code of Practice shows the Government is going a step further to protect workers across the country. This will help to preserve security and opportunity for those in work, as part of our plan to grow the economy.
Business Minister Kevin Hollinrake said:“Our new Code will crack down on employers mistreating employees and sets out how they should behave when changing an employee’s contract.
“This announcement shows we are taking action to tackle fire and re-hire practices by balancing protections for workers with business flexibility”.
In future the courts, and employment tribunals, will take the Code into account when considering relevant cases. This will include on unfair dismissal claims where the employer should have followed the Code.
https://twitter.com/i/status/1759563650212200518
Employment tribunals will have the power to apply an uplift of up to 25 percent of an employee’s compensation if an employer unreasonably fails to comply with the Code.
The new Code clarifies how employers should behave when seeking to change employees’ terms and conditions, aiming to ensure employees are properly consulted and treated fairly.
Employers will now also need to explore alternatives to dismissal and re-engagement and have meaningful discussions with employees or trade unions to reach an agreed outcome.
The Code makes it clear to employers that they must not use threats of dismissal to pressurise employees into accepting new terms. They should also not raise the prospect of dismissal unreasonably early or threaten dismissal where it is not envisaged.
Acas Chief Executive Susan Clews said: “Fire and rehire is an extreme step that can seriously damage working relations and has significant legal risks for organisations. Employers should focus on maintaining good employment relations to reach agreement with staff if they are thinking about making changes to their contracts.
“Acas offers impartial advice on employment rights and obligations, and has expertise in helping parties to maintain good industrial relations and resolving disputes where they arise.
“The Government’s new draft Code is clear that employers should contact Acas for advice before they raise the prospect of fire and rehire with employees.”
Principal Policy Advisor at Institute of Directors, Alexandra Hall-Chen said:“The publication of this Code of Practice provides employers with welcome clarity and practical guidance.
“The Code rightly places good industrial relations at its core and represents an effective means of balancing worker protections with labour market flexibility.”
Head of Public Policy at CIPD, Ben Willmott said: “The Code promotes good practice, making clear employers should always seek to agree any changes to terms and conditions with employees and that ‘fire and rehire’ should only be used as an absolute last resort.
“It highlights the importance of early and meaningful consultation with employees to maximise the chances of finding alternative solutions which can lead to agreement over proposed changes.
“It also emphasises that Acas has a key role to play and should be contacted by an employer for advice before it raises the prospect of fire and rehire with the workforce.”
The Government previously asked Acas to produce guidance for employers on fire and rehire practices, which was published in 2021.
The TUC says the guidance does not go far enough: ‘Government’s code of practice on fire and rehire lacks bite.
“It will not deter bad employers like P&O from treating staff like disposable labour. We need far more robust legislation to protect people at work.
“Labour’s New Deal for Working People would be the biggest upgrade in workers’ rights in a generation and end fire and rehire.”
