Employment Rights Bill: Motion to disagree with Lords Amendment 46
314Ayes
178Noes
Carried · majority 136 · Government won158 did not vote
650 Members · Aye 314 · No 178 · DNV 158 · grey dots in centre are abstentions
Analysis
Commons
Commons
Parliament voted on 15 September 2025 to reject Lords Amendment 46 to the Employment Rights Bill, which would have updated the whistleblowing framework to require employers to act on serious concerns raised by workers, extending protections beyond the existing rules that only apply when a worker has lost their job. The motion to disagree with the Lords passed by 314 votes to 178, meaning the amendment was removed from the Bill and the existing framework was preserved. The vote has direct consequences for workers who raise concerns about wrongdoing such as fraud or patient safety but remain in employment. Under the current law, as described in the debate, protections for whistleblowers apply primarily where someone has lost their job as a result of speaking out. Lords Amendment 46 would have introduced a duty requiring employers to follow up on serious concerns, addressing what the Liberal Democrats argued was a gap that leaves many whistleblowers ignored or reluctant to come forward. The government opposed the amendment, arguing the Bill as drafted was already sufficient. The division split almost entirely along party lines. All 308 Labour and Labour and Co-operative MPs who voted backed the government's position. Every Conservative, Liberal Democrat, SNP, Reform UK, Plaid Cymru, Green, and Democratic Unionist Party MP who voted opposed it. Two independents voted on each side. There were no notable rebel votes recorded within Labour's ranks, with only one Labour MP voting against the government.
Voting Aye meant
Support the government rejecting the Lords whistleblowing amendment, keeping the existing Employment Rights Bill framework rather than adding new whistleblower duties on employers
Voting No meant
Back the Lords amendment to strengthen whistleblowing protections, requiring employers to act on serious concerns raised by workers and extending rights beyond those who have lost their job
Each row is one party. The stacked bar gives the within-party split of Aye / No / Absent; the columns on the right give the raw counts. The whip column shows the published party position — “Free vote” means the whip was formally removed for this division.
Party
Whip
Aye / No / Abs
Aye
No
Abs
Labour Party
Whipped Aye
274
1
86
Conservative and Unionist Party
Whipped No
0
84
32
Liberal Democrats
Whipped No
0
65
6
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped Aye
34
0
8
Independent
—
2
3
8
Scottish National Party
Whipped No
0
8
1
Reform UK
Whipped No
0
6
2
Sinn Féin
—
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
—
0
2
3
Green Party of England and Wales
Whipped No
0
3
1
Plaid Cymru
Whipped No
0
3
1
Social Democratic and Labour Party
—
2
0
0
Your Party
—
1
1
0
Alliance Party of Northern Ireland
—
0
0
1
Restore Britain
—
0
0
1
Speaker
—
0
0
1
Traditional Unionist Voice
—
0
1
0
Ulster Unionist Party
—
0
1
0
Source · Hansard · UK Parliament Votes API · whip status from announced positions; “free vote” indicates the whip was formally removed
Government will reject most Lords amendments and proceed with day-one unfair dismissal rights, employer-led guaranteed hours offers, and expanded bereavement leave, striking a balance between worker protection and business flexibility.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (7,412 words) →
The Bill will damage growth and employment; Lords amendments are reasonable and should be accepted, especially on probation periods (6 months instead of day one), zero-hours contract flexibility, and trade union ballot thresholds.Conservative · Voted no · Read full speech (2,054 words) →
The Bill is landmark legislation delivering on Labour's manifesto; day-one unfair dismissal rights and employer-led guaranteed hours are essential to restore dignity at work and end the race to the bottom.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (2,898 words) →
Support Bill's aims but concerned about implementation detail left to secondary legislation; favour Lords amendments on guaranteed hours as a right to request (not obligation), 48-hour notice periods, and seasonal work protections.Liberal Democrat · Voted no · Read full speech (2,716 words) →
Challenge Government on business support; claim most small and medium-sized businesses oppose the Bill despite Government assertions.Conservative · Voted no · Read full speech (54 words) →
Acknowledge some business concerns on probation tribunal involvement and sick pay waiting days; urge continued engagement with chambers of commerce.Conservative · Voted no · Read full speech (129 words) →
Small businesses fear sickness absence costs will rise dramatically; request assurance that Bill will not overwhelm businesses with additional payroll costs.DUP · Voted no · Read full speech (141 words) →
Welcome most of Bill but urge Government to reconsider Lords amendment 61 on heritage railways to allow youth volunteering safely and legally.Plaid Cymru · Voted no · Read full speech (194 words) →
Sources
Division dataUK Parliament Votes API
DebateHansard · Commons
Stance analysisAI analysis · Claude 4.x
LicenceOpen Parliament Licence v3.0