Employment Rights Bill: Motion to disagree with Lords Amendment 47
327Ayes
164Noes
Carried · majority 163 · Government won160 did not vote
651 Members · Aye 327 · No 164 · DNV 160 · grey dots in centre are abstentions
Analysis
Commons
Commons
MPs voted 327 to 164 on 15 September 2025 to reject Lords Amendment 47 to the Employment Rights Bill, which would have expanded the right to be accompanied at employment hearings to include certified professional companions. Under existing law, workers may bring a trade union representative or a colleague; the Lords wanted to add a third category of certified professional companion. The government's motion to disagree with that change passed, keeping the existing arrangement in place. The practical effect is that workers facing disciplinary or grievance hearings who are not trade union members and do not wish to bring a colleague remain without the option of professional support. The Liberal Democrats argued in the debate that only 22% of workers are in a trade union, and only around 12% of private sector workers, meaning the existing right to union accompaniment leaves the large majority of the workforce reliant solely on a colleague. The government's position was that the Bill as drafted already struck the right balance and that the Lords change was unnecessary. The vote split cleanly along party lines. All 310 Labour and Labour and Co-operative MPs who voted supported the government's motion to disagree. The Conservatives, Liberal Democrats, Reform UK, Plaid Cymru and the Democratic Unionist Party all voted against, meaning they supported retaining the Lords amendment. The Scottish National Party and the Greens voted with the government. No significant cross-party rebellion was recorded on either side.
Voting Aye meant
Support rejecting the Lords change, keeping the right to be accompanied at employment hearings limited to trade union representatives or colleagues rather than extending it to certified professional companions
Voting No meant
Support the Lords amendment, arguing that falling union membership means many workers are left without support at employment hearings and that professional companions should be permitted
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
276
0
85
Conservative and Unionist Party
Whipped No
0
82
34
Liberal Democrats
Whipped No
0
65
6
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped Aye
34
0
8
Independent
—
3
2
8
Scottish National Party
Whipped Aye
8
0
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 Aye
3
0
1
Plaid Cymru
Whipped No
0
3
1
Social Democratic and Labour Party
—
2
0
0
Your Party
—
1
0
1
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