Employment Rights Bill: Motion to disagree with Lords Amendment 121
316Ayes
161Noes
Carried · majority 155 · Government won175 did not vote
652 Members · Aye 316 · No 161 · DNV 175 · grey dots in centre are abstentions
Analysis
Commons
Commons
The House of Commons voted on 15 September 2025 to disagree with Lords Amendment 121 to the Employment Rights Bill, rejecting a change the House of Lords had made to the legislation. The motion passed by 316 votes to 161, allowing the government to maintain its original provisions in the Bill rather than accept the Lords' modification. The Employment Rights Bill is one of the Labour government's flagship pieces of legislation, designed to strengthen protections for workers across Great Britain. Lords Amendment 121 represented a specific change the upper chamber had inserted into the Bill, which the government judged incompatible with its policy intentions. By voting to disagree with the amendment, the Commons preserved the government's preferred text and sent the Bill back to the Lords, continuing the process known as parliamentary ping-pong, in which the two chambers negotiate the final wording of legislation. The vote divided almost entirely along party lines. All 307 Labour and Labour and Co-operative MPs who voted supported the government, joined by three Greens, three independents, and one member from Your Party. All 84 voting Conservatives, all 65 Liberal Democrats, all six voting Reform UK members, both voting DUP members, and the Ulster Unionist member voted against. There were no notable cross-party rebellions on the government side. This division is one of several in a sequence of ping-pong votes on the Employment Rights Bill seen in late 2025, with the government consistently winning Commons majorities to reassert its position against Lords amendments.
Voting Aye meant
Support rejecting the Lords amendment, agreeing with the government that existing provisions in the Bill are sufficient and the extra requirements would add needless bureaucracy to school support staff negotiations.
Voting No meant
Support keeping the Lords amendment, arguing additional safeguards around the school support staff negotiating body are warranted.
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
273
0
88
Conservative and Unionist Party
Whipped No
0
84
32
Liberal Democrats
Whipped No
0
65
7
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped Aye
34
0
8
Independent
—
3
1
9
Scottish National Party
—
0
0
9
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
—
0
0
4
Social Democratic and Labour Party
—
0
0
2
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
Your Party
—
1
0
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_vote_recorded · Read full speech (194 words) →
Sources
Division dataUK Parliament Votes API
DebateHansard · Commons
Stance analysisAI analysis · Claude 4.x
LicenceOpen Parliament Licence v3.0