Employment Rights Bill: motion to disagree with Lords Amendment 1B

Wednesday, 5 November 2025 · Division No. 339 · Commons

310Ayes
155Noes
Passed

183 MPs did not vote

leftGovernment wonPro Workers Rights(Yes)Pro Guaranteed Hours(Yes)Pro Business Flexibility(No)Anti Zero Hours Contracts(Yes)

Voting Yes means

Support the government's position on guaranteed hours and employment rights provisions, rejecting the Lords' alternative version and backing Labour's Employment Rights Bill as amended by the Commons

Voting No means

Support the Lords amendment 1B, raising concerns about the impact on employers — particularly around probationary periods and the right to guaranteed hours — and arguing the Lords changes provide better balance between workers' and employers' interests

Parliament voted on 5 November 2025 to override Lords Amendment 1B to the Employment Rights Bill, with the House of Commons rejecting a change the House of Lords had sought to make to the legislation. The motion to disagree with the Lords passed by 310 votes to 155, a majority of 155. This was one of several motions considered together as part of the Bill's "ping-pong" stage, the process by which the two chambers exchange amendments until they reach agreement.

The Employment Rights Bill is a major piece of legislation that introduces a range of new protections for workers. The central provisions include the right to guaranteed hours for workers on zero-hours contracts, day one rights protecting employees from unfair dismissal from the start of their employment, changes to trade union ballot thresholds for industrial action, and reforms to statutory sick pay. The Lords had sought to amend or remove several of these provisions, and this vote was the Commons insisting on its original position, or in some cases proposing revised government amendments in lieu of what the Lords had put forward.

The vote divided almost entirely along party lines. All 286 Labour and Labour and Co-operative MPs who voted supported the government's position, joined by SNP, Plaid Cymru, Green Party and most Independent MPs, totalling 310 ayes. The 155 noes came from Conservative, Liberal Democrat and Reform UK MPs. There were no significant rebellions on either side. The Liberal Democrats, though supportive of many of the Bill's stated principles, opposed specific implementation choices, particularly around guaranteed hours and probation periods. The Bill sits within a broader government programme to reset what ministers describe as industrial relations, reversing elements of the Trade Union Act 2016 and expanding worker protections that Labour had promised in its general election manifesto.

How They Voted

Government position: Aye

Labour PartyWhipped Aye
256 Aye/0 No
Conservative and Unionist PartyWhipped No
0 Aye/86 No
Liberal DemocratsWhipped No
0 Aye/63 No
Labour and Co-operative PartyWhipped Aye
30 Aye/0 No
Independent
7 Aye/3 No
Scottish National PartyWhipped Aye
6 Aye/0 No
Reform UKWhipped No
0 Aye/4 No
Green Party of England and WalesWhipped Aye
4 Aye/0 No
Plaid CymruWhipped Aye
4 Aye/0 No
Democratic Unionist Party
0 Aye/1 No
Social Democratic and Labour Party
1 Aye/0 No
Your Party
1 Aye/0 No

What They Said in the Debate

Andrew Griffith

Conservative · Arundel and South Downs

Opposed

Opposed the Bill as rushed and half-baked, warning it will reduce youth hiring, create unemployment, and burden small businesses with compliance costs; called for meaningful compromises on qualifying periods, seasonal work, and guaranteed hours obligations.

Voted No

Sarah Olney

Liberal Democrat · Richmond Park

Neutral

Supported the Bill's aims but urged amendments to clarify probation periods, change guaranteed hours to a right-to-request model, and maintain the 50% ballot threshold; argued for balance between worker security and business flexibility.

Voted No

Kate Dearden

Labour · Halifax

Supportive

Defended rejecting Lords amendments on day-one unfair dismissal rights, guaranteed hours, and strike ballot thresholds; argued these are core manifesto commitments that will provide security and dignity for workers while supporting fair employers.

Voted Aye

Angela Rayner

Labour · Ashton-under-Lyne

Supportive

Passionately defended the Bill as delivering a new deal for working people, rejecting compromise amendments as attempts to water down manifesto promises; emphasized worker dignity and cited support from businesses like the Co-op and Richer Sounds.

Voted Aye

Justin Madders

Labour · Ellesmere Port and Bromborough

Supportive

Strongly opposed Lords amendments, particularly on zero-hours contracts and ballot thresholds; argued day-one unfair dismissal rights are essential and did not prevent probation periods; cited OECD evidence that employment regulation does not reduce employment.

Voted Aye

Ian Lavery

Labour · Blyth and Ashington

Supportive

Defended the Bill as a manifesto pledge voted for by millions; cited research showing 73% of employers support day-one unfair dismissal rights; challenged Opposition claims about union influence by noting trade union support is transparent and democratic.

Voted Aye

Andy McDonald

Labour · Middlesbrough and Thornaby East

Supportive

Strongly opposed all Lords amendments, arguing they would water down manifesto commitments on day-one rights, guaranteed hours, and ballot thresholds; framed the Bill as essential to raising living standards after 14 years of wage suppression.

Voted Aye

Antonia Bance

Labour · Tipton and Wednesbury

Supportive

Declared no concessions on the Bill; opposed political fund opt-in and ballot thresholds as undemocratic attacks on worker voice; committed to full repeal of the Trade Union Act 2016.

Voted Aye

Related Votes

Employment Rights Bill: motion to disagree with Lords Amendment 1B — Wednesday, 5 November 2025 | Beyond The Vote