The Employment Rights Bill has been described quite rightly by the Trades Union Congress (TUC) general secretary Paul Novak as a positive, ambitious expansion of workers’ and trade union rights in a generation. In contrast, the Confederation of British Industry (CBI)’s Rupert Soames wants to warn that of this ‘highly damaging’ bill that risks discouraging investment and burdening businesses.

The reality is that this legislation is not just important but long overdue. For decades, since Margaret Thatcher’s restructuring of the British economy in 1979, workers in Britain have faced the steady erosion of their rights, job security and real wages. This was all enabled by the systematic dismantling of union power, with legal restrictions enforced on organising and collective bargaining coming alongside mass privatisation of state-owned assets and the outsourcing of public services.

These changes fragmented workforces, shattered unions, and undermined the ability of workers to protect themselves. There is no greater example than this today than the gig economy — built on precarious contracts, outsourced labour and agency work. Here, millions of workers are without basic protections, and while unions have been restricted by legal and structural barriers, many employers have been free to drive down wages and weaken conditions in pursuit of profit.

The rise of companies like Uber, Deliveroo and Hermes (now Evri), all of which operate on models of bogus self-employment, highlights how British employment law has failed to keep up with the realities of modern work. Amazon — one of the largest employers in the country — relies heavily on agency work, while the mass sackings at P&O Ferries via video call showed how little recourse workers have been bosses decide to sidestep legal protections altogether.

This is all why I was proud to work with unions, employers and others to draft Labour’s New Deal for Working People document in 2021. The aim was clear: to shift the balance of power towards workers and ensure their priorities were embedded in labour market decisions. Among the measures proposed included the introduction of a single employment status to close loopholes that deny gig workers their basic rights.

The establishment of fair pay agreements, laying the foundation for a revival of sectoral collective bargaining, the introduction of tougher protections against fire and rehire, ensuring unions could challenge exploitative restructuring practices — after years of economic stagnation and widespread precarity, this is the most meaningful upgrade to employment law in decades, and I strongly welcome it.

But even as it progresses, powerful business lobbies are already working to water down its provisions. While employer groups argue that strengthening workers’ rights will stifle growth, the evidence suggests the opposite: high union density and strong collective bargaining correlate with better wages, increased productivity, and more stable industrial relations.

The bill takes some steps towards tackling insecure employment, but it stops short of implementing a single, universal employment status. Without this, gig workers will remain in legal limbo, at risk of continued exploitation. Deliveroo and Hermes have already used legal loopholes to avoid giving workers fundamental rights, and unless the bill is further amended, such practices will persist.

The Business and Trade Select Committee in Parliament have made the case for action on employment status, with the government’s own Director of Labour Market Enforcement told them it was ‘about time to do something about it’.

The legislation also outlaws — but does not utilise all measures to prevent — fire and rehire. While the government has introduced amendments to increase the financial penalties for companies found guilty of abusing the practice, this does not prevent large employers from making a calculated decision to break the law and absorb the cost — as P&O did. Without stronger deterrents, employers will still find ways to undercut worker protections.

On collective bargaining, the bill takes a small but important step by creating a new negotiation body for adult social care and re-establishing a similar body for school support staff. However, these mechanisms are absent from most other sectors, leaving the vast majority of workers without industry-wide agreements. The long-term decline in real wages has tracked closely with the decline in collective bargaining coverage, and unless this trend is reversed, workers in Britain will continue to lose out.

The state of public sector pay bargaining is another issue that cannot be ignored. Many unions have criticised the pay review bodies, and the civil service pay model has long been a source of frustration and industrial disputes. The bill provides no clear pathway to reforming public sector pay-setting, nor does it address the need for widespread insourcing, which would end the growing reliance on precarious agency contracts in public services.

Looking ahead, we must aim not only for stronger employment protections but for a renewed culture of workplace democracy and collective bargaining. Some in the business community argue that higher union density leads to more disputes, but the evidence shows the opposite: well-unionised workplaces have better industrial relations, as workers have a formal structure to raise concerns and negotiate solutions.

That’s why we need a clear right of access for unions to organise in every workplace, with a simplified process for union recognition, removing bureaucratic barriers that hinder collective bargaining and stronger sectoral bargaining mechanisms, ensuring fair wages and conditions across industries.

After 14 years of stagnating wages, deepening insecurity, and widening inequality, this bill represents a crucial opportunity to rebalance the labour market in favour of workers. But without key improvements, it risks leaving the door open for continued exploitation.

The voices of unions, campaigners, and workers must be central to this debate. As business lobbies push to dilute the bill’s impact, we must push in the other direction — towards stronger, more comprehensive protections. This is a rare opportunity to build a fairer, more just economy — and we cannot afford to waste it.