header-logo header-logo

Brexit: no deal no alarm?

20 September 2018 / Charles Pigott
Issue: 7809 / Categories: Features , Brexit , Employment
printer mail-detail
nlj_7809_pigott

Deal or no deal, government promises Brexit won’t affect workplace rights: Charles Pigott examines the evidence

  • Assurances have been offered that a no deal Brexit will have no impact in the UK in relation to workplace rights.
  • This matches the commitment to ‘non-regression of labour standards’ in the Chequers white paper.

It seems that UK workplace rights will be at least one area of national life that won’t be disrupted by Brexit—or so the government has assured us in a guidance note published last month. This note is one of 25 separate notes published on 23 August 2018 as part of the government’s preparations for a no-deal Brexit. Another large batch was published on 13 September and more are promised.

The workplace rights guidance note

The scene is set in an overall guidance note which explains the government’s preparations for a no-deal Brexit in the context of the negotiations on a withdrawal agreement with the EU. As the government puts it: ‘People and businesses should not be alarmed by “no deal”

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

International private client team appoints expert in Spanish law

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

Stefan Borson, football finance expert head of sport at McCarthy Denning, discusses returning to the law digging into the stories behind the scenes

NEWS
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
Michael Zander KC, emeritus professor at LSE, revisits his long-forgotten Crown Court Study (1993), which surveyed 22,000 participants across 3,000 cases, in the first of a two-part series for NLJ
Getty Images v Stability AI Ltd [2025] EWHC 2863 (Ch) was a landmark test of how UK law applies to AI training—but does it leave key questions unanswered, asks Emma Kennaugh-Gallagher of Mewburn Ellis in NLJ this week
back-to-top-scroll