header-logo header-logo

16 November 2022
Issue: 8003 / Categories: Legal News , EU , Employment , Brexit
printer mail-detail

Employee rights could disappear under retained EU law Bill

Lawyers have aired more concerns about the government’s controversial EU laws bonfire Bill, warning it will create chaos for business, deter investment and decimate employee rights.

Under the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill, thousands of EU-derived provisions will be repealed from the end of 2023 except those the government has taken positive action to save.

The Employment Lawyers Association (ELA), comprising 6,000 lawyers, has highlighted that the Bill will strip away rights covering equal pay, maximum working hours, TUPE, health and safety, shared parental leave and the rights of part-time and fixed-term workers.

The Bill would erase principles derived from EU law, such as direct effect, supremacy of EU law and general principles of EU law. The ELA warns this will abolish important rights, including the right to normal pay during holidays, as well as removing the legal reasoning that has helped give gig economy workers protection from discrimination.

The ELA says the Bill potentially ends the automatic transfer provisions under TUPE, which would mean the UK reverting to the pre-1 May 1982 position of the transfer automatically terminating employment contracts.

Paul McFarlane, chair of the ELA, said: ‘The chaos, ambiguity and potential damage this Bill could do should not be underestimated.

‘It will decimate workers’ rights and leave both employers and employees in a state of profound uncertainty. Businesses will struggle to plan for growth, investment will drop and disputes and litigation costs will rocket.

‘It is also deeply worrying how this Bill will likely impact women specifically, as many of our laws which govern issues such as equal pay, parental leave and rights for part-time workers will be affected, and rights will disappear altogether.’

The ELA said it doubted the 31 December 2023 deadline gave the government enough time to consider the many laws, regulations and interpretive principles involved.

Issue: 8003 / Categories: Legal News , EU , Employment , Brexit
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Sidley—James Inness

Sidley—James Inness

Partner joins capital markets team in London office

Haynes Boone—William Cecil

Haynes Boone—William Cecil

Firm announces appointment of partner as UK general counsel

Devonshires—Nicholas Barrows

Devonshires—Nicholas Barrows

Firm appoints first chief marketing officer to drive growth strategy

NEWS
A seemingly dry procedural update may prove potent. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ this week, Stephen Gold explains that new CPR 31.12A—part of the 193rd update—fills a ‘lacuna’ exposed in McLaren Indy v Alpa Racing
The long-running Mazur saga edged towards its finale as the Court of Appeal heard arguments on whether non-solicitors can ‘conduct litigation’. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School reports from a packed courtroom where 16 wigs watched Nick Bacon KC argue that Mr Justice Sheldon had failed to distinguish between ‘tasks and responsibilities’

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
back-to-top-scroll