Workers Rights: The Brexit Bonfire Begins?

Professor Steve Peers, University of Essex

Parallel reports inwards the Sunday Times too the Sun advise that the authorities is planning to fleck the European Union working fourth dimension Directive inwards the United Kingdom of Great Britain too Northern Ireland equally presently equally it tin transportation away after Brexit takes effect. This violates the government’s previous pledges too is justified past times highly misleading claims inwards The Sun.

First of all, it violates a clear pledge that Theresa May made regarding workers’ rights inwards her Lancaster House speech setting out her Brexit policy.  Point vii reads:

…a fairer Great Britain is a province that protects too enhances the rights that people cause got at work. That is why, equally nosotros interpret the torso of European constabulary into our domestic regulations, nosotros volition ensure that workers rights are fully protected too maintained.

Indeed, nether my leadership, non alone volition the Government protect the rights of workers get down inwards European legislation, nosotros volition create on them

Secondly, it seems that this innovation mightiness last accompanied past times a misleading attempt to advise that it makes workers ameliorate off. According to the Sun headline, scrapping the Directive volition allow to a greater extent than workers to claim overtime: “British workers laid for post-Brexit overtime nail equally ministers plot to fleck European Union limits”.

More precisely, the article claims: “The Tories won an opt-out inwards 1993 but Labour MEPs voted to destination the UK’s correct to interruption the bound inwards 2003.” The showtime purpose of this judgement is accurate: the original Directive (amended to apply to to a greater extent than workers inwards 2000, therefore codified inwards 2003) gives each Member State the pick to allow workers determine to opt out individually of the green average bound of 48 working hours a week, on the status that they are non dependent plain to whatever ‘detriment’ past times the employer if they opt non to practise therefore (see Article 22 of the 2003 version). Indeed, a study past times Barnard, Deakin too Hobbs showed that equally a result, the Directive had piffling deport upon on the UK’s long working hours.

However, the instant purpose of the judgement is highly misleading. Along alongside the residue of the article, it gives the reader the impression that each worker’s private opt out to operate over 48 hours a calendar week on average no longer exists. This is non true: a 2004 proposal to amend the Directive to (among other things) bound work of the opt-out failed inwards 2009 due to disagreements betwixt the European Parliament too the European Union Council. Employers too unions therefore failed to agree on amendments inwards 2013.

This continued work of the overtime opt-out is confirmed past times a report on the Directive from the European Union Commission before this year: eighteen Member U.S. of A. work this option, too the United Kingdom of Great Britain too Northern Ireland is ane of vi Member U.S. of A. which allow workers inwards every sector of work to necessitate to operate extra hours. You tin transportation away honor the pick inwards the UK’s Working Time Regulations, which transpose the Directive into United Kingdom of Great Britain too Northern Ireland constabulary (it’s Regulation 5). In practical terms, a recent TUC analysis estimates that over iii ane M m United Kingdom of Great Britain too Northern Ireland workers operate over the 48-hour average limit. Moreover, opposite to the implied hope of extra pay inwards the Sun article, many of those additional working hours are unpaid.

Thirdly, non alone does the Directive not preclude workers from earning overtime pay if they necessitate to (assuming their employer pays them extra for those additional hours), it guarantees them of import rights too. Daily working hours are express to a maximum of 13; at that spot must last a residue interruption if the working 24-hour interval is longer than 6 hours; workers must larn at to the lowest degree ane 24-hour interval off a week; too at that spot are guarantees for nighttime workers. There’s no possibility of opting out of these rights for workers, but at that spot is a lot of flexibility for Member U.S. of A. or employers, for representative to exempt sure enough jobs from these guarantees or to calculate the limits over a longer period, to accept delineate of piece of work organisation human relationship of (say) longer shopping hours inwards the weeks before Christmas.

Most notably, the Directive guarantees 4 weeks’ paid vacation every year, alongside no opt-outs or exceptions. It’s sometimes argued that the Directive added null to pre-existing United Kingdom of Great Britain too Northern Ireland law, but the representative constabulary on the vacation pay clause inwards the Directive suggests otherwise. The cases that went from the United Kingdom of Great Britain too Northern Ireland courts to the ECJ on vacation pay established that: fixed-term workers cause got a correct to pro-rata vacation pay; employers couldn’t inwards trial cut vacation pay past times ‘rolling it up’ inwards each pay package across the year; workers paid partly or wholly on commission must have vacation pay that takes delineate of piece of work organisation human relationship of their average commission; vacation pay must accept delineate of piece of work organisation human relationship of extra allowances regularly paid to workers; workers who missed vacation pay due to long-term sickness tin transportation away claim that pay later, dependent plain to fourth dimension limits; but ‘gig economy’ workers who had been wrongly classified equally ‘self-employed’ could claim such accrued vacation pay without whatever fourth dimension limit.  

Put simply, far from increasing workers’ pay, scrapping the working fourth dimension Directive would reduce that pay for many of them. It’s unfortunate that patch close journalists aim to utter truth to power, approximately appear content to mislead on its behalf.

If the mooted plans become ahead, this would attempt that the Conservative party’s pledge to retain all workers’ rights derived from European Union constabulary was worthless. Perhaps the government’s reported lack of integrity is unsurprising, inwards low-cal of Theresa May’s hope that at that spot would last no early on election. But breaking that hope ultimately alone made her ain working atmospheric condition worse; breaking her hope on workers’ rights volition brand those atmospheric condition worse for millions of others.

Barnard & Peers: chapter 20

Photo credit: Telegraph

Share this post