Draft ACAS Code of Practice on Time Off for Trade Union Duties and Activities
(3 days, 7 hours ago)
General CommitteesRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Committee divided: - Ayes: 8 / Noes: 4 - Question accordingly agreed to.
The Minister for the Future of Work (Kate Dearden)
I beg to move,
That the Committee has considered the draft Acas Code of Practice on Time Off for Trade Union Duties and Activities.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship this afternoon, Sir Jeremy. The measure was laid in draft before this House on 6 July 2026. This Government are resetting and modernising our industrial relations framework. We believe that strong trade unions are essential for tackling insecurity, inequality, discrimination, enforcement and low pay. The Government want to ensure that trade union workplace representatives can take sufficient reasonable paid time off and have sufficient access to facilities to enable them to fulfil their union representative duties.
The Acas code of practice, issued under section 199 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992, provides practical guidance on reasonable paid time off and access to accommodation and other facilities that employees who are trade union representatives are entitled to take to fulfil their trade union duties. The code has been updated following the changes introduced by the Employment Rights Act 2025, which strengthened and introduced rights for employees who are trade union representatives.
There are three key changes made by the Employment Rights Act to the existing statutory framework. First, it strengthens the existing right to reasonable paid facility time for trade union representatives to carry out their duties. The legislation now makes it clear that, where a request is made, it should generally be treated as reasonable, and it is for the employer to demonstrate otherwise if challenged in a tribunal. Secondly, there is a statutory provision that representatives should be provided with reasonable access to facilities, such as meeting spaces, communication tools and appropriate workplace resources, to enable them to carry out their duties or undergo relevant training. Thirdly, the Act introduces a new right for trade union equality representatives to reasonable paid time off for specified equality-related purposes.
Those changes are due to take effect on 30 October. The code has been updated to reflect the changes and support effective and smooth implementation when these new rights come into force in October. It provides clear, accessible guidance to employers, trade unions and representatives on how the statutory framework should operate in practice.
The code sets out in practical terms how these rights should be applied, covering matters such as the kinds of activities that fall under the statutory duties and purposes, factors that might make a request reasonable or not, how unions and employers should communicate about arrangements for time off, and the agreement of arrangements between employers and unions. Importantly, the code supports constructive engagement between employers and unions. The intention is not to prescribe rigid rules but to encourage that co-operation and clarity, so that arrangements work for employers, businesses and trade unions.
The code provides clear guidance that will give employers confidence in how to approach requests, and will help representatives to understand how to exercise their rights appropriately. In that sense, the laying of this code is a necessary step to ensure that the changes made by the 2025 Act operate as intended from day one. I therefore support this code of practice and commend it to the House.
Bradley Thomas (Bromsgrove) (Con)
On the surface, this revision introduces the legal right to reasonable paid time off for union equality representatives, ensures that representatives can hold multiple positions—thus increasing the provisions under which they qualify for more time off—puts a greater onus on employers in tribunals, and legally requires employers to provide reasonable means to support representatives in carrying out their jobs. Yet it does far more than that: it burdens businesses with yet more regulatory red tape, further decreases employment opportunities and compounds the hardship that employers already face. Higher employment costs through increased administrative expenditure, unaffordable additional paid leave and legal tribunal expenses are a fast track to job scarcity.
A recent survey of more than 1,000 business owners found that one in five lacked confidence in the new trade union rules. Furthermore, 69% of employers believed that trade unions still have the power to cause serious problems for the UK economy, while 62% believed that the UK is entering a new, more unstable period of employment relations. Yet rather than heed those warnings and work with businesses to create a viable solution, the Government persist with such policies, despite being aware of the risks.
This is a tough time for employers and workers. Employers are seeing rising costs all around them, and workers are watching their budgets get stretched thinner as the cost of living continues to mount. A solution is needed, but this approach will only create new challenges.
The increased presence of trade unions is anticipated to escalate the number of strikes taking place across the economy. Data from the European company survey shows that strike incidence is directly higher in establishments where trade union density is greater. Furthermore, trade union membership in the public sector sits at 48.5%, compared with only 12.1% in the private sector. Research shows that since 2000 the number of days lost to strikes per worker has been 30 times higher in the public sector than in the private sector, despite public sector earnings rising faster.
In a scenario of escalating industrial action, who is likely to be profoundly impacted? A persistent casualty demographic is the general public. It is unacceptable that the Government are looking to create a set of circumstances conducive to increased strikes, which burden the British public—and at the taxpayer’s expense, no less. That is why we will vote against this draft code. Rather than expand the scope of paid time off for union representatives, the Government should scrap this legal burden on employers and redirect important taxpayer funds to frontline priorities such as the NHS and national infrastructure.
Businesses have already suffered harmful setbacks under this Government: increases to national insurance contributions, mounting energy bills, business rate modifications and the Employment Rights Act, which 86% of industry leaders warned would harm UK growth. The Government claim to be pro-worker yet continue to enact policies that shrink workforces and empty the public’s pockets.
I am both pro-worker and pro-business, and so is my party. We are steadfast in our belief that we must support businesses and entrepreneurs, who not only prop up our economy but take risks needed to provide employment. I also firmly believe that the Government must support workers by ensuring that they can keep as much of their own money as possible. That is how to truly bolster UK business and meaningfully assist the hard-working taxpayer simultaneously.
Can the Minister outline the Government’s plan to ensure that their policies on trade unions do not lead to further job losses? If not, will they accept our suggestions?
Kate Dearden
I welcome the shadow Minister to his role and to the Committee. I look forward to working with him and debating many issues—this one in particular. He spoke a lot about industrial action. I always find it quite rich when the Opposition talk about strike days, because on their watch they did absolutely nothing to further good industrial relations in this country. That is a real shame, because it is a detriment not only to those employers but to trade unions, our society and our economy as a whole. That is why this Government are absolutely acting responsibly.
I will come to the issue that we are debating today, but let me first say that we recognise the need to make sure that our wider industrial relations framework is functioning so that we can resolve disputes in the workplace early. That is good for businesses, employers and trade unions, so enforcement and ensuring we have negotiation skills across the workplace are really important.
What the Government are doing to reset industrial relations is responsible. We are modernising our wider framework, alongside passing lots of legislation, including the instrument that we are discussing today, and helping to usher in a more co-operative and constructive approach among employers, workers and their unions. I think that is a really good thing.
Bradley Thomas
Does the Minister accept that in settling trade disputes, the Government should emphasise increases in productivity, not just blanket above-inflation pay rises?
Kate Dearden
I will not be drawn on the ins and outs of every single dispute that is happening in the industrial relations landscape. I will bring us back to what a responsible Government are doing: fostering good industrial relations, which is absolutely the right thing to do. Unfortunately, perhaps the shadow Minister and I just disagree on that point.
Let me bring us back to the draft Acas code of practice. The statutory instrument will ensure that employers have the guidance they need based on what was passed in the Employment Rights Act. It is a necessary step so that employers have the guidance to facilitate the legislation and understand their duties. It is really important to provide that guidance and clarity.
We have already touched on the ability to resolve grievances early, and it is really good and positive for reps to have more ability to spend time on doing that in the workplace. In addition, they can improve communication, support workplace training and prevent disputes. That is great workplace value, and that is what we want to foster going forward.
The measure we are debating is necessary and the right step to take. As I said in my introductory speech, we want to make sure that the code plays a key role in ensuring that the new rights introduced in the Act passed last year can operate effectively in practice from the point at which they come into force next month. I hope the code of practice will be approved. It is a real shame that the Opposition cannot support us today.