PETER Mandelson has been criticised by senior Labour figures and trade union leaders for suggesting that reform of workers’ rights should be slower than pledged – and should not go further than the previous Labour government.
Party leader Keir Starmer previously said Labour's "New Deal for Working People" will be implemented in the first 100 days of UK Government he leads. It will give all workers employment rights from their first day in a job and ban zero-hours contracts.
In an article for the Sunday Times, former business secretary Mandelson argued reform "must not be rushed".
Mandelson (below) wrote: "Businesses and investors will have eyes on the total UK business environment, including regulation. This includes labour market and trade union law.
The Labour peer, and a key player in Tony Blair’s government, added that “employers need to be satisfied before the election” that the party will “not go further than the settlement bequeathed by New Labour”.
The remarks have been criticised by senior Labour figures who have said the party will continue pushing for reforms.
Justin Madders, the shadow minister for employment rights, said: “We have had well over a decade of wages lagging behind the cost of living, growing insecurity at work and a rise in exploitative jobs. The case for reform so that we have well paid, secure, trade union recognised jobs is as strong as it has ever been.”
Appearing on Sky News, Labour Chair Anneliese Dodds (below) insisted “we’re a pro-worker and pro-business party”.
She added: “We need to ensure that work pays. That’s the motivation for Labour’s New Deal for Working People. The measures in that New Deal would actually increase productivity. They would put more money in workers pockets and they’d also boost the conditions for innovation as well.
“Of course, those proposals will be delivered in a way that’s in the interests of business as well as in the interests of workers.”
And the general secretary of the Trades Union Congress, Paul Nowak, posted on Twitter/X: “Wages no higher in real terms than they were in 2008; insecure, low paid work hard wired into the economy; household debt spiralling; good employers undercut by zero hours cowboys.
“Spare me the ‘unintended consequences’ of decent employment laws brigade and their outriders.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel