Sunsetting the sunset clause may be good news, but worker health is still at risk

Following the government’s U-turn on the controversial sunset clause in the Retained EU Law Bill, Sharlene McGee argues any reform to UK workplace regulations needs to consider the impacts on health

In the face of widespread objections, the government has now changed course on its timetable to repeal large swathes of EU-derived law by the end of the year. Originally, the Bill would have automatically removed an estimated 4,800 laws applying to many aspects of our lives – including employment law, environmental regulations and food standards – and employers, businesses and legal experts voiced alarm about the inevitable legal uncertainty. 

A much-reduced list of 600 laws is now to be revoked – the majority of which appear to be tidying up laws now irrelevant, out-of-date or superseded by newer legislation. The government has also released a flurry of new announcements over the past few weeks including a new policy approach on regulatory reform and a new consultation on immediate plans to amend workplace regulation that sits outside the Bill. This focuses on changes to current regulations on holiday entitlement and calculating pay, and employers’ responsibilities towards people contracted out to a different firm. Although these changes may bring some relief, it still moves the government only slightly closer to a cohesive framework in the mammoth task of reviewing EU laws. It also only alleviates some of the uncertainty for businesses and employees that the government created in the first place.

Making workplace legislation better for health – reforming the reform

This major shift came just as the Bill reached the House of Lords last week, and despite voting it through the government was left somewhat battle-scarred. A sifting committee of MPs and Peers is now to act as a check against new ministerial powers to ditch laws without proper scrutiny. Peers also sought to address the controversial clause 16 that asserts any future changes to REUL cannot add to so-called ‘regulatory burdens’. Although additional safeguards were inserted for environmental regulations, this provision was not afforded to workplace regulations, which failed by a single vote.

The government, however, continues to dig its heels in on ending the supremacy of EU law and principles in UK law on 31 December 2023. This will have significant implications on current workplace practices and rights. And any decision made under EU law could now be challenged with legal uncertainty and confusion about what responsibilities employers have towards their staff. Tribunals are set to have a hefty new role in making sense of the likely chaos.

Why does regulatory reform matter to workforce health?

Modern watermarks of job quality – including maternity pay, gender equality in pay, annual leave provisions from Working Time Regulations and even collective definitions of disability in the workplace – have been developed by EU mechanisms. UK primary legislation offers a framework but often EU law refines and expands its scope in line with evolving social and working conditions. Losing protections found only in EU law would risk restricting workplace rights and the mechanisms to assert them. 

The work we do has an important impact on our health. Poor job quality – a lack of security, progression and low salary – can be as bad for health as unemployment. People in low-quality work are already more likely to be in poor health, perhaps through pre-existing conditions that are either caused or exacerbated by job strain. In the UK we can see the effect of growing poor health on our available workforce with more people falling out of work completely due to ill health – a trend that came to the fore following the pandemic but has longer term origins.

It's generally accepted that better working standards also promote better health, and there are clear signals that understanding of this is growing among the business community. There is simply no appetite from business or the public to turn back the clock.

A race to the top instead of to the bottom

The government’s new approach has given some reassurance and it’s positive that Peers have asserted their role in providing scrutiny to the Bill and have introduced some improvements. However, it’s not clear that these changes will survive when the Bill returns to the commons before the summer, with the government likely to throw out any opposing amendments. Along with a prominent role for parliament in scrutinising laws selected to be axed, wide consultation with relevant sector experts is needed for regulatory reform to be effective.

Businesses have faced significant uncertainty in recent years in the UK, resulting in low investment and the UK is now forecast to be the only major economy to shrink in 2023. Furthermore, an Employment Bill to ‘protect and enhance workers’ rights’, first promised by the government back in 2019, is still to be published. What is needed now is a clear plan with supporting legislation that would instead strengthen workers’ rights while addressing two major drags on growth – business uncertainty and declining health among working age adults. 

Sharlene McGee (@sharlene_mcgee) is a Policy Manager at the Health Foundation.